Influence of several factors in the generalized finite difference method
By Juan José Benito, Francisco Ureña, Luis Gavete. 2001
299 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Computational Mechanics, Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Mechanics of Materials
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f3db4f9c1bf87afd6584267357013632962691c7
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Computational Mechanics
In Electrical and Electronic Engineering
In Mechanics of Materials
Citations in the corpus
- Positivity conditions in meshless collocation methods (2004, methodology): “[12] have reported that the solution of the generalized finite-difference method depends on the number of nodes in the cloud, the relative position of the nodes in the cloud with respect to the star node and the weighting function.”
- Application of the Generalized Finite-Difference Method to Inverse Biharmonic Boundary-Value Problems (2014, methodology): “From previous research [25, 26], there are many choices for the weighting functions, such as potential functions, cubic splines, quartic splines, etc.”
- Generalized finite difference method for solving two-dimensional inverse Cauchy problems (2015, methodology): “From previous study,[27,28] it is clear that if more nodes are included in the star, the accuracy of the numerical results improved and, at the same time, the computational cost rose.”