Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Read backward fields #106

Merged
merged 16 commits into from
Mar 22, 2024
Merged

Conversation

Rohit-Kakodkar
Copy link
Collaborator

Description

Implements backward simulation.

  • Reads in forward wavefields
  • Updates to configuration file to accomodate combined simulations
  • Simulates backward wavefields

TODO:

  • Current implementation only simulates homogeneous domains without coupling between the domains.

Issue Number

If there is an issue created for these changes, link it here

Checklist

Please make sure to check developer documentation on specfem docs.

[x] I ran the code through pre-commit to check style
[x] My code passes all the integration tests
[] I have added sufficient unittests to test my changes
[] I have added/updated documentation for the changes I am proposing
[x] I have updated CMakeLists to ensure my code builds
[] My code builds across all platforms

- HDF5 implementation takes in an operator template to configure IO to read/write
- Modified SPECFEM config file format to account for adjoint simulations
- Modifying the enum namespace
- Updated enum namespace and unbloated several interfaces
- domain/element/sources/receivers are now templated based on enum classes. This should improve errr messagesfor wrong templates
- typedefs are defined based on template types.
- Linked assembly to time scheme
- Solver can now take a user defined t0
@Rohit-Kakodkar Rohit-Kakodkar merged commit d0759b7 into adjoint-simulations Mar 22, 2024
0 of 6 checks passed
@Rohit-Kakodkar Rohit-Kakodkar deleted the read-backward-fields branch November 12, 2024 18:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant