/* $Id$ */
/* */
-/* Copyright (C) 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2006 by the deal.II authors */
+/* Copyright (C) 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2008 by the deal.II authors */
/* */
/* This file is subject to QPL and may not be distributed */
/* without copyright and license information. Please refer */
// @sect3{Renumbering of DoFs}
- // In the sparsity pattern produced
- // above, the nonzero entries
- // extended quite far off from the
- // diagonal. For some algorithms,
- // this is unfavorable, and we will
- // show a simple way how to improve
+ // In the sparsity pattern produced above,
+ // the nonzero entries extended quite far off
+ // from the diagonal. For some algorithms,
+ // for example for incomplete LU
+ // decompositions or Gauss-Seidel
+ // preconditioners, this is unfavorable, and
+ // we will show a simple way how to improve
// this situation.
//
- // Remember that for an entry (i,j)
+ // Remember that for an entry $(i,j)$
// in the matrix to be nonzero, the
// supports of the shape functions i
// and j needed to intersect
// of they were adjacent to each
// other, so in order to have the
// nonzero entries clustered around
- // the diagonal (where i equals j),
+ // the diagonal (where $i$ equals $j$),
// we would like to have adjacent
// shape functions to be numbered
// with indices (DoF numbers) that
{
DoFRenumbering::Cuthill_McKee (dof_handler);
SparsityPattern sparsity_pattern (dof_handler.n_dofs(),
- dof_handler.n_dofs());
+ dof_handler.n_dofs(),
+ 20);
DoFTools::make_sparsity_pattern (dof_handler, sparsity_pattern);
sparsity_pattern.compress ();