Solving ARPACK with INFO = 3: Seek Help Here!

  • Thread starter Thread starter NeoDevin
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on resolving the INFO = 3 error encountered while using ARPACK for eigenvalue computations. This error indicates that no shifts could be applied during the implicitly restarted Arnoldi iteration. To address this, it is essential to increase the size of NCV relative to NEV, with a recommendation that NCV should be at least twice NEV. Users are encouraged to experiment with varying NCV while keeping NEV fixed to optimize performance, as the optimal configuration is problem-dependent and requires empirical testing.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of ARPACK for eigenvalue problems
  • Familiarity with the concepts of NCV (number of converged vectors) and NEV (number of eigenvalues)
  • Knowledge of the implicitly restarted Arnoldi iteration method
  • Experience with performance optimization in numerical algorithms
NEXT STEPS
  • Experiment with different NCV values in ARPACK to find optimal configurations
  • Research the implications of varying NEV and NCV on computational efficiency
  • Learn about the implicitly restarted Arnoldi iteration method in detail
  • Investigate empirical testing methods for performance optimization in numerical computations
USEFUL FOR

Numerical analysts, researchers in computational mathematics, and software developers working with ARPACK for eigenvalue problems will benefit from this discussion.

NeoDevin
Messages
334
Reaction score
2
I'm using ARPACK to find the eigenvalues of a matrix, it works for some of the problems I need it for, but for others, it returns INFO = 3, which means:

No shifts could be applied during a cycle of the implicitly restarted Arnoldi iteration. One possibility is to increase the size of NCV relative to NEV. See remark 4 below.

Remark 4 says:

At present there is no a-priori analysis to guide the selection of NCV relative to NEV. The only formal requrement is that NCV > NEV. However, it is recommended that NCV .ge. 2*NEV. If many problems of the same type are to be solved, one should experiment with increasing NCV while keeping NEV fixed for a given test problem. This will usually decrease the required number of OP*x operations but it also increases the work and storage required to maintain the orthogonal basis vectors. The optimal "cross-over" with respect to CPU time is problem dependent and must be determined empirically.

I have tried increasing NCV, and playing with the values of both NEV and NCV, but no luck.

Anyone who has worked with ARPACK, and knows how to solve this problem, your help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Technology news on Phys.org
Anyone? I'm kinda stuck here, I can't move on until I get this working, and no one around here seems to know why it's doing it, or how to fix it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K