Structure-Preserving Implementation

2002 ◽  
pp. 255-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernst Hairer ◽  
Gerhard Wanner ◽  
Christian Lubich
Keyword(s):  
Structure Preserving

Structure-preserving NPR framework for image abstraction and stylization

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. P. Pavan Kumar ◽  
B. Poornima ◽  
H. S. Nagendraswamy ◽  
C. Manjunath
Keyword(s):  
Structure Preserving ◽  
Image Abstraction

Model reduction in power systems using a structure-preserving balanced truncation approach

2019 ◽  
Vol 177 ◽  
pp. 106002
Author(s):  
Johnny Leung ◽  
Michel Kinnaert ◽  
Jean-Claude Maun ◽  
Fortunato Villella
Keyword(s):  
Power Systems ◽  
Model Reduction ◽  
Balanced Truncation ◽  
Structure Preserving

scholarly journals Structure-preserving retargeting of irregular 3D architecture

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinjie Lin ◽  
Daniel Cohen-Or ◽  
Hao Zhang ◽  
Cheng Liang ◽  
Andrei Sharf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Structure Preserving ◽  
3D Architecture

Advance in compact structure‐preserving manner to the Rosenau–Kawahara model of shallow‐water wave

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Wongsaijai ◽  
Phakdi Charoensawan ◽  
Tanadon Chaobankoh ◽  
Kanyuta Poochinapan
Keyword(s):  
Shallow Water ◽  
Water Wave ◽  
Compact Structure ◽  
Structure Preserving ◽  
Shallow Water Wave

In search of the origin of na in Mavea

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 690-716
Author(s):  
Valérie Guérin
Keyword(s):  
Common Noun ◽  
Language Family ◽  
Structural Requirements ◽  
Structure Preserving ◽  
Syntactic Change

Reflexes of the Proto-Oceanic common noun marker *na are found throughout the Oceanic language family. In Mavea, there is a morpheme na but it no longer partakes in the determiner system and is best analyzed synchronically as a preposition. This paper argues that today’s preposition is a reflex of the Proto-Oceanic common noun marker *na. Locative constructions are shown to provide a critical context conducive to the reanalysis of *na. Reanalysis has long been established as a mechanism of syntactic change, yet the factors motivating it remain a matter for debate. The dominant view is that reanalysis is driven by pragmatic factors. A rarely voiced view is that it is driven by structural requirements. The data adduced in this paper lend support to a model of syntactic change which can be structure-preserving in nature.

STRUCTURED GROUPS AND LINK-HOMOTOPY

1993 ◽  
Vol 02 (01) ◽  
pp. 37-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES R. HUGHES
Keyword(s):  
Automorphism Groups ◽  
Original Version ◽  
Theoretic Approach ◽  
Homotopy Classes ◽  
Structure Preserving ◽  
Three Sphere ◽  
Complex Program ◽  
Link Homotopy ◽  
Structured Groups

We study link-homotopy classes of links in the three sphere using reduced groups endowed with peripheral structures derived from meridian-longitude pairs. Two types of peripheral structures are considered — Milnor’s original version (called “pre-peripheral structures” in Levine’s terminology) and Levine’s refinement (called simply “peripheral structures”). We show here that pre-peripheral structures are not strong enough to classify links up to link-homotopy, and that Levine’s peripheral structures, although strong enough to distinguish those classes not distinguished by pre-peripheral structures, are also in all likelihood not strong enough to distinguish all link-homotopy classes. Following Levine’s classification program, we compare structure-preserving and realizable automorphisms, using an obstruction-theoretic approach suggested by work of Habegger and Lin. We find that these automorphism groups are in general different, so that a more complex program for classification by structured groups is required.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document