THE ELECTROMAGNETIC EQUATION OF STATE DATA

1968 ◽  
pp. 183-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph L. Amey
2008 ◽  
Vol 683 (2) ◽  
pp. 1217-1228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Nettelmann ◽  
Bastian Holst ◽  
André Kietzmann ◽  
Martin French ◽  
Ronald Redmer ◽  
...  

1974 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 1201-1204 ◽  
Author(s):  
W.F. Lewis ◽  
R.K. Crawford ◽  
W.B. Daniels

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mike J. Morley ◽  
David J. Chapman ◽  
William G. Proud ◽  
Mark Elert ◽  
Michael D. Furnish ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2000 ◽  
Vol 61 (14) ◽  
pp. 9287-9294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitri Batani ◽  
Antonio Balducci ◽  
Daniele Beretta ◽  
Andrea Bernardinello ◽  
Thorsten Löwer ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Benjamin P Mastripolito ◽  
Nicholas A. Koskelo ◽  
Dylan A. Weatherred ◽  
David A Pimentel ◽  
Daniel G. Sheppard ◽  
...  

Abstract Applications often require a fast, single-threaded search algorithm over sorted data, typical in table-lookup operations. We explore various search algorithms for a large number of search candidates over a relatively small array of logarithmically-distributed sorted data. These include an innovative hash-based search that takes advantage of floating point representation to bin data by the exponent. Algorithms that can be optimized to take advantage of SIMD vector instructions are of particular interest. We then conduct a case study applying our results and analyzing algorithmic performance with the EOSPAC package. EOSPAC is a table look-up library for manipulation and interpolation of SESAME equation-of-state data. Our investigation results in a couple of algorithms with better performance with a best case eight times speedup over the original EOSPAC Hunt-and-Locate implementation. Our techniques should generalize to other instances of search algorithms seeking to get a performance boost from vectorization.


2020 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sakun Duwal ◽  
Chad A. McCoy ◽  
Philippe F. Weck ◽  
Patricia Kalita ◽  
Heath L. Hanshaw ◽  
...  

1998 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen M. Corey ◽  
David A. Young

2019 ◽  
Vol 632 ◽  
pp. A70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ludwig Scheibe ◽  
Nadine Nettelmann ◽  
Ronald Redmer

The brightness of Neptune is often found to be in accordance with an adiabatic interior, while the low luminosity of Uranus challenges this assumption. Here we apply revised equation of state data of hydrogen, helium, and water and compute the thermal evolution of Uranus and Neptune assuming an adiabatic interior. For this purpose, we have developed a new planetary model and evolution code. We investigate the influence of albedo, solar energy influx, and equations of state of H and He, and water on the cooling time. Our cooling times of about τU = 5.1 × 109 yr for Uranus and τN = 3.7 × 109 yr for Neptune bracket the known age of the planets of 4.56 × 109 yr implying that neither planet’s present-day luminosity can be explained by adiabatic cooling. We also find that uncertainties on input parameters such as the level of irradiation matter generally more for Uranus than for Neptune. Our results suggest that in contrast to common assumptions, neither planet is fully adiabatic in the deeper interior.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document