Computational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology: Explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solvers
A recent verification study compared 11 large-scale cardiac electrophysiology solvers on an unambiguously defined common problem. An unexpected amount of variation was observed between the codes, including significant error in conduction velocity in the majority of the codes at certain spatial resol...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2012
|
| _version_ | 1797088490552295424 |
|---|---|
| author | Pathmanathan, P Bernabeu, M Niederer, SA Gavaghan, D Kay, D |
| author_facet | Pathmanathan, P Bernabeu, M Niederer, SA Gavaghan, D Kay, D |
| author_sort | Pathmanathan, P |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | A recent verification study compared 11 large-scale cardiac electrophysiology solvers on an unambiguously defined common problem. An unexpected amount of variation was observed between the codes, including significant error in conduction velocity in the majority of the codes at certain spatial resolutions. In particular, the results of the six finite element codes varied considerably despite each using the same order of interpolation. In this present study, we compare various algorithms for cardiac electrophysiological simulation, which allows us to fully explain the differences between the solvers. We identify the use of mass lumping as the fundamental cause of the largest variations, specifically the combination of the commonly used techniques of mass lumping and operator splitting, which results in a slightly different form of mass lumping to that supported by theory and leads to increased numerical error. Other variations are explained through the manner in which the ionic current is interpolated. We also investigate the effect of different forms of mass lumping in various types of simulation. © 2012 John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T02:50:51Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:ada1b777-9a6b-4b00-a4e6-ecde75187f3e |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T02:50:51Z |
| publishDate | 2012 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:ada1b777-9a6b-4b00-a4e6-ecde75187f3e2022-03-27T03:36:58ZComputational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology: Explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solversJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:ada1b777-9a6b-4b00-a4e6-ecde75187f3eEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2012Pathmanathan, PBernabeu, MNiederer, SAGavaghan, DKay, DA recent verification study compared 11 large-scale cardiac electrophysiology solvers on an unambiguously defined common problem. An unexpected amount of variation was observed between the codes, including significant error in conduction velocity in the majority of the codes at certain spatial resolutions. In particular, the results of the six finite element codes varied considerably despite each using the same order of interpolation. In this present study, we compare various algorithms for cardiac electrophysiological simulation, which allows us to fully explain the differences between the solvers. We identify the use of mass lumping as the fundamental cause of the largest variations, specifically the combination of the commonly used techniques of mass lumping and operator splitting, which results in a slightly different form of mass lumping to that supported by theory and leads to increased numerical error. Other variations are explained through the manner in which the ionic current is interpolated. We also investigate the effect of different forms of mass lumping in various types of simulation. © 2012 John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. |
| spellingShingle | Pathmanathan, P Bernabeu, M Niederer, SA Gavaghan, D Kay, D Computational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology: Explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solvers |
| title | Computational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology: Explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solvers |
| title_full | Computational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology: Explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solvers |
| title_fullStr | Computational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology: Explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solvers |
| title_full_unstemmed | Computational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology: Explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solvers |
| title_short | Computational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology: Explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solvers |
| title_sort | computational modelling of cardiac electrophysiology explanation of the variability of results from different numerical solvers |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pathmanathanp computationalmodellingofcardiacelectrophysiologyexplanationofthevariabilityofresultsfromdifferentnumericalsolvers AT bernabeum computationalmodellingofcardiacelectrophysiologyexplanationofthevariabilityofresultsfromdifferentnumericalsolvers AT niederersa computationalmodellingofcardiacelectrophysiologyexplanationofthevariabilityofresultsfromdifferentnumericalsolvers AT gavaghand computationalmodellingofcardiacelectrophysiologyexplanationofthevariabilityofresultsfromdifferentnumericalsolvers AT kayd computationalmodellingofcardiacelectrophysiologyexplanationofthevariabilityofresultsfromdifferentnumericalsolvers |