[CIG-SEISMO] SPECFEM3D Globe verification

[Dimitri Komatitsch]

Hi Ping,

Please use the SVN version of the code instead; the small differences 
you see are related to the fact that we have improved the calculation of 
attenuation. The SVN version has the right (new) reference seismograms. 
The tar file version is obsolete.

Best regards,
Dimitri.

On 25/06/2013 20:23, Luo, Ping wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We are going to use SPECFEM3D Globe as a benchmark for new cluster purchase. I have built SPECFEM3D Globe one a Sandy Bridge cluster and am running "small_benchmark_run_to_test_a_new_machine" from the EXAMPLES directory. In the README file, it mentions that "If you notice any difference on any of the 387 pages, the code on your new machine (or your new machine, or both) has a problem." I indeed find my simulation results are a little different from the reference values. I am attaching one graph where the two sets of results seems off the most. The files attached are:
>
>       BBSR.IU.MXE.sem.ascii
>       BBSR.IU.MXE.sem.ascii-ref
>       BBSR_IU_MXE.seismograms_comparison.pdf
>
>
> Do you think there is something wrong with my simulation? What could be the problem? Since we are only interested in relative performance among different clusters, is it OK to use SPECFEM3D Globe as a benchmark of cluster selection even though the results are not correct?
>
> I used the Intel XE compilers and the intel MPI for compilation. I didn't change the default compilation flags.
>
> Thank you for help,
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Ping
> Lead Systems Administrator
> Supercomputing Facility
> Texas A&M University
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CIG-SEISMO mailing list
> CIG-SEISMO at geodynamics.org
> http://geodynamics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cig-seismo
>

-- 
Dimitri Komatitsch
CNRS Research Director (DR CNRS), Laboratory of Mechanics and Acoustics,
UPR 7051, Marseille, France    http://komatitsch.free.fr