The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fundamental differences between SPH and grid methods: Simulating fluids using SPH and grid techniques
Open accessAbstract
We have carried out a comparison study of hydrodynamical codes by investigating their performance in modelling interacting multiphase fluids. The two commonly used techniques of grid and smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) show striking differences in their ability to model processes that are fundamentally important across many areas of astrophysics. Whilst Eulerian grid based methods are able to resolve and treat important dynamical instabilities, such as Kelvin–Helmholtz or Rayleigh–Taylor, these processes are poorly or not at all resolved by existing SPH techniques. We show that the reason for this is that SPH, at least in its standard implementation, introduces spurious pressure forces on particles in regions where there are steep density gradients. This results in a boundary gap of the size of an SPH smoothing kernel radius over which interactions are severely damped.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The cosmological simulation code gadget-2
Springel, V. (2005) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09655.x · Cited by 6,368
Self-citation
Cited by
The EAGLE project: simulating the evolution and assembly of galaxies and their environments
Schaye, J., Crain, R. A., Bower, R. G., Furlong, M., Schaller, M., Theuns, T., Dalla Vecchia, C., Frenk, C. S., McCarthy, I. G., Helly, J. C., et al. (2015) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stu2058 · Cited by 3,601
The EAGLE simulations of galaxy formation: calibration of subgrid physics and model variations
Crain, R. A., Schaye, J., Bower, R. G., Furlong, M., Schaller, M., Theuns, T., Dalla Vecchia, C., Frenk, C. S., McCarthy, I. G., Helly, J. C., et al. (2015) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1093/mnras/stv725 · Cited by 1,451
Theoretical Challenges in Galaxy Formation
Naab, T., & Ostriker, J. P. (2017) · Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081913-040019 · Cited by 722
Phantom: A Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics and Magnetohydrodynamics Code for Astrophysics
Price, D. J., Wurster, J., Tricco, T. S., Nixon, C., Toupin, S., Pettitt, A., Chan, C., Mentiplay, D., Laibe, G., Glover, S., et al. (2018) · Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia · doi:10.1017/pasa.2018.25 · Cited by 429
Ram pressure stripping the hot gaseous haloes of galaxies in groups and clusters
McCarthy, I. G., Frenk, C. S., Font, A. S., Lacey, C. G., Bower, R. G., Mitchell, N. L., Balogh, M. L., & Theuns, T. (2008) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12577.x · Cited by 375
Metadata
- Authors
- Agertz, O., Moore, B., Stadel, J., Potter, D., Miniati, F., Read, J., Mayer, L., Gawryszczak, A., Kravtsov, A., Nordlund, Å., Pearce, F., Quilis, V., Rudd, D., Springel, V., Stone, J., Tasker, E., Teyssier, R., Wadsley, J., & Walder, R.
- Venue
- Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-08-23
- Volume
- 380
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 963-978
- ISSN
- 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2134123336
- Cited by
- 620
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 48.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fundamental differences between SPH and grid methods: Simulating fluids using SPH and grid techniques. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12183.x
- The paper
- Agertz, O., Moore, B., Stadel, J., Potter, D., Miniati, F., Read, J., Mayer, L., Gawryszczak, A., Kravtsov, A., Nordlund, Å., Pearce, F., Quilis, V., Rudd, D., Springel, V., Stone, J., Tasker, E., Teyssier, R., Wadsley, J., & Walder, R. (2007). Fundamental differences between SPH and grid methods: Simulating fluids using SPH and grid techniques. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12183.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
