Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 4 – uploaded by Blanca Rodríguez

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 4. Monodomain 3D: electrical activation at (x = 1.5,y = 1.5,z = 1.5) mn Figure 5. Bidomain 3D: electrical activation at (w# = 1.5,y = 1.5,z = 1.5) mr

Figure 4 Monodomain 3D: electrical activation at (x = 1.5,y = 1.5,z = 1.5) mn Figure 5. Bidomain 3D: electrical activation at (w# = 1.5,y = 1.5,z = 1.5) mr

Related Figures (11)

Figure 1. The fine mesh (thin lines) and coarse mesh (thick lines)
Figure 1. The fine mesh (thin lines) and coarse mesh (thick lines)
Table 2. Summary of numerical approximation schemes
Table 2. Summary of numerical approximation schemes
Figure 2. Monodomain 2D: electrical activation at (c = 10,y = 10) mm Figure 3. Bidomain 2D: electrical activation at (« = 10,y = 10) mm
Figure 2. Monodomain 2D: electrical activation at (c = 10,y = 10) mm Figure 3. Bidomain 2D: electrical activation at (« = 10,y = 10) mm
Figure 2. Monodomain 2D: electrical activation at (c = 10,y = 10) mm
Figure 2. Monodomain 2D: electrical activation at (c = 10,y = 10) mm
Figure 4. Monodomain 3D: electrical activation at (x = 1.5,y = 1.5,z = 1.5) mn
Figure 4. Monodomain 3D: electrical activation at (x = 1.5,y = 1.5,z = 1.5) mn
Table 4. Results of the 3D Simulations scheme like BE (not suffering from such a long assembling time) would lead to ¢ higher overall improvement.
Table 4. Results of the 3D Simulations scheme like BE (not suffering from such a long assembling time) would lead to ¢ higher overall improvement.
Table 4. Results of the 3D Simulations scheme like BE (not suffering from such a long assembling time) would lead to ¢ higher overall improvement.
Table 4. Results of the 3D Simulations scheme like BE (not suffering from such a long assembling time) would lead to ¢ higher overall improvement.
Figure 6. Monodomain 2D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented Total computation time and most time consuming parts shown. Figure 7. Bidomain 2D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented. Tota. computation time and most time consuming parts shown.
Figure 6. Monodomain 2D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented Total computation time and most time consuming parts shown. Figure 7. Bidomain 2D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented. Tota. computation time and most time consuming parts shown.
Figure 6. Monodomain 2D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented Total computation time and most time consuming parts shown.
Figure 6. Monodomain 2D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented Total computation time and most time consuming parts shown.
Figure 8. Monodomain 3D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented Total computation time and most time consuming parts shown. Figure 9. Bidomain 3D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented. Tota: computation time and most time consuming parts shown.
Figure 8. Monodomain 3D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented Total computation time and most time consuming parts shown. Figure 9. Bidomain 3D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented. Tota: computation time and most time consuming parts shown.
Figure 8. Monodomain 3D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented Total computation time and most time consuming parts shown.
Figure 8. Monodomain 3D: Performance of the different numerical schemes presented Total computation time and most time consuming parts shown.
Related topics:
AlgorithmsComputer GraphicsComputer User Interface Design
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved