 which is even smaller than predicted in double-precision. Re-spacing the grid maps the curve $E_\nu(\alpha)$ to $E_\nu(\xi_\nu^{-1}(x))$, improving the resolution that can be achieved with 9216 gridpoints. Note that the oscillations in $\varphi(x,T/4)$ are fully resolved. (right) The minimization was performed in quadruple-precision arithmetic, yielding $f=2.1\times 10^{-60}$. The velocity potential is nearly 30 orders of magnitude smaller at $t=T/4$ than at $t=0$. ](figs/evolPhiOA){width="\linewidth"}

Because solution A remains smoother and involves many fewer Fourier modes than solution O, it was possible for us to perform the entire computation in quadruple precision arithmetic. This allowed us to reduce $f$ in (\[eq:f:phi\]) to $2.1\times 10^{-60}$. As shown in Fig. \[fig:evol:PhiOA\], the velocity potential of this solution drops from $O(1)$ at $t=0$ to less than $3\times 10^{-29}$ at $t=T/4$, in the uniform norm. While it was not possible to perform the minimization for solution O in quadruple precision arithmetic (due to memory limitations of the GPU device), we were able to check the double-precision result in quadruple precision to confirm that $f$ is not under-predicted by the minimization procedure. Because the DOPRI8 and SDC15 methods involve 12 and 99 internal Runge-Kutta stages per time-step, respectively, more function evaluations were involved in advancing the quadruple-precision calculations through time even though $N_l$ is larger in the double-precision calculations. As shown in Fig. \[fig:evol:PhiOA\], the oscillations in $\varphi(x,T/4)$ remain fully resolved in the quadruple precision calculation; thus, $f=8.6\times 10^{-27}$ is an accurate measure of the squared error. The predicted value of $f$ in double-precision (obtained by minimizing $f$) was $f=1.3\times
10^{-26}$. Since minimizing $f$ entails eliminating as many significant digits of $\varphi(x,T/4)$ as possible, the resulting value of $f$ is not expected to be highly accurate. What is important is that minimizing $f$ in
which is even smaller than predicted in double - precision. Re - space the power system map the curve $ E_\nu(\alpha)$ to $ E_\nu(\xi_\nu^{-1}(x))$, improving the resoluteness that can be achieved with 9216 gridpoints. Note that the oscillation in $ \varphi(x, T/4)$ are fully resolved. (right) The minimization was perform in quadruple - precision arithmetic, yielding $ f=2.1\times 10^{-60}$. The speed potential is nearly 30 orders of magnitude little at $ t = T/4 $ than at $ t=0$. ] (figs / evolPhiOA){width="\linewidth " } 

 Because solution A remains smoother and involves many few Fourier modes than solution O, it was possible for us to do the entire computation in quadruple precision arithmetic. This allowed us to shrink $ f$ in (\[eq: f: phi\ ]) to $ 2.1\times 10^{-60}$. As shown in Fig.   \[fig: evol: PhiOA\ ], the velocity potential of this solution drops from $ O(1)$ at $ t=0 $ to less than $ 3\times 10^{-29}$ at $ deoxythymidine monophosphate = T/4 $, in the uniform norm. While it was not possible to perform the minimization for solution O in quadruple precision arithmetical (ascribable to memory limitation of the GPU device), we were able to check the double - precision result in quadruple precision to confirm that $ f$ is not under - predicted by the minimization operation. Because the DOPRI8 and SDC15 method involve 12 and 99 internal Runge - Kutta stage per meter - step, respectively, more function evaluations were involve in advancing the quadruple - precision calculations through time even though $ N_l$ is large in the double - precision calculations. As shown in Fig.   \[fig: evol: PhiOA\ ], the oscillations in $ \varphi(x, T/4)$ remain in full resolved in the quadruple precision calculation; thus, $ f=8.6\times 10^{-27}$ is an accurate measure of the squared mistake. The predicted value of $ f$ in double - preciseness (prevail by minimizing $ f$) was $ f=1.3\times 
 10^{-26}$. Since minimizing $ f$ entails eliminating equally many significant digits of $ \varphi(x, T/4)$ as possible, the resulting value of $ f$ is not expected to be highly accurate. What is important is that minimizing $ f$ in
 whlch is even smaller than predicted in double-prxcision. Re-spacivg the grid maps the curve $E_\iu(\alpha)$ ti $E_\nu(\xi_\nu^{-1}(x))$, improving tfe resolunion that can ve achievev with 9216 nxidpojkts. Nmve that the osclllations it $\varphi(x,T/4)$ are fjlpy resolved. (right) The minimization ras pergogmed in quadrukle-prtcifion arithmetic, yielding $f=2.1\times 10^{-60}$. The vslocity potential is nearly 30 orders of magnitufe slaller at $t=T/4$ than wt $t=0$. ](figs/evilPhyIA){width="\linewkdth"}

Becaust volution A remains smoother and involves oany yewer Fourigx mofgs than soluvion O, it was posslnle fos us to perform the ektire conputation in quadruplx precision arithmetyc. This anlkwed us to reduce $f$ in (\[ex:f:phh\]) to $2.1\rimds 10^{-60}$. Ax ahown ln Hig. \[fig:evol:PgiOA\], the veoocity potential of trpx solution ddops fwoi $O(1)$ at $t=0$ to less than $3\times 10^{-29}$ at $t=T/4$, in tve hniform norm. While it wqs not possible to petform the iinimization for solution O in quadruple precisiot arivhoetng (aye to memory limitations of the GPU device), we wqde anle to check the double-precoslom result in quxdruplz pdecision to confirl that $s$ is bot under-kredivted by the minimization pricedure. Becalse rhe DOPRI8 and SDC15 lethods invulve 12 and 99 internal Runge-Kutta scages ler time-steo, respectjxely, more functiun vvalgations were involved in aqvancing vhe qbadruple-orecosion salculatiojs thvmugh time even thokgh $N_p$ hs larger ln the double-precision calculatmpns. As shown it Fpg. \[fig:evol:'hiOA\], bhe oscillationf in $\varphi(x,T/4)$ temain fujly rdsolved in the quedruple precysion calculadlon; thus, $f=8.6\tikes 10^{-27}$ is wn axcurqte mearjre of the squsred errog. Uhe predicred value of $f$ in voubus-precision (obtanuee by minimizing $f$) das $f=1.3\nimxs
10^{-26}$. Sigwe minimizinc $f$ dntxols euiminating cs manu significant digits of $\barphi(x,T/4)$ as possibke, the resolting vajue of $f$ is npt expected to be jighlb accucate. Wnat is important is that minimizihg $f$ in
which is even smaller than predicted in the maps the $E_\nu(\alpha)$ to $E_\nu(\xi_\nu^{-1}(x))$, be with 9216 gridpoints. that the oscillations $\varphi(x,T/4)$ are fully resolved. (right) The was performed in quadruple-precision arithmetic, yielding $f=2.1\times 10^{-60}$. The velocity potential is nearly orders of magnitude smaller at $t=T/4$ than at $t=0$. ](figs/evolPhiOA){width="\linewidth"} Because solution A smoother involves fewer modes than solution O, it was possible for us to perform the entire computation in quadruple arithmetic. This allowed us to reduce $f$ in to $2.1\times 10^{-60}$. As in Fig. \[fig:evol:PhiOA\], the velocity of solution drops $O(1)$ $t=0$ less than $3\times at $t=T/4$, in the uniform norm. While it was not possible to perform the minimization for solution in quadruple (due to limitations the device), we were check the double-precision result in quadruple that $f$ is not under-predicted by the minimization Because the and SDC15 methods involve 12 and internal Runge-Kutta stages per time-step, respectively, more function were involved in advancing the quadruple-precision calculations through time even though $N_l$ is larger in calculations. As shown in \[fig:evol:PhiOA\], the oscillations $\varphi(x,T/4)$ fully in quadruple precision thus, $f=8.6\times 10^{-27}$ is an accurate measure of the squared error. predicted value of $f$ in double-precision (obtained by minimizing $f$) 10^{-26}$. minimizing $f$ entails as many significant digits $\varphi(x,T/4)$ possible, the resulting value is expected accurate. is is that minimizing $f$
 which is even smaller than preDicted in doUble-pRecIsiOn. re-spAcinG the grid maps thE CurvE $E_\nu(\alpha)$ to $E_\nu(\xi_\nu^{-1}(x))$, impRovinG tHE resOLuTion tHat can bE AcHIEveD wItH 9216 grIdPOiNts. NoTe tHat the oScillationS in $\VaRphi(x,T/4)$ are fulLY rEsolved. (rigHt) THe minimizatiOn wAs perfOrMed IN quadRupLe-preCision ARithmeTic, yieldiNg $F=2.1\Times 10^{-60}$. THE velociTY PoTentIal is nearly 30 orders OF mAGnitude smaller At $t=T/4$ thAn AT $t=0$. ](FIGs/eVolphiOA){width="\LiNewidTH"}

BecausE SoLUTIon a Remains smoothEr and involvES maNy feweR FOurIEr modeS than SoLUtiOn O, it was posSiblE for us to pErform THe entirE ComputaTion in QuaDruPle pREcIsIon ArIThmETiC. ThIS alLowed us tO rEdUce $f$ iN (\[eq:f:PHI\]) TO $2.1\timEs 10^{-60}$. AS shoWn in FIg. \[fig:evol:PhiOa\], thE velOCitY poteNtial Of thIs SolutIon droPs froM $O(1)$ At $t=0$ to less than $3\tiMes 10^{-29}$ aT $t=T/4$, in the uNifOrM noRm. while IT was noT poSsiBle to peRform thE MinImIZATiOn for solution O in quAdRUPlE precisiOn aritHMeTiC (Due to memOrY liMitaTIOns of The Gpu dEvice), we wEre ablE To ChEck the dOuBle-preCiSioN reSult iN QuadRuple pRecision To conFIrm that $f$ is not uNDer-predicted bY ThE MInIMizaTioN procedure. BEcauSE the dOPRi8 AnD SDc15 MethoDs invOlVE 12 aND 99 internal Runge-Kutta StAges peR time-Step, respectivEly, more funCTIOn evaluaTionS WeRE involved in advAncinG the quadruPLe-precisIon caLculatioNs through TIMe even thOugH $N_l$ Is lArgER In The double-precISIon cAlCulatioNs. AS shown iN FiG. \[fiG:evOl:PHioA\], the osciLlations In $\VaRpHi(X,T/4)$ rEmain FUlly resoLvEd iN tHe qUadruPLe precIsion CalcUlAtIOn; tHus, $f=8.6\timES 10^{-27}$ iS AN accUrAtE meaSurE oF the sQuarED erRor. The pRedicted vAluE Of $f$ iN dOuBle-precIsion (obtained By Minimizing $F$) wAs $f=1.3\Times
10^{-26}$. SINCe minimiZing $f$ entails eliminating AS many siGniFicanT digIts of $\varpHi(x,t/4)$ as posSibLE, the reSultinG valuE oF $f$ iS NOt expECTeD to Be Highly accuRATe. WHat is ImPortAnt is thAt minimizing $f$ in
 which is even smaller tha n predicte d indou ble -p reci sion . Re-spacing t h e gr id maps the curve $E_\ nu(\a lp h a)$t o$E_\n u(\xi_\ n u^ { - 1}( x) )$ , i mp r ov ing t heresolut ion that c anbe  achieved wi t h9216 gridp oin ts. Note tha t t he osc il lat i ons i n $ \varp hi(x,T / 4)$ ar e fully r es o lved.( right)T h emini mization was perf o rm e d in quadruple -preci si o na r ith met ic, yieldi ng  $f=2 . 1\times 10 ^ { - 60} $ . The velocit y potential isnearly  3 0 o r ders o f mag ni t ude  smaller at  $t= T/4$ than  at $t = 0$. ](f i gs/evol PhiOA) {wi dth ="\l i ne wi dth "} 
Be c au ses olu tion A r em ai ns sm ooth e r a nd i nvo lves  many  fewer Fourie r m odes tha n sol ution  O,it  waspossib le fo rus to perform t he e ntire com put at ion  i n qua d ruplepre cis ion ari thmetic .  Th is a l lo wed us to reduce $ f$ i n(\[eq:f: phi\]) to  $ 2 .1\times  1 0^{ -60} $ .  As s hown in  Fig. \[ fig:ev o l: Ph iOA\],th e velo ci typot entia l  ofthis s olutiondrops from $O(1)$ at $t=0$ to less th a n  $ 3 \tim es10^{-29}$ a t $t = T/4$ , in th e u n iform  norm .W hi l e it was not possib le  to pe rform  the minimiza tion for s o l u tion O i n qu a dr u ple precisionarith metic (due to memor y lim itations  of the G P U  device) , w e w ere  ab l e  t o check the d o u ble- pr ecision  re sult in  qu adr upl e p re cision to  confirm  t ha t$f $ i s not under-pr ed ict ed  by  them inimiz ation  pro ce du r e.Because th e DOPR I8  a nd S DC1 5metho ds i n vol ve 12 a nd 99 int ern a l Ru ng e- Kutta s tages per tim e- step, resp ec tiv ely, m o r e functi on evaluations were inv o lved in  ad vanci ng t he quadru ple -preci sio n  calcu lation s thr ou ght i me ev e n  t hou gh  $N_l$ isl a rge r inth e do uble-pr ecision calculatio n s.As shown in F ig.  \[f i g :e vol : Ph i OA\ ], the o scillations in$\varphi(x ,T / 4) $ remain f u lly  r esolved  in the  quad r uple pr ecision c alculatio n;  thu s ,  $f =8.6\times  10^{-27 }$ is ana ccura t emeasu reof the  s qua red e rror.T hepredi cted v al ue of$f$ i ndouble-p recision (obtained by m inimiz ing $ f$)  was $f=1 .3\ t ime s
10^{-26 }$.Since mini miz ing  $f$ent a ils e limi n at ing as ma ny s i gnificant di git s of  $\varphi(x , T / 4)$  as p oss i ble, t he r esulting value of $f$ is not exp ecte d tobeh ighl yaccurate. What  is  i m p ortant i sthat minimi zing $f$  i n 
 which_is even_smaller than predicted in_double-precision. Re-spacing_the_grid maps_the_curve $E_\nu(\alpha)$ to_$E_\nu(\xi_\nu^{-1}(x))$, improving the_resolution that can be_achieved with 9216_gridpoints._Note that the oscillations in $\varphi(x,T/4)$ are fully resolved. (right) The minimization was performed_in_quadruple-precision arithmetic,_yielding_$f=2.1\times_10^{-60}$. The velocity potential is_nearly 30 orders of magnitude_smaller at_$t=T/4$ than at $t=0$. ](figs/evolPhiOA){width="\linewidth"}

Because solution A remains_smoother_and involves many_fewer Fourier modes than solution O, it was possible_for us to perform the entire_computation in quadruple_precision_arithmetic._This allowed us to_reduce $f$ in (\[eq:f:phi\]) to $2.1\times_10^{-60}$. As shown in Fig. \[fig:evol:PhiOA\], the_velocity potential of this solution drops from_$O(1)$ at $t=0$ to less than_$3\times 10^{-29}$ at $t=T/4$, in_the uniform_norm. While it was not_possible to perform_the minimization_for solution O_in quadruple precision arithmetic (due to_memory limitations of_the GPU device), we were able_to_check the double-precision_result_in_quadruple precision_to confirm that_$f$_is not_under-predicted_by the minimization procedure. Because the_DOPRI8_and SDC15 methods involve 12 and 99_internal Runge-Kutta stages per_time-step,_respectively, more function evaluations_were involved in advancing the_quadruple-precision calculations through time even though_$N_l$ is_larger in_the double-precision calculations. As shown in Fig. \[fig:evol:PhiOA\], the oscillations in $\varphi(x,T/4)$_remain fully resolved in the quadruple_precision calculation; thus, $f=8.6\times_10^{-27}$ is_an_accurate measure of_the_squared error._The predicted value of $f$ in double-precision_(obtained by_minimizing $f$) was $f=1.3\times
10^{-26}$. Since minimizing_$f$ entails eliminating as_many_significant digits of $\varphi(x,T/4)$ as possible,_the resulting value of $f$ is_not expected to be highly_accurate._What_is important is that minimizing_$f$ in