Install
$ agentstack add skill-heshamfs-materials-simulation-skills-numerical-stability Open-source listing — not yet scanned by AgentStack. Follow the source repository for install instructions.
Security review
⚠ Flagged1 finding(s); flagged for manual review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- • Prompt-injection patterns
- • Secret / credential exfiltration
- • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- • Untrusted network calls
- • Known-malicious package signatures
- high Dangerous shell/eval execution.
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ● Shell / process execution Used
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ● Dynamic code execution Used
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
About
Numerical Stability
Goal
Provide a repeatable checklist and script-driven checks to keep time-dependent simulations stable and defensible.
Requirements
- Python 3.10+
- NumPy (for matrixcondition.py and vonneumann_analyzer.py)
- See
scripts/requirements.txtfor dependencies
Inputs to Gather
| Input | Description | Example | |-------|-------------|---------| | Grid spacing dx | Spatial discretization | 0.01 m | | Time step dt | Temporal discretization | 1e-4 s | | Velocity v | Advection speed | 1.0 m/s | | Diffusivity D | Thermal/mass diffusivity | 1e-5 m²/s | | Reaction rate k | First-order rate constant | 100 s⁻¹ | | Dimensions | 1D, 2D, or 3D | 2 | | Scheme type | Explicit or implicit | explicit |
Decision Guidance
Choosing Explicit vs Implicit
Is the problem stiff (fast + slow dynamics)?
├── YES → Use implicit or IMEX scheme
│ └── Check conditioning with matrix_condition.py
└── NO → Is CFL/Fourier satisfied with reasonable dt?
├── YES → Use explicit scheme (cheaper per step)
└── NO → Consider implicit or reduce dx
Stability Limit Quick Reference
| Physics | Number | Explicit Limit (1D) | Formula | |---------|--------|---------------------|---------| | Advection | CFL | C ≤ 1 | C = v·dt/dx | | Diffusion | Fourier | Fo ≤ 0.5 | Fo = D·dt/dx² | | Reaction | Reaction | R ≤ 1 | R = k·dt |
Multi-dimensional correction: For d dimensions, diffusion limit is Fo ≤ 1/(2d).
Script Outputs (JSON Fields)
| Script | Key Outputs | |--------|-------------| | scripts/cfl_checker.py | metrics.cfl, metrics.fourier, recommended_dt, stable | | scripts/von_neumann_analyzer.py | results.max_amplification, results.stable | | scripts/matrix_condition.py | results.condition_number, results.is_symmetric | | scripts/stiffness_detector.py | results.stiffness_ratio, results.real_part_stiffness_ratio, results.imag_dominated, results.stiff, results.recommendation, results.warning |
Workflow
- Identify dominant physics (advection vs diffusion vs reaction)
- Run CFL checker with
scripts/cfl_checker.py - Compare to limits and adjust
dtif needed - Check stiffness with
scripts/stiffness_detector.pyif multiple scales - Analyze custom schemes with
scripts/von_neumann_analyzer.py - Check conditioning with
scripts/matrix_condition.pyfor implicit solves - Document the stability verdict and recommended time step
Conversational Workflow Example
User: My phase-field simulation is blowing up after 100 steps. I'm using explicit Euler with dx=0.01, dt=1e-4, and diffusivity D=1.0.
Agent workflow:
- Check stability criteria:
``bash python3 scripts/cfl_checker.py --dx 0.01 --dt 1e-4 --diffusivity 1.0 --dimensions 2 --json ``
- Interpret results:
- Fourier number:
Fo = 1.0 × 1e-4 / (0.01)² = 1.0 - 2D limit:
Fo ≤ 0.25 - Violation: Fo = 1.0 > 0.25, unstable!
- Recommend fix:
- Reduce dt to
2.5e-5(the tool'srecommended_dt, giving Fo = 0.25) - Or increase dx, or switch to implicit
Pre-Simulation Stability Checklist
- [ ] Identify dominant physics and nondimensional groups
- [ ] Compute CFL/Fourier/Reaction numbers with
cfl_checker.py - [ ] If explicit and limit violated, reduce
dtor change scheme - [ ] If stiffness ratio > 1000, select implicit/stiff integrator
- [ ] For custom schemes, verify amplification factor ≤ 1
- [ ] Document stability reasoning with inputs and outputs
CLI Examples
# Check CFL/Fourier for 2D diffusion-advection
python3 scripts/cfl_checker.py --dx 0.1 --dt 0.01 --velocity 1.0 --diffusivity 0.1 --dimensions 2 --json
# Von Neumann analysis for custom 3-point stencil
python3 scripts/von_neumann_analyzer.py --coeffs 0.2,0.6,0.2 --dx 1.0 --nk 128 --json
# Detect stiffness from eigenvalue estimates
python3 scripts/stiffness_detector.py --eigs=-1,-1000 --json
# Check matrix conditioning for implicit system
python3 scripts/matrix_condition.py --matrix A.npy --norm 2 --json
Error Handling
| Error | Cause | Resolution | |-------|-------|------------| | dx and dt must be positive | Zero or negative values | Provide valid positive numbers | | No stability criteria applied | Missing velocity/diffusivity | Provide at least one physics parameter | | Matrix not found: | Invalid path | Check matrix file exists | | Could not compute eigenvalues | Singular or ill-formed matrix | Check matrix validity |
Interpretation Guidance
| Scenario | Meaning | Action | |----------|---------|--------| | stable: true | All checked criteria satisfied | Proceed with simulation | | stable: false | At least one limit violated | Reduce dt or change scheme | | stable: null | No criteria could be applied | Provide more physics inputs | | Stiffness ratio > 1000 | Problem is stiff | Use implicit integrator | | Condition number > 10⁸ | Poorly-conditioned (status: poorly-conditioned) | Preconditioning likely needed | | Condition number > 10¹⁰ | Ill-conditioned (status: ill-conditioned) | Use scaling/preconditioning |
> Conditioning thresholds assume IEEE double precision: solving loses roughly log10(κ) significant digits, and a matrix becomes numerically singular near κ ≈ 1/eps ≈ 4.5e15. The > 10⁸ / > 10¹⁰ cutoffs (matching matrix_condition.py status) leave ample margin; well-conditioned-for-double FEM matrices (κ up to ~10⁶–10⁷) report status: ok.
Verification checklist
Do not declare a scheme/time step "stable" until each applicable item below is satisfied with a recorded value from the scripts, not a mental estimate.
- [ ] Ran
cfl_checker.py --jsonand recordedmetrics.cfl,metrics.fourier, and/ormetrics.reactionagainst the reportedlimits.*(explicit defaults: CFL ≤ 1, Fo ≤ 1/(2d), R ≤ 1), withstable: trueand the intended criteria present incriteria_applied. - [ ] Confirmed
criteria_appliedis non-empty andstableis notnull— i.e. at least one physics parameter (--velocity/--diffusivity/--reaction-rate) was actually supplied so a real check ran, not a silent no-op. - [ ] Used the smallest grid spacing across all directions for
--dx(anisotropic grids: smallestdx/dy/dz) and re-rancfl_checker.pyafter any mesh refinement, sinceFo ∝ dt/dx²makes the limit highly sensitive todx. - [ ] If the chosen
dtis below the limit, recorded the tool'srecommended_dt(and the--safetyfactor used) so the margin to the stability boundary is explicit and reproducible. - [ ] For any custom/non-standard update stencil, ran
von_neumann_analyzer.py --jsonand confirmedresults.max_amplification ≤ 1(stable: true); notedk_at_maxand resolved any even-length-stencilwarning. - [ ] For multi-scale systems, ran
stiffness_detector.py --jsonand recordedreal_part_stiffness_ratio,imag_dominated, andstiff; only chose BDF/Radau whenstiff: trueon the real-part ratio (not on magnitude alone) and there is nowarning. - [ ] For implicit solves, ran
matrix_condition.py --jsonand recordedcondition_numberandstatus; treatedpoorly-conditioned(>1e8) /ill-conditioned(>1e10) as a flag to scale/precondition before trusting the solve.
Common pitfalls & rationalizations
| Tempting shortcut | Why it's wrong / what to do | |-------------------|-----------------------------| | "Implicit scheme, so any dt is fine." | Unconditional stability is not accuracy. cfl_checker.py reports stable: true with relaxed (infinite) limits for --scheme implicit and even adds a note to "check accuracy" — a large dt still ruins temporal error. Size dt for accuracy, not just stability. | | "It ran 100 steps without crashing, so the setup is stable." | Late-time blow-up from round-off, conservation loss, or marginal Fo is common. Completion ≠ correctness — record metrics.fourier/metrics.cfl vs limits.* and confirm stable: true before trusting the run. | | "The 1D Fourier limit is 0.5, so Fo ≤ 0.5 is safe." | The explicit diffusion limit is Fo ≤ 1/(2d) — 0.25 in 2D, 0.167 in 3D. Pass the real --dimensions; cfl_checker.py tightens diffusion_limit automatically, and using 0.5 in 2D/3D is an instability. | | "Stiffness ratio is huge, so use BDF/Radau." | The magnitude stiffness_ratio is misleading for oscillatory/advective/Hamiltonian spectra. Check imag_dominated and real_part_stiffness_ratio: if imag_dominated: true the detector returns stiff: false with a warning — prefer symplectic/leapfrog or a CFL-sized A-stable scheme, not implicit stiff solvers. | | "I tightened dt, so the old mesh's dt still works after refining dx." | Fo ∝ dt/dx²: halving dx quadruples Fo. Reusing a pre-refinement dt reintroduces a violation. Recompute with cfl_checker.py after every mesh change. | | "The matrix solved, so its conditioning is fine." | A solve can return numbers while silently losing ~log10(κ) digits. Record condition_number/status from matrix_condition.py; poorly-conditioned/ill-conditioned means scale or precondition before trusting the result. |
Security
Input Validation
dx,dt, andsafetyare validated as finite positive numbers before any computation;velocity,diffusivity, andreaction_rate, when supplied, are validated as finite--dimensionsis restricted to{1, 2, 3}(cfl_checker.py raises and exits 2 otherwise)- Comma-separated eigenvalue lists (
--eigs) are capped at 10,000 entries and validated as finite numbers - Stencil coefficient lists (
--coeffs) are capped at 10,000 entries and validated as finite floats
File Access
matrix_condition.pyreads a single matrix file (.npyor text) specified by--matrix; no directory traversal beyond the given path- Matrix/Jacobian files are rejected if they exceed 500 MB before parsing (matrixcondition.py, stiffnessdetector.py)
np.load()is called withallow_pickle=Falseto prevent arbitrary code execution via crafted.npyfiles (matrixcondition.py, stiffnessdetector.py)- Scripts write only to stdout (JSON output); no files are created unless the agent explicitly uses the Write tool
Tool Restrictions
- Read: Used to inspect script source, references, and user configuration files
- Bash: Used to execute the four Python analysis scripts (
cfl_checker.py,von_neumann_analyzer.py,matrix_condition.py,stiffness_detector.py) with explicit argument lists - Write: Used to save analysis results or generated reports; writes are scoped to the user's working directory
- Grep/Glob: Used to locate relevant files and search references
Safety Measures
- No
eval(),exec(), or dynamic code generation - All subprocess calls use explicit argument lists (no
shell=True) - Matrix dimension limit (100,000 per side) in matrix_condition.py prevents memory exhaustion
- JSON output mode (
--json) produces structured, parseable results without shell-interpretable content
Limitations
- Explicit schemes only for CFL/Fourier checks (implicit is unconditionally stable)
- Von Neumann analysis assumes linear, constant-coefficient, periodic BCs
- Stiffness detection requires eigenvalue estimates from user. The
stiffverdict is based on scale separation among genuinely decaying modes (Re(λ) < 0); the magnitude ratio is still reported asstiffness_ratio. Imaginary-axis-dominated spectra (oscillatory/advection/Hamiltonian) are flagged viaimag_dominatedand awarning, and are NOT classified as stiff — for those, prefer symplectic/leapfrog or an A-stable scheme sized by the CFL limit, not BDF/Radau.
References
references/stability_criteria.md- Decision thresholds and formulasreferences/common_pitfalls.md- Frequent failure modes and fixesreferences/scheme_catalog.md- Stability properties of common schemes
Version History
- v1.2.2 (2026-06-24): Added a "Verification checklist" (7 evidence-based items tied to the four scripts' JSON outputs) and a "Common pitfalls & rationalizations" table (6 rows) to make stability verdicts reproducible and guard against false-confidence shortcuts
- v1.2.0 (2026-06-23): Corrected the phase-field worked example (genuinely unstable Fo=1.0 with D=1.0); fixed eval case 1 Fourier value; reconciled conditioning thresholds and error-message docs with the scripts; real-part-based stiffness classification with imaginary-dominated detection; enforced documented input/file-size/dimension safeguards
- v1.1.0 (2024-12-24): Enhanced documentation, decision guidance, examples
- v1.0.0: Initial release with 4 stability analysis scripts
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: HeshamFS
- Source: HeshamFS/materials-simulation-skills
- License: Apache-2.0
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet — be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.