Differentiation Schemes
Goal
Provide a reliable workflow to select a differentiation scheme, generate stencils, and assess accuracy for simulation discretization.
Requirements
- Python 3.10+
- NumPy (for stencil computations)
- No heavy dependencies
Inputs to Gather
| Input |
Description |
Example |
| Derivative order |
First, second, etc. |
1 or 2 |
| Target accuracy |
Order of truncation error |
2 or 4 |
| Grid type |
Uniform, nonuniform |
uniform |
| Boundary type |
Periodic, Dirichlet, Neumann |
periodic |
| Smoothness |
Smooth or discontinuous |
smooth |
Decision Guidance
Scheme Selection Flowchart
Is the field smooth?
├── YES → Is domain periodic?
│ ├── YES → Use central differences or spectral
│ └── NO → Use central interior + one-sided at boundaries
└── NO → Are there shocks/discontinuities?
├── YES → Use upwind, TVD, or WENO
└── NO → Use central with limiters
Quick Reference
| Situation |
Recommended Scheme |
| Smooth, periodic |
Central, spectral |
| Smooth, bounded |
Central + one-sided BCs |
| Advection-dominated |
Upwind |
| Shocks/fronts |
TVD, WENO |
| High accuracy needed |
Compact (Padé), spectral |
Script Outputs (JSON Fields)
| Script |
Key Outputs |
scripts/stencil_generator.py |
offsets, coefficients, order, accuracy, scheme |
scripts/scheme_selector.py |
recommended, alternatives, notes |
scripts/truncation_error.py |
error_scale, order, reduction_if_halved |
Workflow
- Identify requirements - derivative order, accuracy, smoothness
- Select scheme - Run
scripts/scheme_selector.py
- Generate stencils - Run
scripts/stencil_generator.py
- Estimate error - Run
scripts/truncation_error.py
- Validate - Test with manufactured solutions or grid refinement
Conversational Workflow Example
User: I need to discretize a second derivative for a diffusion equation on a uniform grid. I want 4th-order accuracy.
Agent workflow:
- Select appropriate scheme (boundary type was not stated; if the domain is
bounded rather than periodic, add
--boundary to surface one-sided/ghost-cell
guidance, or ask the user):
python3 scripts/scheme_selector.py --smooth --order 2 --accuracy 4 --json
- Generate the stencil:
python3 scripts/stencil_generator.py --order 2 --accuracy 4 --scheme central --json
- Result: 5-point stencil with coefficients
[-1/12, 4/3, -5/2, 4/3, -1/12] / dx².
Pre-Discretization Checklist
- Confirm derivative order and target accuracy
- Choose scheme appropriate to smoothness and boundaries
- Generate and inspect stencils at boundaries
- Estimate truncation error vs physics scales
- Verify with grid refinement study
CLI Examples
# Select scheme for smooth periodic problem
python3 scripts/scheme_selector.py --smooth --periodic --order 1 --accuracy 4 --json
# Generate central difference stencil for first derivative
python3 scripts/stencil_generator.py --order 1 --accuracy 2 --scheme central --json
# Generate 4th-order second derivative stencil
python3 scripts/stencil_generator.py --order 2 --accuracy 4 --scheme central --json
# Estimate truncation error
python3 scripts/truncation_error.py --dx 0.01 --accuracy 2 --scale 1.0 --json
Error Handling
| Error |
Cause |
Resolution |
order must be positive |
Invalid derivative order |
Use 1, 2, 3, ... (max 6) |
order must be <= 6 |
Derivative order too large |
Use 1–6 |
accuracy must be even for central |
Odd accuracy requested for central scheme |
Use 2, 4, 6, ... |
scheme must be central, forward, or backward |
Invalid --scheme value |
Use central, forward, or backward |
Interpretation Guidance
Stencil Properties
| Property |
Meaning |
| Symmetric offsets |
Central scheme (no directional bias) |
| Asymmetric offsets |
One-sided or upwind scheme |
| More points |
Higher accuracy but wider stencil |
Truncation Error Scaling
| Accuracy Order |
Error Scales As |
Refinement Factor |
| 2nd order |
O(dx²) |
2× refinement → 4× error reduction |
| 4th order |
O(dx⁴) |
2× refinement → 16× error reduction |
| 6th order |
O(dx⁶) |
2× refinement → 64× error reduction |
Common Stencils
| Derivative |
Accuracy |
Points |
Coefficients (× 1/dx or 1/dx²) |
| 1st |
2 |
3 |
[-1/2, 0, 1/2] |
| 1st |
4 |
5 |
[1/12, -2/3, 0, 2/3, -1/12] |
| 2nd |
2 |
3 |
[1, -2, 1] |
| 2nd |
4 |
5 |
[-1/12, 4/3, -5/2, 4/3, -1/12] |
Verification checklist
Before trusting a generated stencil or accepting a scheme recommendation, record concrete evidence for each item below:
- Ran
stencil_generator.py --json and confirmed results.accuracy matches the requested order AND that len(results.offsets) equals the expected stencil width (e.g. 5 points for a 4th-order central second derivative); for a central scheme also verified the offsets are symmetric about 0.
- Sanity-checked the returned
coefficients against references/stencil_catalog.md: confirmed they sum to ~0 (consistency: the operator annihilates a constant) and reproduce a known catalog stencil for at least one standard case (e.g. 2nd-order d²/dx² gives [1, -2, 1]/dx²).
- For a
central scheme, confirmed --accuracy is even (odd values exit 2 with accuracy must be even for central); recorded the actual exit code rather than assuming the requested order was achieved.
- Recorded the
error_scale, order, and reduction_if_halved from truncation_error.py and confirmed reduction_if_halved == 2**accuracy, then compared error_scale against the smallest physical feature size (dx/L_feature from references/error_guidance.md) to confirm the grid actually resolves the physics.
- Ran an independent grid-refinement / manufactured-solution study on >=3 grids (the scripts do NOT do this) and confirmed the observed order
p_obs = log(e_h/e_{h/2})/log(2) is within ~10% of the formal accuracy before quoting that order.
- For a bounded (non-periodic) domain, confirmed boundary stencils were generated/selected explicitly (
--scheme forward|backward or --boundary guidance) per references/boundary_handling.md, since the interior stencil alone does not define the scheme order at the boundary.
- For non-smooth fields (shocks/fronts), confirmed
scheme_selector.py did NOT recommend high-order central FD and that a limiter/WENO/upwind path was chosen instead.
Common pitfalls & rationalizations
| Tempting shortcut |
Why it's wrong / what to do |
| "The stencil generator returned coefficients, so the scheme is the order I asked for." |
The accuracy field just echoes your request; it is not measured. Verify the achieved order with a grid-refinement study and confirm the coefficients match a catalog stencil and sum to ~0. |
"I asked for 4th order on a central scheme with --accuracy 3, it'll just round up." |
It will not — central schemes reject odd accuracy with accuracy must be even for central (exit 2). Pass an even accuracy; an odd request is an error, not a silent upgrade. |
| "Higher accuracy order always means lower error here." |
truncation_error.py reports asymptotic scaling (scale * dx**accuracy); for a coarse grid or under-resolved feature the higher-order term need not dominate, and roundoff (O(ε/dx^p)) can win on very fine grids. Compare error_scale to the feature size, do not assume monotone improvement. |
| "Two grids agree closely, so it's converged." |
Two grids cannot estimate observed order or confirm the asymptotic range. Use >=3 grids and compute p_obs before claiming the formal order (see references/error_guidance.md). |
| "The interior stencil is 4th order, so my whole solve is 4th order." |
The generator emits interior stencils only; boundary closures often limit the global order. Generate one-sided/ghost-cell stencils explicitly and verify the boundary does not drop the observed order (references/boundary_handling.md). |
| "The field has a shock but a wide central stencil is more accurate, so use it." |
High-order central FD oscillates (Gibbs) at discontinuities. scheme_selector.py recommends FV with limiter/WENO or upwind for --discontinuous; follow it rather than maximizing formal order. |
"Custom --offsets let me build any stencil I want." |
Offsets must be distinct, length-capped (51), and number more than the derivative order, or the script exits 2. A valid run still does not guarantee the intended accuracy — verify the coefficients and observed order. |
Security
Input Validation
--order (derivative order) is validated as a positive integer with an upper bound (order <= 6)
--accuracy is validated as a positive integer (<= 8), and additionally must be even for central schemes
--scheme is validated against a fixed allowlist (central, forward, backward)
--offsets (custom stencil) is length-capped (max 51), parsed as distinct integers, and must exceed the derivative order
--dx and --scale are validated as finite, non-negative numbers (--dx strictly positive)
- No user-supplied strings are interpolated into code paths or shell commands
File Access
- Scripts read no external files; all inputs are provided via CLI arguments
- 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 three Python scripts (
stencil_generator.py, scheme_selector.py, truncation_error.py) with explicit argument lists
- Write: Used to save generated stencil coefficients or scheme recommendations; 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)
- Stencil computation uses only small, bounded arrays (derivative order capped at 6, accuracy at 8, and custom offset lists capped at 51 points)
- All output is deterministic JSON with no shell-interpretable content
Limitations
- Boundary handling: Stencil generator provides interior stencils; boundaries need special treatment
- Nonuniform grids: Standard stencils assume uniform spacing
- Spectral: Not covered by stencil generator
References
references/stencil_catalog.md - Common stencils
references/boundary_handling.md - One-sided schemes
references/scheme_selection.md - FD/FV/spectral comparison
references/error_guidance.md - Truncation error scaling
Version History
- v1.2.2 (2026-06-24): Added a Verification checklist (evidence-based, tied to script JSON outputs and the references) and a Common pitfalls & rationalizations table.
- v1.2.0 (2026-06-23): Enforced even-accuracy and order upper-bound validation, corrected Security/error-handling/output docs to match scripts, fixed CLI/eval examples, hardened input validation
- v1.1.0 (2024-12-24): Enhanced documentation, decision guidance, examples
- v1.0.0: Initial release with 3 differentiation scripts