No clear winner. The survival gap is under 10 percentage points and the balanced-score gap is under 0.05, so neither SolvSRK nor the best baseline clears the win threshold. Either works — choose on cost, licensing, or integration effort. All verdicts →
Hybrid system with velocity-reversal events; tests event detection
Canonical benchmark implementation
Canonical RHS excerpt from the registered callable used for this benchmark cell. Expand it to verify the state equations; it is not a standalone runnable fixture.
def _bouncing_ball_rhs(t, y):
return np.array([y[1], -9.81])Canonical RHS excerpt captured from the same registered callable used for the published benchmark. Frozen closure values are summarized below; helper imports and solver settings are intentionally omitted.
Fingerprint
Spread: low
Default noise: none
Recommendation snapshot
Clean best: SciPy Radau
Noisy best: SciPy LSODA
Coverage
14 solver arms · clean + 5 noise levels
Ranked on survival, precision, and speed
20 seeds/cell default · 14 arms · TRL 4–5 · simulation-lab validated · this page: Bouncing ball (impact events) (bouncing-ball-impact-events)
Governed SolvTune benchmark freeze; per-arm medians only. RHS definitions and raw trial rows are not published.
Self-reported by Resonix Labs · not independently verified
Pick an objective and a noise level to rank all arms on survival, median SCD, median nfev, and median wall time. Medians across seeds.
Objective
Best overall trade-off of survival, precision, and speed.
Noise level
| # | Solver | Survival | SCD | nfev | Wall | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SciPy RadauSciPy | 100% | 16.0 | 39 | 1 ms | 1.000 |
| 2 | TRBDF2external | 100% | 16.0 | 24 | 5.07 s | 1.000 |
| 3 | SciPy RK23SciPy | 100% | 15.6 | 20 | <1 ms | 0.991 |
| 4 | CVODE Adamsexternal | 100% | 15.6 | 15 | 6 ms | 0.991 |
| 5 | SolvSRK | 100% | 15.6 | 157 | 2 ms | 0.991 |
| 6 | SciPy RK45SciPy | 100% | 15.5 | 32 | <1 ms | 0.987 |
| 7 | Vern9external | 100% | 15.5 | 114 | 3.92 s | 0.987 |
| 8 | Vern7external | 100% | 14.9 | 72 | 4.01 s | 0.974 |
| 9 | SciPy DOP853SciPy | 100% | 14.7 | 50 | <1 ms | 0.970 |
| 10 | Tsit5external | 100% | 14.5 | 30 | 720 ms | 0.964 |
| 11 | SciPy LSODASciPy | 100% | 12.3 | 13 | <1 ms | 0.911 |
| 12 | SciPy BDFSciPy | 100% | 10.9 | 51 | 2 ms | 0.878 |
| 13 | CVODE BDFexternal | 100% | 10.3 | 31 | 6 ms | 0.863 |
| 14 | FBDFexternal | 100% | 8.3 | 944 | 5.10 s | 0.818 |
At Clean, best balanced arm is SciPy Radau · SolvSRK survival 100%, SCD 15.6.
Values are medians across seeds, measured by Resonix Labs on Resonix hardware and not independently verified; nfev and wall are on reference lab hardware (indicative). Under injected noise only SolvSRK and the SciPy arms are run. How we measure accuracy → · Verification status →
SolvScout · free
This page shows one published benchmark cell. SolvScout fingerprints your ODE, compares it to the full corpus, and recommends a solver with the same survival / precision / speed ranking you see here — including when a SciPy arm wins.
SolvSRK · 30-day trial
SolvSRK is the stiffness-adaptive integrator behind the SolvSRK column in these tables. Create an account, activate a machine, and take a 30-day trial — same binary you'd ship after purchase.
Replace the access date. Pin the freeze ID and library versions when comparing against a later export. Cite it as what it is — a self-reported vendor benchmark, not an independently verified result. The note field says so; please keep it.
@misc{resonix_evidence_bouncing_ball_impact_events_2026,
title = {Resonix Evidence Portal: Bouncing ball (impact events)},
author = {{Resonix Labs (Canada) Inc.}},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://resonix.tech/evidence/problems/bouncing-ball-impact-events}},
note = {Self-reported vendor benchmark; internally generated by Resonix Labs and not independently verified. Accessed YYYY-MM-DD. Freeze 2026-08-13; libsolvsrk 2.3.0; SciPy 1.14.}
}TRL 4–5 · simulation-lab validated · 398 problems · 14 solver arms · clean + 5 noise levels
Freeze: 2026-08-13 · scipy 1.14 · libsolvsrk 2.3.0 · Methodology
Self-reported by Resonix Labs · not independently verified · Verification status