1: \begin{abstract}

2: 	We compare the computational performance of

3: 	two modeling approaches for the flow of

4: 	dilute cavitation bubbles in a liquid.

5: 	The first approach is a deterministic model, for which bubbles are represented in a

6: 	Lagrangian framework as advected features, each sampled from a distribution of

7: 	equilibrium bubble sizes. The dynamic coupling to the liquid phase

8: 	is modeled through local volume averaging.

9: 	The second approach is stochastic; ensemble-phase

10: 	averaging is used to derive mixture-averaged equations

11: 	and field equations for the associated bubble properties are evolved in an Eulerian reference frame.

12: 	For polydisperse mixtures, the probability density function of the equilibrium bubble radii

13: 	is discretized and bubble properties are solved for each representative bin.

14: 	In both cases, the equations are closed by solving Rayleigh--Plesset-like

15: 	equations for the bubble dynamics as forced by the local or mixture-averaged

16: 	pressure, respectively. An acoustically excited dilute bubble screen is used

17: 	as a case study for comparisons. We show that observables of

18: 	ensemble- and volume-averaged simulations match closely and that

19: 	their convergence is first order under grid refinement.  Guidelines are established

20: 	for phase-averaged simulations by comparing the computational costs of methods.

21: 	The primary costs are shown to be associated with stochastic closure;

22: 	polydisperse ensemble-averaging requires many samples of the underlying

23: 	PDF and volume-averaging requires repeated, randomized simulations to accurately

24: 	represent a homogeneous bubble population. The relative sensitivities

25: 	of these costs to spatial resolution and bubble void fraction are presented.

26: \end{abstract}

27: