
#1
Feb2512, 05:25 AM

P: 87

Couple of days ago I downloaded a book on numerical optimization, hoping to get clearer picture on some techniques.
But, I'm surprised that some of the concepts were not precisely separated from one another. Namely, in the part of "coordinate descent methods" (cdm), I found that, in the case the contribution of each point to the function in question is known, one applied the GaussSouthwell approach to select the point to be updated. In case the update is done is a sequence from 1 to n, the the approach is referred to as the "cyclic descent method" (cydm). However, on some other places I've found that GaussSeidl method's principle is close to cydm's. Is GaussSeidl actually another name for cydm? I hope someone will clarify this for me. Another question is regarding the Jacobi method, which is a "hold on" version of GaussSeidl, in my understanding (regarding the point update at the end of iteration). Given certain function f(x) which is quadratic in x, in order to obtain its minimal, I set the derivative to 0, and obtain the following linear system Ax=b which I decide to solve by Jacobi iteration. Given that A is strictly diagonally dominant, is it true that the value of f(x1), where x1 is obtained by a single Jacobi iteration on some arbitrary x0 (but not the stationary point) satisfies f(x1)<f(x0)? 



#2
Feb2812, 07:05 AM

P: 87

Let me clarify what I'm looking for : given a function
[tex] f(x)=\frac{1}{2}x^TAx  b^Tx, [/tex] and the update [tex] x_1=D^{1}(bRx_0) [/tex] where A=D+R, with the being the diagonal matrix with diagonal entries of A (and R containing the offdiagonal entries of A), how could I show [tex] f(x_0)>f(x_1) [/tex] 



#3
Feb2812, 04:35 PM

Engineering
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 6,339

What you want to show is false, in general. For example take
##A = \begin{bmatrix}1 & 2 \\ 2 & 1 \end{bmatrix}, \quad b = \begin{bmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix}, \quad x_0 = \begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ 1 \end{bmatrix}## 



#4
Feb2912, 03:14 AM

P: 87

GaussSeidl, GaussSouthwell, Jacobi...
Your A is not strictly diagonally dominant (which is necessary for convergence of Jacobi method).




#5
Feb2912, 08:12 PM

Engineering
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 6,339

Sorry, I was reading post #2 and missed "strictly diagonal dominant" from post #1.
One way to prove this is to show the eigenvalues of ##D^{1}R## have modulus < 1, using the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gershgorin_circle_theorem. 



#6
Mar112, 07:55 AM

P: 87

Many thanks for the suggestion. Note that following:
[tex] D^{1}R=D^{1}(VD)=D^{1}VI [/tex] In my choice of V, the matrix [tex]D^{1}V[/tex] reduces to a symmetric matrix with the only nonnegative elements on the diagonal begin equal to 1: [tex] D^{1}V=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc} 1 & & & & \\ & \ddots & & c_{ij} \\ & & \ddots & & \\ & c_{ij} & & \ddots & \\ & & & & 1 \end{array}\right) \in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n} [/tex] such that the sum of the absolute values of all the offdiagonal elements in each row and column sum to 1, which is the corresponding diagonal element. By matrix difference $D^{1}VI$, this implies that the diagonal elements of the matrix $D^{1}R$ are zero, and in terms of the proposed Gershgorin circle theorem, this would correspond to n disks D(0, 1), meaning that eigenvalues of [tex]eigs(D^{1}R)\leq 1[/tex] (correct me if I'm wrong). How to proceed with the proof further? 



#7
Mar112, 10:10 AM

Engineering
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 6,339

You can get rid of the vector b by shifting the origin so the solution vector is zero, i.e ##y = x  \bar x## where ##A \bar x  b = 0##.
Then use the fact that any vector y is a linear combination of the eigenvectors of ##D^{1}R##. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Jacobi, GaussSeidel, SOR question  Calculus & Beyond Homework  0  
Jacobi Vs gaussseidel  Calculus  2  
Anybody experience with elliptic problems/ Gauss, Seidel Jacobi for Matlab ?  Calculus  0  
GaussJacobi and GaussSiedel  Calculus & Beyond Homework  0  
Gauss's Law yet again.  Introductory Physics Homework  5 