Numerical LA: Cholesky & Conjugate gradient method

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on using Cholesky decomposition to derive A-orthogonal directions in numerical linear algebra. The matrix A is expressed as A = GG', where G is the Cholesky factor of a symmetric positive definite matrix. The user seeks clarification on how to apply the formula v_k = r_k-1 + s_k-1*v_k-1, with the condition = 0, to determine the direction vectors. The provided formula for s_k-1, s_k-1 = - / , raises questions about the utility of the Cholesky decomposition in this context.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Cholesky decomposition and its properties
  • Familiarity with symmetric positive definite matrices
  • Knowledge of A-orthogonality and its implications in numerical methods
  • Basic proficiency in vector operations and inner products
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Cholesky decomposition in solving linear systems
  • Explore the concept of A-orthogonal sets in numerical linear algebra
  • Learn about the conjugate gradient method and its relationship with Cholesky decomposition
  • Investigate the implications of residual vectors in iterative methods
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, numerical analysts, and students studying numerical linear algebra, particularly those interested in optimization techniques and iterative methods for solving linear equations.

eckiller
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I have to do a proof and am having trouble starting.

The proof is to show how you could use Cholesky decomposition to determine a set of A-orthogonal directions.


Cholesky decom. means I can write the symmetric positive definite matrix as

A = GG'

The textbook gives a way of determining the A-orthogonal set using A. Specifically,

v_k = r_k-1 + s_k-1*v_k-1

where v_k is the kth direction vector and r_k-1 is the k-1 residual vector. So we want to choose s_k-1 such that

<v_k-1, Av_k> = 0

The textbook then goes onto show:

s_k-1 = - <v_k-1, Ar_k-1> / <v_k-1, Av_k-1>

So I don't see how using A = GG' helps at all.

If anyone could give me a tip on how to start, I'd be thankful.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I assume Cholesky guarantees that you don't go in circles with the given recursions.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K