Cholesky decomp vs A = L'DL decomp.

  • Thread starter Thread starter WCMU101
  • Start date Start date
WCMU101
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hey all. I've written an algorithm to find the Cholesky decomposition of a symmetric, positive-definite matrix (A). I've used the algorithm from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholesky_decomposition#Avoiding_taking_square_roots

Ok here is my question. My current algorithm solves for A = LDLT, however I would also like to solve for A = LTDL. I've seen the results of both decompositions and it looks like they are related. From what I've seen it looks like the L returned from L'DL is just L from cholesky inverted about the positively sloped diagonal. And same for the D. So for example:

A =

4 2 2
2 4 2
2 2 4

A = LDL'

L =
1 0 0
0.5 1 0
0.5 0.333333 1

D =
4 0 0
0 3 0
0 0 2.66667

A = L'DL

L =

1.0000 0 0
0.3333 1.0000 0
0.5000 0.5000 1.0000

D =
2.6667 0 0
0 3.0000 0
0 0 4.0000

So my question. How can I relate the L from LDL' decomp with the L from L'DL decomp (mathematically).

Thanks,

Nick.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your example matrix is a special case because it also "symmetrical top to bottom" and "left to right".

For a general symmmetric matrix, you can get the L^T D L decomoposition by running the L D L^T "backwards" starting from the bottom right corner and working to the top left, but the result will not be as you described it. There is no obvious connection between the two sets of L and D matrices.

As a simple example, take the matrix

1 1
1 2
 
Thanks for that! Exactly what I needed to know.

Nick.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...
Back
Top