Is My SDP Formulation to Minimize trace((G^TG)^-1) Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter perplexabot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Optimization
perplexabot
Gold Member
Messages
328
Reaction score
5
Hey all. Let me get right to it!

I have the following objective function: \mathbf{minimize} \ \ trace((G^TG)^{-1})
I am trying to minimize it with CVX.

I used schur complement to do the following:
<br /> \begin{equation*}<br /> \begin{aligned}<br /> &amp; \underset{G}{\text{minimize}}<br /> &amp; &amp; \mathrm{trace}((G^TG)^{-1}) \\<br /> \end{aligned}<br /> \end{equation*}<br />
which is equivalent to
<br /> \begin{equation*}<br /> \begin{aligned}<br /> &amp; \underset{t, G}{\text{minimize}}<br /> &amp; &amp; \mathrm{t} \\<br /> &amp; \text{subject to}<br /> &amp;&amp; t \geq\mathrm{trace}((G^TG)^{-1})<br /> \end{aligned}<br /> \end{equation*}<br />
which is equivalent to
<br /> \begin{equation*}<br /> \begin{aligned}<br /> &amp; \underset{t, G, X, Z}{\text{minimize}}<br /> &amp; &amp; \mathrm{t} \\<br /> &amp; \text{subject to}<br /> &amp;&amp; t \geq\mathrm{trace}(Z) \\<br /> &amp;&amp;&amp;\begin{bmatrix} X &amp; G^T \\G &amp; I \end{bmatrix} \succeq 0 \qquad \\<br /> &amp;&amp;&amp;\begin{bmatrix} Z &amp; I \\ I &amp; X \end{bmatrix} \succeq 0 \qquad<br /> \end{aligned}<br /> \end{equation*}<br />

Those two matrices introduced by schur complement achieve the following two inequalities: X \geq G^TG and Z \geq X^{-1}

My question is, is this formulation correct?

Here are some links that may be worth the read if you are interested:
The work I did is based on the following similar example.
I have had some help at the official cvx forums.

Thank you for reading : ) Any comments, pointers or advice is much appreciated!

EDIT: Apologies if this is in the wrong category.
 
Last edited:
##\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...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
Back
Top