Optimizing Quadratic Functions with the Second Derivative Test

Zyuke
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Under what conditions on the constants a and b does the second derivative test guarantee that the function

g(x,y,z)=ax^2+2axz+by^2-2byz+z^2

has a local maximum at (0,0,0)? a local minimum at (0,0,0)?

well, i used the Hessian matrix to compute the eigenvalues to set them above zero. but the computation is so complicated that i used Mathematica to solve them and it turned out to be some messy stuff. i was convinced that this is not the way to do it. but then how?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[STRIKE]Just looking at the problem makes me want to try Lagrange multipliers.[/STRIKE]
 
Last edited:
Jufro said:
[STRIKE]Just looking at the problem makes me want to try Lagrange multipliers.[/STRIKE]

Won't work here.

They ask about the second derivative test, so you'll need to calculate the Hessian. It's what they ask for.
 
Zyuke said:
Under what conditions on the constants a and b does the second derivative test guarantee that the function

g(x,y,z)=ax^2+2axz+by^2-2byz+z^2

has a local maximum at (0,0,0)? a local minimum at (0,0,0)?

well, i used the Hessian matrix to compute the eigenvalues to set them above zero. but the computation is so complicated that i used Mathematica to solve them and it turned out to be some messy stuff. i was convinced that this is not the way to do it. but then how?

Why would you try to set the eigenvalues to zero? The Hessian is positive-definite if all the eigenvalues are > 0 (so the origin is a global minimum---not just local!)

The Hessian cannot be negative-definite, so the origin cannot be a local maximum. (Note: a matrix A is negative-definite if and only if its negative B = -A is positive-definite, and since B(3,3) = -2 < 0, B cannot be positive-definite---no fancy tests needed here!)

To test for positive-definiteness of the Hessian H, just perform Cholesky decomposition; see, eg., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholesky_decomposition . The Cholesky algorithm is easy to carry out in this case.
 
thanks a lot.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top