Optimum (min/max) of a symmetric function

  • Thread starter Thread starter NaturePaper
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Symmetric
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the conditions under which a symmetric function achieves its optimum value. It is proposed that if a symmetric function f(x_1, x_2, ..., x_n) has an optimum, it should occur at the point where all variables are equal (x_1 = x_2 = ... = x_n). However, counterexamples exist, such as functions with multiple maxima that do not align with this condition. The conversation also touches on the implications of convexity, noting that for convex functions, local optima are global optima, but the convexity of the specific function in question remains uncertain. Ultimately, the relationship between symmetry and the nature of the function's optima is complex and requires further exploration.
NaturePaper
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Hi all,
I'm wondering if the following argument is right:

"The optimum (minimum/maximum) value of a symmetric function f(x_1,x_2,...,x_n) (By 'symmetric' I mean that f remains same if we alter any x_i's with x_j's), if exists, should be at the point x_1=x_2=...=x_n".

Please help me by proving (or disproving, i.e, a counter example) this argument. I have examine some well-known symmetric functions and these obey the rules. However, a general proof (or reference to literature, document etc.) is needed.


[I think this may be right, in the sense that the graph of the function (in n+1 dimensional space) should be symmetric about all axes, so if f has optimum at x_1=a, by the symmetry of the curve, x_2=...=x_n=a.]


Regards,
NaturePaper
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I assume that you mean that the optimum, if it exists, should be unique. Say it is some point (a_1,\ldots,a_n), but then a_1=\ldots=a_n, because otherwise one could interchange two coordinates to obtain another optimum.
 
@yyat,
Oh..., Let us consider the global optimum (min/max) for f. For convex f, it is known that every local optimum is the global optimum. However, I don't know whether f is convex or not. But I think the following discussion is right:

Let f has a global optimum (by definition, it is unique). Then the set of points where f attains it should contain the point x_1=x_2=...=x_n= some constant, by your argument.

Am I right?

Regards
NaturePaper
 
By uniqueness I meant that the optimum is only achieved at a single point, otherwise the argument becomes false. For example, consider the function on R^2 that is mostly 0 but has two http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bump_function" at (1,0) and (0,1) that are mirror images of themselves with respect to the diagonal (x_1=x_2). Then the function has two global maxima, but none of them on the diagonal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyway, if I restrict f to be symmetric, even function [i.e. f(-X)=f(X)], any number of time differentiable, then is it possible to make any comment about its global optimum?
At least, is f convex etc...?

Actually, my function f is like f=[g(x_1,x-2,...,x_n)]^2, where g is symmetric, bounded and any time differentiable. Is it possible to comment about the convexity of f etc?

Regards,
NaturePaper
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 125 ·
5
Replies
125
Views
20K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K