I understand that for many iterative methods, convergence rates can be shown to depend on the condition number of the coefficient matrix A in the linear equation(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

$$Ax=y.$$

Therefore, if a preconditioner satisfies

$$P \approx A,$$

then by solving the transformed linear equation

$$(AP^{-1}) (Px)=y.$$

the new coefficient matrix will now have more favorable spectral properties and hence better convergence can be achieved.

One of the main properties a good preconditioner should satisfy besides the above condition is that its inverse should be cheap to apply. Thus, they are often sought out for with a certain structure. Typical examples are the incomplete Cholesky and LU factorizations of the matrix A.

My question is: why do we want to have P approximate A, or, in a more direct approach, why do we formulate finding preconditioners as:

$$

\min_{P} \left\| AP^{-1} - I \right\|_F,

$$

where F represents the Frobenius-norm? The identity matrix isn't the only one with a condition number of 1; would it not be better to formulate the problem as:

$$

\min_{P,Q} \left\| AP^{-1} - Q \right\|_F,

$$

with Q having to be orthogonal? Given a certain structure restriction on P, I imagine this could lead to better preconditioning than in the previous case. Yet, I have not run across any such examples.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Preconditioning for linear equations

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - Preconditioning linear equations | Date |
---|---|

I Solutions to equations involving linear transformations | Mar 6, 2018 |

I Geometric intuition of a rank formula | Feb 8, 2018 |

I Tensors vs linear algebra | Jan 28, 2018 |

I Is there a geometric interpretation of orthogonal functions? | Jan 25, 2018 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**