v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization
v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization
318 CHAPTER 4. SEMIDEFINITE PROGRAMMING The trace constraint on X normalizes vector x while the diagonal constraint on Z maintains sign between respective entries of x and y . Regularization term ‖X −Y ‖ F then makes x equal to y to within a real scalar; (C.2.0.0.2) in this case, a positive scalar. To make this program solvable by convex iteration, as explained in Example 4.4.1.2.2 and other previous examples, we move the rank constraint to the objective minimize X , Y , Z , x , y subject to (x, y) ∈ C ⎡ f(x, y) + ‖X − Y ‖ F + 〈G, W 〉 G = ⎣ tr(X) = 1 δ(Z) ≽ 0 X Z x Z Y y x T y T 1 ⎤ ⎦≽ 0 (727) by introducing a direction matrix W found from (1581a): minimize W ∈ S 2N+1 〈G ⋆ , W 〉 subject to 0 ≼ W ≼ I trW = 2N (728) This semidefinite program has an optimal solution that is known in closed form. Iteration (727) (728) terminates when rankG = 1 and linear regularization 〈G, W 〉 vanishes to within some numerical tolerance in (727); typically, in two iterations. If function f competes too much with the regularization, positively weighting each regularization term will become required. At convergence, problem (727) becomes a convex equivalent to the original nonconvex problem (724). 4.6.0.0.8 Example. fast max cut. [96] Let Γ be an n-node graph, and let the arcs (i , j) of the graph be associated with [ ] weights a ij . The problem is to find a cut of the largest possible weight, i.e., to partition the set of nodes into two parts S, S ′ in such a way that the total weight of all arcs linking S and S ′ (i.e., with one incident node in S and the other one in S ′ [Figure 85]) is as large as possible. [31,4.3.3]
4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAINT EXAMPLES 319 2 3 4 S 1 CUT 16 5 S ′ 15 4 -1 -3 5 1 -3 6 7 2 1 14 13 9 8 12 11 10 Figure 85: A cut partitions nodes {i=1...16} of this graph into S and S ′ . Linear arcs have circled weights. The problem is to find a cut maximizing total weight of all arcs linking partitions made by the cut.
- Page 267 and 268: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 267 minimizes an aff
- Page 269 and 270: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 269 whose rank
- Page 271 and 272: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 271 and where m
- Page 273 and 274: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 273 4.3.3 Optim
- Page 275 and 276: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 275 Initialize:
- Page 277 and 278: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 279 and 280: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 281 and 282: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 283 and 284: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 285 and 286: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 287 and 288: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 289 and 290: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 291 and 292: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 293 and 294: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 295 and 296: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 295 m
- Page 297 and 298: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 297 m
- Page 299 and 300: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 299 a
- Page 301 and 302: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 301 f
- Page 303 and 304: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 303 n
- Page 305 and 306: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 305 W
- Page 307 and 308: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 307 t
- Page 309 and 310: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 311 and 312: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 313 and 314: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 315 and 316: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 317: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 321 and 322: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 323 and 324: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 325 and 326: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 327 and 328: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 329 and 330: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 331 and 332: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 333 and 334: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 335 and 336: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 337 and 338: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 339 and 340: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 341 and 342: 4.7. CONVEX ITERATION RANK-1 341 fi
- Page 343 and 344: 4.7. CONVEX ITERATION RANK-1 343 Gi
- Page 345 and 346: Chapter 5 Euclidean Distance Matrix
- Page 347 and 348: 5.2. FIRST METRIC PROPERTIES 347 co
- Page 349 and 350: 5.3. ∃ FIFTH EUCLIDEAN METRIC PRO
- Page 351 and 352: 5.3. ∃ FIFTH EUCLIDEAN METRIC PRO
- Page 353 and 354: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 353 The collect
- Page 355 and 356: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 355 5.4.2 Gram-
- Page 357 and 358: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 357 D ∈ EDM N
- Page 359 and 360: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 359 5.4.2.2.1 E
- Page 361 and 362: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 361 ten affine
- Page 363 and 364: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 363 spheres: Th
- Page 365 and 366: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 365 By eliminat
- Page 367 and 368: 5.4. EDM DEFINITION 367 where Φ ij
4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAINT EXAMPLES 319<br />
2 3 4<br />
S<br />
1<br />
CUT<br />
16<br />
5<br />
S ′<br />
15<br />
4<br />
-1<br />
-3<br />
5<br />
1<br />
-3<br />
6<br />
7<br />
2<br />
1<br />
14<br />
13<br />
9<br />
8<br />
12<br />
11<br />
10<br />
Figure 85: A cut partitions nodes {i=1...16} of this graph into S and S ′ .<br />
Linear arcs have circled weights. The problem is to find a cut maximizing<br />
total weight of all arcs linking partitions made by the cut.