10.03.2015 Views

v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization

v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization

v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

452 CHAPTER 6. CONE OF DISTANCE MATRICES<br />

That is easily proven false by counter-example via (1088), for then<br />

( ◦√ D 1 + ◦√ D 2 ) ◦( ◦√ D 1 + ◦√ D 2 ) would need to be a member of EDM N .<br />

Notwithstanding,<br />

√<br />

EDM N ⊆ EDM N (1089)<br />

by (999) (Figure 114), and we learn how to transform a nonconvex proximity<br />

problem in the natural coordinates √ d ij to a convex optimization in7.2.1.<br />

6.4 a geometry of completion<br />

Intriguing is the question of whether the list in X ∈ R n×N (68) may<br />

be reconstructed given an incomplete noiseless EDM, and under what<br />

circumstances reconstruction is unique. [1] [3] [4] [5] [7] [16] [179] [188] [201]<br />

[202] [203]<br />

If one or more entries of a particular EDM are fixed, then geometric<br />

interpretation of the feasible set of completions is the intersection of the EDM<br />

cone EDM N in isomorphic subspace R N(N−1)/2 with as many hyperplanes<br />

as there are fixed symmetric entries. (Depicted in Figure 115(a) is an<br />

intersection of the EDM cone EDM 3 with a single hyperplane representing<br />

the set of all EDMs having one fixed symmetric entry.) Assuming a<br />

nonempty intersection, then the number of completions is generally infinite,<br />

and those corresponding to particular affine dimension r

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!