v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization

v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization

convexoptimization.com
from convexoptimization.com More from this publisher
12.07.2015 Views

302 CHAPTER 4. SEMIDEFINITE PROGRAMMINGand where matrix Z i ∈ S ρ is found at each iteration i by solving a verysimple feasibility problem: 4.20find Z i ∈ S ρsubject to 〈Z i , RiA T j R i 〉 = 0 ,j =1... m(712)Were there a sparsity pattern common to each member of the set{R T iA j R i ∈ S ρ , j =1... m} , then a good choice for Z i has 1 in each entrycorresponding to a 0 in the pattern; id est, a sparsity pattern complement.At iteration i∑i−1X ⋆ + t j B j + t i B i = R i (I − t i ψ(Z i )Z i )Ri T (713)j=1By fact (1450), therefore∑i−1X ⋆ + t j B j + t i B i ≽ 0 ⇔ 1 − t i ψ(Z i )λ(Z i ) ≽ 0 (714)j=1where λ(Z i )∈ R ρ denotes the eigenvalues of Z i .Maximization of each t i in step 2 of the Procedure reduces rank of (713)and locates a new point on the boundary ∂(A ∩ S n +) . 4.21 Maximization oft i thereby has closed form;4.20 A simple method of solution is closed-form projection of a random nonzero point onthat proper subspace of isometrically isomorphic R ρ(ρ+1)/2 specified by the constraints.(E.5.0.0.6) Such a solution is nontrivial assuming the specified intersection of hyperplanesis not the origin; guaranteed by ρ(ρ + 1)/2 > m. Indeed, this geometric intuition aboutforming the perturbation is what bounds any solution’s rank from below; m is fixed bythe number of equality constraints in (649P) while rank ρ decreases with each iteration i.Otherwise, we might iterate indefinitely.4.21 This holds because rank of a positive semidefinite matrix in S n is diminished belown by the number of its 0 eigenvalues (1460), and because a positive semidefinite matrixhaving one or more 0 eigenvalues corresponds to a point on the PSD cone boundary (193).Necessity and sufficiency are due to the facts: R i can be completed to a nonsingular matrix(A.3.1.0.5), and I − t i ψ(Z i )Z i can be padded with zeros while maintaining equivalencein (713).

4.3. RANK REDUCTION 303(t ⋆ i) −1 = max {ψ(Z i )λ(Z i ) j , j =1... ρ} (715)When Z i is indefinite, direction of perturbation (determined by ψ(Z i )) isarbitrary. We may take an early exit from the Procedure were Z i to become0 or wererank [ svec R T iA 1 R i svec R T iA 2 R i · · · svec R T iA m R i]= ρ(ρ + 1)/2 (716)which characterizes rank ρ of any [sic] extreme point in A ∩ S n + . [239,2.4][240]Proof. Assuming the form of every perturbation matrix is indeed (709),then by (712)svec Z i ⊥ [ svec(R T iA 1 R i ) svec(R T iA 2 R i ) · · · svec(R T iA m R i ) ] (717)By orthogonal complement we haverank [ svec(R T iA 1 R i ) · · · svec(R T iA m R i ) ] ⊥+ rank [ svec(R T iA 1 R i ) · · · svec(R T iA m R i ) ] = ρ(ρ + 1)/2(718)When Z i can only be 0, then the perturbation is null because an extremepoint has been found; thus[svec(RTi A 1 R i ) · · · svec(R T iA m R i ) ] ⊥= 0 (719)from which the stated result (716) directly follows.

302 CHAPTER 4. SEMIDEFINITE PROGRAMMINGand where matrix Z i ∈ S ρ is found at each iteration i by solving a verysimple feasibility problem: 4.20find Z i ∈ S ρsubject to 〈Z i , RiA T j R i 〉 = 0 ,j =1... m(712)Were there a sparsity pattern common to each member of the set{R T iA j R i ∈ S ρ , j =1... m} , then a good choice for Z i has 1 in each entrycorresponding to a 0 in the pattern; id est, a sparsity pattern complement.At iteration i∑i−1X ⋆ + t j B j + t i B i = R i (I − t i ψ(Z i )Z i )Ri T (713)j=1By fact (1450), therefore∑i−1X ⋆ + t j B j + t i B i ≽ 0 ⇔ 1 − t i ψ(Z i )λ(Z i ) ≽ 0 (714)j=1where λ(Z i )∈ R ρ denotes the eigenvalues of Z i .Maximization of each t i in step 2 of the Procedure reduces rank of (713)and locates a new point on the boundary ∂(A ∩ S n +) . 4.21 Maximization oft i thereby has closed form;4.20 A simple method of solution is closed-form projection of a random nonzero point onthat proper subspace of isometrically isomorphic R ρ(ρ+1)/2 specified by the constraints.(E.5.0.0.6) Such a solution is nontrivial assuming the specified intersection of hyperplanesis not the origin; guaranteed by ρ(ρ + 1)/2 > m. Indeed, this geometric intuition aboutforming the perturbation is what bounds any solution’s rank from below; m is fixed bythe number of equality constraints in (649P) while rank ρ decreases with each iteration i.Otherwise, we might iterate indefinitely.4.21 This holds because rank of a positive semidefinite matrix in S n is diminished belown by the number of its 0 eigenvalues (1460), and because a positive semidefinite matrixhaving one or more 0 eigenvalues corresponds to a point on the PSD cone boundary (193).Necessity and sufficiency are due to the facts: R i can be completed to a nonsingular matrix(A.3.1.0.5), and I − t i ψ(Z i )Z i can be padded with zeros while maintaining equivalencein (713).

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!