v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization
v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization v2010.10.26 - Convex Optimization
334 CHAPTER 4. SEMIDEFINITE PROGRAMMINGx ≽ 0 is analogous to positive semidefiniteness; the notation means vector xbelongs to the nonnegative orthant R n + . Cardinality is quasiconcave on R n +just as rank is quasiconcave on S n + . [61,3.4.2]4.5.1.1 direction vectorWe propose that cardinality-constrained feasibility problem (530) can beequivalently expressed as a sequence of convex problems: for 0≤k ≤n−1minimizex∈R n 〈x , y〉subject to Ax = bx ≽ 0(156)n∑π(x ⋆ ) i =i=k+1minimizey∈R n 〈x ⋆ , y〉subject to 0 ≼ y ≼ 1y T 1 = n − k(525)where π is the (nonincreasing) presorting function. This sequence is iterateduntil x ⋆T y ⋆ vanishes; id est, until desired cardinality is achieved. But thisglobal convergence cannot always be guaranteed. 4.32Problem (525) is analogous to the rank constraint problem; (p.308)N∑λ(G ⋆ ) ii=k+1= minimizeW ∈ S N 〈G ⋆ , W 〉subject to 0 ≼ W ≼ ItrW = N − k(1700a)Linear program (525) sums the n−k smallest entries from vector x . Incontext of problem (530), we want n−k entries of x to sum to zero; id est,we want a globally optimal objective x ⋆T y ⋆ to vanish: more generally,n∑π(|x ⋆ |) i = 〈|x ⋆ |, y ⋆ 〉 0 (758)i=k+1defines global convergence for the iteration. Then n−k entries of x ⋆ arethemselves zero whenever their absolute sum is, and cardinality of x ⋆ ∈ R n is4.32 When it succeeds, a sequence may be regarded as a homotopy to minimal 0-norm.
4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 3350R 3 +∂H(confer Figure 84)1∂H = {x | 〈x, 1〉 = κ}Figure 99: 1-norm heuristic for cardinality minimization can be interpreted asminimization of a hyperplane, ∂H with normal 1, over nonnegative orthantdrawn here in R 3 . Polar of direction vector y = 1 points toward origin.at most k . Optimal direction vector y ⋆ is defined as any nonnegative vectorfor which(530)find x ∈ R nsubject to Ax = bx ≽ 0‖x‖ 0 ≤ k≡minimizex∈R n 〈x , y ⋆ 〉subject to Ax = bx ≽ 0(156)Existence of such a y ⋆ , whose nonzero entries are complementary to thoseof x ⋆ , is obvious assuming existence of a cardinality-k solution x ⋆ .4.5.1.2 direction vector interpretation(confer4.4.1.1) Vector y may be interpreted as a negative search direction;it points opposite to direction of movement of hyperplane {x | 〈x , y〉= τ}in a minimization of real linear function 〈x , y〉 over the feasible set inlinear program (156). (p.75) Direction vector y is not unique. The feasibleset of direction vectors in (525) is the convex hull of all cardinality-(n−k)one-vectors; videlicet,
- Page 283 and 284: 4.1. CONIC PROBLEM 2834.1.2.3 Previ
- Page 285 and 286: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 285Semidefinite Fark
- Page 287 and 288: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 287On the other hand
- Page 289 and 290: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 2894.2.2.1 Dual prob
- Page 291 and 292: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 291For symmetric pos
- Page 293 and 294: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 293has norm ‖x ⋆
- Page 295 and 296: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 295minimize 1 TˆxX
- Page 297 and 298: 4.2. FRAMEWORK 297asminimize ‖ỹ
- Page 299 and 300: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 2994.3 Rank red
- Page 301 and 302: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 301A rank-reduc
- Page 303 and 304: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 303(t ⋆ i)
- Page 305 and 306: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 3054.3.3.0.1 Ex
- Page 307 and 308: 4.3. RANK REDUCTION 3074.3.3.0.2 Ex
- Page 309 and 310: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 311 and 312: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 313 and 314: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 315 and 316: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 317 and 318: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 319 and 320: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 321 and 322: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 323 and 324: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 325 and 326: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 327 and 328: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 329 and 330: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 331 and 332: 4.4. RANK-CONSTRAINED SEMIDEFINITE
- Page 333: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 333mi
- Page 337 and 338: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 337it
- Page 339 and 340: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 339m/
- Page 341 and 342: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 341we
- Page 343 and 344: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 343fl
- Page 345 and 346: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 345We
- Page 347 and 348: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 3474.
- Page 349 and 350: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 349R
- Page 351 and 352: 4.5. CONSTRAINING CARDINALITY 351pe
- Page 353 and 354: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 355 and 356: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 357 and 358: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 359 and 360: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 361 and 362: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 363 and 364: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 365 and 366: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 367 and 368: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 369 and 370: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 371 and 372: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 373 and 374: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 375 and 376: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 377 and 378: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 379 and 380: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 381 and 382: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
- Page 383 and 384: 4.6. CARDINALITY AND RANK CONSTRAIN
334 CHAPTER 4. SEMIDEFINITE PROGRAMMINGx ≽ 0 is analogous to positive semidefiniteness; the notation means vector xbelongs to the nonnegative orthant R n + . Cardinality is quasiconcave on R n +just as rank is quasiconcave on S n + . [61,3.4.2]4.5.1.1 direction vectorWe propose that cardinality-constrained feasibility problem (530) can beequivalently expressed as a sequence of convex problems: for 0≤k ≤n−1minimizex∈R n 〈x , y〉subject to Ax = bx ≽ 0(156)n∑π(x ⋆ ) i =i=k+1minimizey∈R n 〈x ⋆ , y〉subject to 0 ≼ y ≼ 1y T 1 = n − k(525)where π is the (nonincreasing) presorting function. This sequence is iterateduntil x ⋆T y ⋆ vanishes; id est, until desired cardinality is achieved. But thisglobal convergence cannot always be guaranteed. 4.32Problem (525) is analogous to the rank constraint problem; (p.308)N∑λ(G ⋆ ) ii=k+1= minimizeW ∈ S N 〈G ⋆ , W 〉subject to 0 ≼ W ≼ ItrW = N − k(1700a)Linear program (525) sums the n−k smallest entries from vector x . Incontext of problem (530), we want n−k entries of x to sum to zero; id est,we want a globally optimal objective x ⋆T y ⋆ to vanish: more generally,n∑π(|x ⋆ |) i = 〈|x ⋆ |, y ⋆ 〉 0 (758)i=k+1defines global convergence for the iteration. Then n−k entries of x ⋆ arethemselves zero whenever their absolute sum is, and cardinality of x ⋆ ∈ R n is4.32 When it succeeds, a sequence may be regarded as a homotopy to minimal 0-norm.