Next: Algebra
Up: Optimization/Numerical Linear Algebra
Previous: Outline
- 1.
- Compare and contrast the line search and trust region methods of
globalizing a quasi-Newton method. Your discussion should touch on the
following points:
- (a)
- The cost of taking a step (that is, of solving the line search
subproblem and trust region subproblem), and the complexity of the
algorithms.
- (b)
- Dealing with nonconvexity.
- (c)
- Convergence theorems.
- 2.
- Derive the BFGS update used for approximating the Hessian of
the objective function in an unconstrained minimization problem. Explain
the rationale for the steps in the derivation.
- 3.
- (a)
- State carefully and prove the first-order necessary condition
for
to have a local minimum at x=x*.
- (b)
- Give an example to show that the first-order condition is only
necessary, not sufficient.
- (c)
- State carefully and prove the second-order necessary condition
for
to have a local minimum at x=x*.
- (d)
- Give an example to show that the second-order condition is only
necessary, not sufficient.
- 4.
- (a)
- Let
be a sequence in
,
and suppose
Define ``
q-quadratically.''
- (b)
- Let
be given. Newton's method for minimizing
f is locally q-quadratically convergent. State carefully and prove this
theorem.
- 5.
- Suppose
is convex.
- (a)
- State and prove a theorem indicating that the usual first-order
necessary condition is, in this case, a sufficient condition.
- (b)
- Prove that every local minimum of f is, in fact, a global minimum.
- 6.
- Consider the equality-constrained problem
 |
(2) |
where
and
are smooth functions.
- (a)
- Explain how to apply the quadratic penalty method to (
).
How does one obtain an estimate of the Lagrange multiplier?
- (b)
- Explain how to apply the augmented Lagrangian method to (
).
How does one obtain an estimate of the Lagrange multiplier?
- 7.
- Recall that the
norm of
is defined by
Derive the formula for the corresponding induced matrix norm of
,
and prove that it is correct.
- 8.
- (a)
- What is the condition number of a matrix
?
- (b)
- Explain how this condition number is related to the problem of
computing the solution x to Ax=b, where b is regarded as the data of
the problem, and A is regarded as being known exactly.
- 9.
- Consider the least-squares problem Ax=b, where
,
m>n,
and
are given, and x is to be determined.
- (a)
- Assume that A has full rank. Explain how to solve the least-squares
problem using:
- i.
- the normal equations;
- ii.
- the QR factorization of A;
- iii.
- the SVD of A.
In each case, your explanation must include a justification that the
algorithm leads to the solution of the least-squares problem (e.g. explain
why the solution of the normal equations is the solution of the least-squares
problem).
- (b)
- Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each of the above methods.
Which is the method of choice for the full rank least-squares problem?
- 10.
- (a)
- Give a simple example to show that Gaussian elimination without
partial pivoting is unstable in finite-precision arithmetic. (Hint: The
example can be as small as
.)
- (b)
- Using the concept of backward error analysis, explain the conditions
under which Gaussian elimination with partial
pivoting can be unstable in finite-precision arithmetic.
(Note: This question does not ask you to perform a backward error analysis.
Rather, you can quote standard results in your explanation.)
- (c)
- Give an example to show that Gaussian elimination with partial
pivoting can be unstable.
- 11.
- (a)
- Suppose that
has eigenvalues
Explain how to perform the power method, and under what conditions it
converges to an eigenvalue.
- (b)
- Explain the idea of simultaneous iteration.
- (c)
- Explain the QR algorithm and its relationship to simultaneous
iteration.
- 12.
- Suppose that
is invertible,
B is an estimate of A-1, and AB = I+E. Show that the
relative error in B is bounded by
(using an arbitrary matrix
norm).
- 13.
- Show that if A is symmetric positive definite and banded,
say
aij = 0 for |i-j| > p, then the Cholesky factor B of
A satisfies
bij = 0 for j > i or j < i-p.
- 14.
- Suppose that Gaussian elimination (without partial pivoting) is
applied to a symmetric positive definite matrix A. Write
where each Ej is an elementary (lower triangular) matrix
(left-multiplication by Ej accomplishes the jth step of Gaussian
elimination). None of the Ejs is a permutation matrix, that is, no
row interchanges are performed. The purpose of this exercise is to prove
that this is possible (i.e. that Gaussian elimination can be applied
without row interchanges) and to prove the following inequality:
Do this by proving the following three lemmas:
- (a)
- Let B be a symmetric positive definite matrix. Then
bii > 0for
and the largest entry of B (in magnitude) occurs
on the diagonal.
- (b)
- Let A be a symmetric positive definite matrix, and suppose one
step of Gaussian elimination is applied to A to obtain
Then
is also symmetric positive definite.
- (c)
- Using the notation of the previous lemma,
Now complete the proof by induction. (Note that this result both proves that
no partial pivoting is required for a symmetric positive definite matrix,
and also that Gaussian elimination is perfectly stable when applied to such
a matrix.)
- 15.
- Let
have SVD A=USVT, where
and
are orthogonal and S is diagonal (Sij=0 if
).
Define S(k) by
and define A(k) by
A(k)=US(k)VT.
What is
,
where
is the matrix
norm induced by the Euclidean (
)
vector norm? Prove your
answer.
Next: Algebra
Up: Optimization/Numerical Linear Algebra
Previous: Outline
Math Dept Webmaster
2003-08-28