Lecture 21

[[lecture-data]]

2024-10-16

Readings

7. Chapter 7

We are talking about the singular value decomposition. Today: see how it can be used for generalized inverses

Recall, if we have a matrix AMm,n and BMn,m then we have generalized inverse when some of the conditions are met:

  1. ABA=A
  2. AB is hermitian
  3. BAB=B
  4. BA is hermitian
Note

if A is square and invertible, then B that satisfies all 4 conditions is the inverse of A ie A1.

We can think of these in terms of the linear system Ax=b.

Theorem

Suppose that AMm,n and bCm are given. Suppose BMn,m is a 1-2generalized inverse of A. Then x=Bb solves Ax=b in a least squares sense. ie,

minxCn||Axb||2

has optimal solution x^=Bb.

Proof

Any vector in Cn can be expressed as x=Bb+y for some yCn. We show that ||A(Bb+y)b||22 is minimized when y=0.

||A(Bb+y)b||22=[(ABI)b+Ay][(ABI)b+Ay]=||(ABI)b||22+||Ay||22+||Ay||22+yA(ABI)b+b(ABI)Ay()=||(ABI)b||22+||Ay||22

() we see that [A(ABI)]=(ABI)A=ABAA=0 since B is a 1, 2 generalized inverse (ie, AB is hermitian and ABA=A).

ie, the expression depends only on the term ||Ay||22, which is minimized precisely when ||Ay||=0 such as when y=0 for example. (the first term of the expression is constant).

  • thus the solutions to the least squares problem is the set {Bb+y:yNull(A)}

(see a 1-2-generalized inverse gives a least squares optimal solution)

Theorem

There exists a unique 1-2-3-4 generalized inverse for every matrix AMm,n called the Moore-Penrose inverse (or pseudoinverse). And if A is real valued, then this inverse is also real valued.

Proof

(Uniqueness first). Suppose B,CMn,m are both 1-2-3-4 generalized inverses for A. NTS B=C.

  • Claim 1: AB=AC
  • AB=ACAB since A=ACA (1 generalized inverse)
  • AC and AB are both hermitian. so we have
  • AB=CABA=C(ABA)=CA since ABA=A
  • But AC is hermitian, so we get AB=AC.
  • Claim 2: BA=CA argued analogously to the first claim
  • BA=BACA since A=ACA
  • Then BA=BACA=ABAC since both BA and CA are hermitian
  • BA=(ABA)C=AC=CA since CA is hermitian
    Consider CAB.
  • By claim 2, we have BAB=CAB
  • By claim 1, we have CAB=CAC.
  • And by property 3 of the generalized inverses, we get B=BAB=CAB=CAC=C.

(Existence)
Let us first consider a special case. Suppose Σ is Mm,n "diagonal". Ie, ij,Σij=0. Define ΣMn,m "diagonal". And for all i, we have (Σ)ii=1Σii if Σii0 and 0 otherwise. Then Σ is a 1-2-3-4 generalized inverse for Σ. We can check this easily

  • clearly ΣΣ is hermitian, same with ΣΣ.
  • ΣΣΣ=Σ
  • ΣΣΣ=Σ

Now, what happens if we have a matrix YMm,n with a 1-2-3-4 generalized inverse ZMn,m? Let UMm be unitary, VMn also unitary. Then UYV has a 1-2-3-4 generalized inverse VZU. We can show this easily:

  • [UYV][VZU][UYV]=UYZYV. Then since Z is 1-2-3-4 generalized inverse we get UYZYV=UYV
  • [UYV][VZU]=UYZU is hermitian since YZ is hermitian
  • (And the other two conditions are shown exactly analogously)

Say A=UΣV is an SVD of A. Then the moore-penrose inverse of A is A=VΣU by the two above facts.

  • if A is real, then the SVD is real and so the pseudoinverse is also real.

(see Moore-Penrose inverse)

Theorem

Let AMm,n,bCm be given. Among the solutions to minxCn||Axb||2, we have that Ab is a unique solution of the minimum euclidian norm.

Proof

Recall that the solutions of the least squares problem are exactly Ab+y:yNull(A). Let A=UΣV be an SVD and the rank of A is k.

  • Null(A)=span{vk+1,vk+2,,vn}
  • Range(A)=span{v0,v1,,vk} since A=VΣU is (almost) an SVD. Almost because the sigmas in Σ are not necessarily non-decreasing. (recall that for SVD we assume that the singular values are ordered)

Thus for all yNull(A) we have yAb since we can see that range(A)Null(A) from the above. Thus for any yNull(A), we have

||Ab+y||22=[Ab+y][Ab+y]=||Ab||22+||y||22+0+0
  • the minimum occurs precisely when y=0!

(see the psuedoinverse gives the least norm solution to the least squares problem)