Lecture 21
[[lecture-data]]
2024-10-16
Readings
- a
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
if
We can think of these in terms of the linear system
- if
is square invertible, then - If
is "tall and skinny" we want something to get the correct shape of . If a system has a solution, then a 1-generalized inverse will give the solution . And if , then the system is consistent (ie a solution exists)
Suppose that
has optimal solution
Any vector in
ie, the expression depends only on the term
- thus the solutions to the least squares problem is the set
(see a 1-2-generalized inverse gives a least squares optimal solution)
There exists a unique 1-2-3-4 generalized inverse for every matrix
(Uniqueness first). Suppose
- Claim 1:
since (1 generalized inverse) and are both hermitian. so we have since - But
is hermitian, so we get . - Claim 2:
argued analogously to the first claim since - Then
since both and are hermitian since is hermitian
Consider. - By claim 2, we have
- By claim 1, we have
. - And by property 3 of the generalized inverses, we get
.
(Existence)
Let us first consider a special case. Suppose
- clearly
is hermitian, same with .
Now, what happens if we have a matrix
. Then since is 1-2-3-4 generalized inverse we get is hermitian since is hermitian - (And the other two conditions are shown exactly analogously)
Say
- if
is real, then the SVD is real and so the pseudoinverse is also real.
(see Moore-Penrose inverse)
Let
Recall that the solutions of the least squares problem are exactly
since is (almost) an SVD. Almost because the sigmas in are not necessarily non-decreasing. (recall that for SVD we assume that the singular values are ordered)
Thus for all
- the minimum occurs precisely when
!
(see the psuedoinverse gives the least norm solution to the least squares problem)