LU Decomposition N^3 - matrix

Suppose I have a square N X N symmetric real matrix A, and that I want to compute the LU decomposition of A. What is the complexity (e.g. O(N^2), O(N^3), etc...) of the best algorithm to do this
If A is a dense matrix
If A is a sparse matrix?

Wikipedia claims the following:
If two matrices of order n can be multiplied in time M(n), where
M(n)≥na for some a>2, then the LU decomposition can be computed in
time O(M(n)). This means, for example, that an O(n^2.376) algorithm
exists based on the Coppersmith–Winograd algorithm.
For a sparse matrix there is no single answer. It depends on the nature of the sparsity.

I would say it's the same order for sparse matrix multiplication as dense because (1) these order metrics only apply when the data is so large that the order effect dominates, and (2) sparsity at best reduces computation by a linear factor unrelated to the size N, therefore as N grows, but sparsity stays the same, the computation should again increase as O(N^3). As always, in the real world, your data size may not be large enough for this aspect of performance (the order) to dominate, and use of caches and optimized kernels will matter far more.

Related

What is the time complexity of finding the rank of a square matrix?

I need to find the number of linearly independent columns in a square n*n matrix. What is the time complexity of this operation?
The regular Gauss elimination is O(n^3).
There are other potential solutions (e.g. iteratives or ones for sparse matrices) but they usually don't have a straightforward complexity.

Does an algorithm exist that finds the product of a n*n matrix in less than n^3 iteration?

I read that there is an algorithm that can calculate the product of a matrix in n^(2.3) complexity, but was unable to find the algorithm.
There have been several algorithms found for matrix multiplication with a big O less than n^3. But here's one of the problems with making conclusions based on big O notation. It only gives the limiting behaviour as n goes to infinity. In this case a more useful metric is the total time complexity which includes the coefficients and lower order terms.
For the general algorithm the time complexity could be An^3 + Bn^2 +...
For the case of the Coppersmith-Winograd algorithm the coefficient for the n^2.375477 term is so large that for all practical purposes the general algorithm with O(n^3) complexity is faster.
This is also true for the Strassen Algorithm as well if it's used on single elements. However,
there is a paper which claims that using a hybrid algorithm which uses the Strassen Algorithm for matrix blocks down to some limit and then switches to the O(n^3) algorithm is faster for large matrices.
So although there exists algorithms which have a smaller time complexity the only one that is useful which I'm aware of is the Strassen algorithm and that's only for large matrices (whatever large means).
Edit: Wikipedia actually has a nice summary of the algorithms for matrix multiplication. Here is plot from that same link showing the reduction in omega for the different algorithms vs. the year they were discovered.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_multiplication#mediaviewer/File:Bound_on_matrix_multiplication_omega_over_time.svg
The Strassen Algorithm is able to multiply matrices with an asymptotic complexity smaller than O(n^3).
Coppersmith–Winograd algorithm calculates the the product of a NxN matrix in O(n^{2.375477}) asymptotic time.

Is there an algorithm better than O(N²) to determine if matrix is symmetric?

Algorithm requirements
Input is an arbitrary square matrix M of size N×N, which just fits in memory.
The algorithm's output must be true if M[i,j] = M[j,i] for all j≠i, false otherwise.
Obvious solutions
Check if the transpose equals the matrix itself (MT=M). Easiest to program in many environments, but (usually) consumes twice the memory and requires N² comparisons worst case. Therefore, this is O(N²) and has high peak memory.
Check if the lower triangular part equals the upper triangular part. Of course, the algorithm returns on the first inequality found. This would make the worst case (worst case being, the matrix is indeed symmetric) require N²/2 - N comparisons, since the diagonal does not need to be checked. So although it is better than option 1, this is still O(N²).
Question
Although it's hard to see how it would be possible (the N² elements will all have to be compared somehow), is there an algorithm doing this check that is better than O(N²)?
Or, provided there is a proof of non-existence of such an algorithm: how to implement this most efficiently for a multi-core CPU (Intel or AMD) taking into account things like cache-friendliness, optimal branch prediction, other compiler-specific specializations, etc.?
This question stems mostly from academic interest, although I imagine a practical use could be to determine what solver to use if the matrix describes a linear system AX=b...
Since you will have to examine all the elements except the diagonal, the complexity IMO can't be better than O (n^2).
For a dense matrix, the answer is a definite "no", because any uninspected (non-diagonal) elements could be different from their transposed counterparts.
For standard representations of a sparse matrix, the same reasoning indicates that you can't generally do better than the input size.
However, the same reasoning doesn't apply to arbitrary matrix representations. For example, you could store sparse representations of the symmetric and antisymmetric components of your matrix, which can easily be checked for symmetry in O(1) time by checking if antisymmetric element has any components at all...
I think you can take a probabilistic approach here.
I think it's not a chance/coincidence that x randomly picked lower coordinate elements will match to their upper triangular counter part. The chance is very high that the matrix is indeed symmetric.
So instead of going through all the ½n² - n elements you can check p random coordinates and tell if the matrix is symmetric with confidence:
p / (½n² - n)
you can then decide a threshold above which you believe that the matrix must be a symmetric matrix.

Efficient algorithm for finding largest eigenpair of small general complex matrix

I am looking for an efficient algorithm to find the largest eigenpair of a small, general (non-square, non-sparse, non-symmetric), complex matrix, A, of size m x n. By small I mean m and n is typically between 4 and 64 and usually around 16, but with m not equal to n.
This problem is straight forward to solve with the general LAPACK SVD algorithms, i.e. gesvd or gesdd. However, as I am solving millions of these problems and only require the largest eigenpair, I am looking for a more efficient algorithm. Additionally, in my application the eigenvectors will generally be similar for all cases. This lead me to investigate Arnoldi iteration based methods, but I have neither found a good library nor algorithm that applies to my small general complex matrix. Is there an appropriate algorithm and/or library?
Rayleigh iteration has cubic convergence. You may want to implement also the power method and see how they compare, since you need LU or QR decomposition of your matrix.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_quotient_iteration
Following #rchilton's comment, you can apply this to A* A.
The idea of looking for the largest eigenpair is analogous to finding a large power of the matrix, as the lower frequency modes get damped out during the iteration. The Lanczos algorithm, is one of a few such algorithms that rely on the so-called Ritz eigenvectors during the decomposition. From Wikipedia:
The Lanczos algorithm is an iterative algorithm ... that is an adaptation of power methods to find eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a square matrix or the singular value decomposition of a rectangular matrix. It is particularly useful for finding decompositions of very large sparse matrices. In latent semantic indexing, for instance, matrices relating millions of documents to hundreds of thousands of terms must be reduced to singular-value form.
The technique works even if the system is not sparse, but if it is large and dense it has the advantage that it doesn't all have to be stored in memory at the same time.
How does it work?
The power method for finding the largest eigenvalue of a matrix A can be summarized by noting that if x_{0} is a random vector and x_{n+1}=A x_{n}, then in the large n limit, x_{n} / ||x_{n}|| approaches the normed eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue.
Non-square matrices?
Noting that your system is not a square matrix, I'm pretty sure that the SVD problem can be decomposed into separate linear algebra problems where the Lanczos algorithm would apply. A good place to ask such questions would be over at https://math.stackexchange.com/.

Reference for lowest order complexity of sparse symmetric matrix premultiplying full vector

In a paper I'm writing I make use of an n x n matrix multiplying a dense vector of dimension n. In its natural form, this matrix has O(n^2) space complexity and the multiplication takes time O(n^2).
However, it is known that the matrix is symmetric, and has zero values along its diagonal. The matrix is also highly sparse: the majority of non-diagonal entries are zero.
Could anyone link me to an algorithm/paper/data structure which uses a sparse symmetric matrix representation to approach O(nlogn) or maybe even O(n), in cases of high sparsity?
I would have a look at the csparse library by Tim Davis. There's also a corresponding book that describes a whole range of sparse matrix algorithms.
In the sparse case the A*x operation can be made to run in O(|A|) complexity - i.e. linear in the number of non-zero elements in the matrix.
Are you interested in parallel algorithms of this sort
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~scandal/cacm/node9.html

Categories

Resources