1 / 20

CS 290H Administrivia: June 2, 2008

CS 290H Administrivia: June 2, 2008. Course project presentations this Wednesday: 11:00 – 11:20 : Yen Ting Ng 11:25 – 11:45 : Ben Adams 11:50 – 12:10 : Yi Gong 12:15 – 12:35 : Long Nguyen 12:40 – 1:00 : Aydin Buluc Final project written reports due Wednesday, June 11.

alec-travis
Download Presentation

CS 290H Administrivia: June 2, 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. CS 290H Administrivia: June 2, 2008 Course project presentations this Wednesday: • 11:00 – 11:20 : Yen Ting Ng • 11:25 – 11:45 : Ben Adams • 11:50 – 12:10 : Yi Gong • 12:15 – 12:35 : Long Nguyen • 12:40 – 1:00 : Aydin Buluc Final project written reports due Wednesday, June 11.

  2. Hierarchy of matrix classes (all real) • General nonsymmetric • Diagonalizable • Normal • Symmetric indefinite • Symmetric positive (semi)definite = Factor width n • Factor width k . . . • Factor width 4 • Factor width 3 • Diagonally dominant SPD = Factor width 2 • Generalized Laplacian = Symm diag dominant M-matrix • Graph Laplacian

  3. Definitions • The Laplacian matrix of an n-vertex undirected graph G is the n-by-n symmetric matrix A with • aij = -1 if i ≠ j and (i, j) is an edge of G • aij = 0 if i ≠ j and (i, j) is not an edge of G • aii = the number of edges incident on vertex i • Theorem: The Laplacian matrix of G is symmetric, singular, and positive semidefinite. The multiplicity of 0 as an eigenvalue is equal to the number of connected components of G. • A generalized Laplacian matrix (more accurately, a symmetric weakly diagonally dominant M-matrix) is an n-by-n symmetric matrix A with • aij≤ 0 if i ≠ j • aii≥Σ |aij| where the sum is over j ≠ i

  4. Edge-vertex factorization of generalized Laplacians • A generalized Laplacian matrix A can be factored as A = UUTwhere U has: • a row for each vertex • a column for each edge, with two nonzeros of opposite sign • a column for each excess-weight vertex, with one nonzero

  5. Support Graph Preconditioning • CFIM: Complete factorization of incomplete matrix • Define a preconditioner B for matrix A • Explicitly compute the factorization B = LU • Choose nonzero structure of B to make factoring cheap (using combinatorial tools from direct methods) • Prove bounds on condition number using both algebraic and combinatorial tools +: New analytic tools, some new preconditioners +: Can use existing direct-methods software -: Current theory and techniques limited

  6. Spanning Tree Preconditioner [Vaidya] • A is generalized Laplacian(symmetric positive semidefinite with negative off-diagonal nzs) • B is the gen Laplacian of a maximum-weight spanning tree for A (with diagonal modified to preserve row sums) Form B: costs O(n log n) or less time (graph algorithms for MST) Factorize B = RTR: costs O(n) space and O(n) time (sparse Cholesky) Apply B-1: costs O(n) time per iteration G(A) G(B)

  7. Combinatorial analysis: cost of preconditioning • A is generalized Laplacian(symmetric positive semidefinite with negative off-diagonal nzs) • B is the gen Laplacian of a maximum-weight spanning tree for A (with diagonal modified to preserve row sums) • Form B: costsO(n log n) time or less (graph algorithms for MST) • Factorize B = RTR: costs O(n) space and O(n) time (sparse Cholesky) • Apply B-1: costs O(n) time per iteration (two triangular solves) G(A) G(B)

  8. Numerical analysis: quality of preconditioner • support each edge of A by a path in B • dilation(A edge) = length of supporting path in B • congestion(B edge) = # of supported A edges • p = max congestion, q = max dilation • condition number κ(B-1A) bounded by p·q (at most O(n2)) G(A) G(B)

  9. Spanning Tree Preconditioner [Vaidya] • can improve congestion and dilation by adding a few strategically chosen edges to B • cost of factor+solve is O(n1.75), or O(n1.2) if A is planar • in experiments by Chen & Toledo, often better than drop-tolerance MIC for 2D problems, but not for 3D. G(A) G(B)

  10. Numerical analysis: Support numbers Intuition from networks of electrical resistors: • graph = circuit; edge = resistor; weight = 1/resistance = conductance • How much must you amplify B to provide as much conductance as A? • How big does t need to be for tB – A to be positive semidefinite? • What is the largest eigenvalue of B-1A ? The support of B for A is σ(A, B) = min { τ : xT(tB– A)x  0 for all x and all t  τ } • If A and B are SPD then σ(A, B) = max{λ : Ax = λBx} = λmax(A, B) • Theorem: If A and B are SPD then κ(B-1A) = σ(A, B) · σ(B, A)

  11. Old analysis, splitting into paths and edges • Split A = A1+ A2 + ··· + Ak and B = B1+ B2 + ··· + Bk • such that Ai and Bi are positive semidefinite • Typically they correspond to pieces of the graphs of A and B (edge, path, small subgraph) • Theorem: σ(A, B)  maxi {σ(Ai , Bi)} • Lemma: σ(edge, path)  (worst weight ratio) · (path length) • In the MST case: • Ai is an edge and Bi is a path, to give σ(A, B)  p·q • Bi is an edge and Ai is the same edge, to give σ(B, A)  1

  12. New analysis: Algebraic Embedding Lemma vv[Boman/Hendrickson] Lemma: If V·W=U, then σ(U·UT, V·VT)  ||W||22 (with equality for some choice of W) Proof: • take t  ||W||22 = λmax(W·WT) = max y0 { yTW·WTy / yTy } • then yT (tI - W·WT) y  0 for all y • letting y = VTx gives xT (tV·VT - U·UT) x  0 for all x • recall σ(A, B) = min{τ : xT(tB– A)x  0 for all x, all t  τ} • thus σ(U·UT, V·VT)  ||W||22

  13. [ ] a2 +b2-a2 -b2 -a2 a2 +c2 -c2-b2 -c2 b2 +c2 [ ] a2 +b2-a2 -b2 -a2 a2 -b2 b2 B =VVT A =UUT ] [ ] ] [ [ 1-c/a1 c/b/b ab-a c-b ab-a c-b-c = x U V W -a2 -c2 -a2 -b2 -b2 σ(A, B)  ||W||22 ||W||x ||W||1 = (max row sum) x (max col sum) (max congestion) x (max dilation)

  14. Open problems I • Other subgraph constructions for better bounds on||W||22? • For example [Boman], ||W||22 ||W||F2= sum(wij2) = sum of (weighted) dilations, and [Alon, Karp, Peleg, West]show there exists a spanning tree with average weighted dilation exp(O((log n loglog n)1/2)) = o(n ); this gives condition number O(n1+) and solution time O(n1.5+), compared to Vaidya O(n1.75) with augmented spanning tree • [Spielman, Teng] recursive partitioning construction gives solution time O(n1+) for all generalized Laplacians! (Uses yet another matrix norm inequality.) • Is there a construction that minimizes ||W||22directly?

  15. Open problems II • Make spanning tree methods more effective in 3D? • Vaidya gives O(n1.75) in general, O(n1.2) in 2D • Issue: 2D uses bounded excluded minors, not just separators • Support graph methods for more general matrices? • All SPD matrices? ([Boman, Chen, Hendrickson, Toledo]: different matroid for all diagonally dominant SPD matrices) • Finite element problems? ([Boman]: Element-by-element preconditioner for bilinear quadrilateral elements) • Matrices of bounded factor width?

  16. Hierarchy of matrix classes (all real) • General nonsymmetric • Diagonalizable • Normal • Symmetric indefinite • Symmetric positive (semi)definite = Factor width n • Factor width k . . . • Factor width 4 • Factor width 3 • Diagonally dominant SPD = Factor width 2 • Generalized Laplacian = Symm diag dominant M-matrix • Graph Laplacian

  17. n1/2 n1/3 Complexity of linear solvers Time to solve model problem (Poisson’s equation) on regular mesh

  18. B has positive (dotted) edges that cancel fill B has same row sums as A Strategy: Use the negative edges of B to support both the negative edges of A and the positive edges of B. -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 B A .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 A = 2D model Poisson problem B = MIC preconditioner for A Support-graph analysis of modified incomplete Cholesky

  19. Every dotted (positive) edge in B is supported by two paths in B Each solid edge of B supports one or two dotted edges Tune fractions to support each dotted edge exactly 1/(2n – 2) of each solid edge is left over to support an edge of A Supporting positive edges of B

  20. Analysis of MIC: Summary • Each edge of A is supported by the leftover 1/(2n – 2) fraction of the same edge of B. • Therefore σ(A, B)  2n – 2 • Easy to show σ(B, A)  1 • For this 2D model problem, condition number is O(n1/2) • Similar argument in 3D gives condition number O(n1/3) or O(n2/3) (depending on boundary conditions)

More Related