Skip to main content

linear algebra - Efficiently Constructing Rank One Approximations for a Matrix using SVD


Suppose I have a $m\times n$ matrix $A$ (real for simplicity). Then SingularValueDecomposition[A] yields 3 matrices $U$, $\Sigma$ and $V$ such that


$A = U\Sigma V^\top = u_1 \sigma_1 v_1^\top + u_2 \sigma_2 v_2^\top + \cdots$,


where $U = [u_1\;\; u_2 \ldots]$ (vector = column matrix).


Successive approximations for $A$ are given by the rank 1 matrices $u_1 \sigma_1 v_1^\top$, etc. I wanted to make a function to compute this but found myself doing all sorts of messy manipulations due to Mathematica's matrix structure (and/or my lack of knowledge on how to use them).


Here is my tentative function. It has as input any matrix A and an optional argument n saying how many rank 1 matrices should be summed. This function is not meant to be numerically fast or anything; perhaps I would use it as a educational tool to examine different approximations of A or etc. The point is in the Sum function where I would like to know: is there a more efficient (or perhaps cleaner) way of doing the matrix multiplications?


RankOneApprox[A_, n_: 1] := Block[{U, Sig, V},


{U, Sig, V} = SingularValueDecomposition[A];

Sum[Sig[[i,i]] ({U[[All, i]]}\[Transpose].{V[[All, i]]}), {i, 1, n}]];

Answer



How about the following:


RankOneApprox[A_, n_: 1] := Module[
{U, Sig, V},
{U, Sig, V} = SingularValueDecomposition[A];
U.DiagonalMatrix[Diagonal[Sig[[1 ;; n]]], 0, Length[a]].ConjugateTranspose[V]

]

Here I take the first n diagonal elements of Sig. That's equivalent to summing the projectors you wrote out explicitly. With these n singular values, I then form a new matrix that has zeros everywhere else, and insert that into the definition of the SVD. When n equals the dimension of a, you get the original SVD back.


This assumes a to be a square matrix - if desired, it would be pretty easy to extend to rectangular matrices. Here I just want to illustrate how one uses the matrix manipulations to avoid writing explicit sums. Also, your original function has the Transpose in a syntactically incorrect spot, and I've fixed that in the above version.


Edit


As mentioned by R.M in the comment, there is another way of calling SingularValueDecomposition that already weeds out the smallest singular values for you: SingularValueDecomposition[A, n]


However, this returns condensed versions of all the matrices, see also the documentation, where an example is given (under Applications) that does something very similar to this question. One has to be a little careful about the dimensionality of the factors in the SVD formula, because the unitary matrices in the condensed form are no longer represented by square matrices (in particular, the syntax Dot @@ SingularValueDecomposition in the comment won't work because conjugate-transposition was omitted). Fortunately, to construct the corresponding matrix approximation, we can maintain the same syntax as in the above function:


RankOneApprox[A_, n_: 1] := Module[
{U, Sig, V},
{U, Sig, V} = SingularValueDecomposition[A, n];

U.Sig.ConjugateTranspose[V]
]

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1....