Skip to main content

linear algebra - How to find selected elements of inverse of a banded matrix without inverting it?


Is it possible to find some selected elements of the inverse of a large sparse matrix without inverting it?



For example consider this Hermitian matrix (as a general case).


n1 = 20; n2 = 50;
n3 = n1 n2;

a1 = RandomComplex[{0. + 0. I, 1. + 1. I}, {n1, n1}];
a2 = ConjugateTranspose[a1];

a3 = RandomComplex[{0. + 0. I, 1. + 1. I}, {n1, n1}];
a3 = (a3 + ConjugateTranspose[a3])/2.;


a0 = SparseArray[{Band[{1, 1}, {n3, n3}] -> {a3},
Band[{1, n1 + 1}, {n3 - n1, n3}] -> {a1},
Band[{n1 + 1, 1}, {n3, n3 - n1}] -> {a2}}, {n3, n3}]

b0 = Inverse[a0]; // AbsoluteTiming


{0.240657, Null}



and I am interested only in a small portion of b0 say



b0[[(n2 - 1) n1 + 1 ;; n2 n1, 1 ;; n1]] // MatrixForm

In case of banded matrix, 'LinearSolve` works much faster.


f = LinearSolve[a0, SparseArray[{i_, i_} -> 1, {n3, n3}]]; // AbsoluteTiming
f[[(n2 - 1) n1 + 1 ;; n2 n1, 1 ;; n1]] // MatrixForm


{0.068483, Null}



The result is same (I didn't put it here). As you can see the execution is significantly faster. But f is using same memory as b0 where the memory required to store a single block (a1,a2) is very little.



Map[ByteCount, {a1, a2, a0, b0, f, b0[[(n2 - 1) n1 + 1 ;; n2 n1, 1 ;; n1]]}]
%/Min[%] // N


{6776, 6776, 6165680, 16000152, 16000152, 6776}


{1., 1., 909.929, 2361.3, 2361.3, 1.}



Is there any way to reduce both time and memory in this case?



Answer



One possibility is to use a rectangular matrix with one block being the identity matrix. Let us consider the example in block matrix form.



$\begin{pmatrix} a_{11} & a_{12} & a_{13} \\ a_{21} & a_{22} & a_{23} \\ a_{31} & a_{32} & a_{33} \\ \end{pmatrix} \cdot \begin{pmatrix} b_{11} & b_{12} & b_{13} \\ b_{21} & b_{22} & b_{23} \\ b_{31} & b_{32} & b_{33} \\ \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} I & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & I & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & I \\ \end{pmatrix} $


Each element here is a $n \times n$ block matrix as per our definition. Now let say we want to find $b_{12}$. For that only three scalar equations will be sufficient, which in matrix form is


$\begin{pmatrix} a_{11} & a_{12} & a_{13} \\ a_{21} & a_{22} & a_{23} \\ a_{31} & a_{32} & a_{33} \\ \end{pmatrix} \cdot \begin{pmatrix} b_{12} \\ b_{22} \\ b_{32} \\ \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ I \\ 0 \\ \end{pmatrix} $


So the second argument of LinearSolve will be a $3n \times n$ rectangular matrix.


Lets use this with the main problem.


n1 = 20; n2 = 50;
n3 = n1 n2;

a1 = RandomComplex[{0. + 0. I, 1. + 1. I}, {n1, n1}];
a2 = ConjugateTranspose[a1];


a3 = RandomComplex[{0. + 0. I, 1. + 1. I}, {n1, n1}];
a3 = (a3 + ConjugateTranspose[a3])/2.;

a0 = SparseArray[{Band[{1, 1}, {n3, n3}] -> {a3},
Band[{1, n1 + 1}, {n3 - n1, n3}] -> {a1},
Band[{n1 + 1, 1}, {n3, n3 - n1}] -> {a2}}, {n3, n3}]

b0 = Inverse[a0]; // AbsoluteTiming



{0.223080, Null}



f = LinearSolve[a0, SparseArray[{i_, i_} -> 1, {n3, n3}]]; // AbsoluteTiming
f[[(n2 - 1) n1 + 1 ;; n2 n1, 1 ;; n1]] // MatrixForm


{0.068368, Null}



Now using the rectangular argument



icol = SparseArray[Band[{1, 1}] -> IdentityMatrix[n1], {n3, n1}]
f1 = LinearSolve[a0, icol]; // AbsoluteTiming
f1[[(n2 - 1) n1 + 1 ;; n2 n1, 1 ;; n1]] // MatrixForm


{0.009034,Null}



icol is here $(I,0,0 ...)^T$ because the element we want to calculate is in first column ($b_{31}$).


Comparing the ByteCount


Map[ByteCount, {a1, f, f1, f1[[(n2 - 1) n1 + 1 ;; n2 n1, 1 ;; n1]]}]

%/Min[%] // N


{6776, 16000152, 320152, 6776}


{1., 2361.3, 47.2479, 1.}



So this is a bit improvement. The method should also work on dense matrices. Although there must be a even better way to do this.


Time Comparison


I tried with different system size and check the time (in seconds) for full inversion and partial inversion (evaluating one column of the inverse).


$n1=100$



$\begin{array}{rrr} n2 & full & col. \\ \hline 20 & 0.55 & 0.15 \\ 40 & 2.26 & 0.25 \\ 80 & 8.72 & 0.55 \end{array}$


As you can see $time_{col.} > time_{full}/n2$. If you need to calculate multiple blocks, using LinearSolve for full matrix would be better.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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 - 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 - 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.