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 - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...

functions - What best practices or performance considerations are there for choosing between Cases, Position, Pick and Select?

Cases , Select , Pick and Position each have different syntaxes and purposes, but there are times when you can express the same calculation equivalently using either of them. So with this input: test = RandomInteger[{-25, 25}, {20, 2}] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {-8, -19}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {-3, -25}, {21, -18}, {4, 4}, {2, -2}, {-24, 8}, {-17, -8}, {4, -18}, {22, -24}, {-4, -3}, {21, 0}, {19, 18}, {-23, -8}, {23, -25}, {14, -2}, {-1, -13}} You can get the following equivalent results: Cases[test, {_, _?Positive}] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Select[test, #[[2]] > 0 &] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Pick[test, Sign[test[[All, 2]] ], 1] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} test[[Flatten@Position[test[[All, 2]], _?Positive] ]] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Are there performance or other considerations that should guide which you shou...