- •1 Introduction
- •1.1 What makes eigenvalues interesting?
- •1.2 Example 1: The vibrating string
- •1.2.1 Problem setting
- •1.2.2 The method of separation of variables
- •1.3.3 Global functions
- •1.3.4 A numerical comparison
- •1.4 Example 2: The heat equation
- •1.5 Example 3: The wave equation
- •1.6 The 2D Laplace eigenvalue problem
- •1.6.3 A numerical example
- •1.7 Cavity resonances in particle accelerators
- •1.8 Spectral clustering
- •1.8.1 The graph Laplacian
- •1.8.2 Spectral clustering
- •1.8.3 Normalized graph Laplacians
- •1.9 Other sources of eigenvalue problems
- •Bibliography
- •2 Basics
- •2.1 Notation
- •2.2 Statement of the problem
- •2.3 Similarity transformations
- •2.4 Schur decomposition
- •2.5 The real Schur decomposition
- •2.6 Normal matrices
- •2.7 Hermitian matrices
- •2.8 Cholesky factorization
- •2.9 The singular value decomposition (SVD)
- •2.10 Projections
- •2.11 Angles between vectors and subspaces
- •Bibliography
- •3 The QR Algorithm
- •3.1 The basic QR algorithm
- •3.1.1 Numerical experiments
- •3.2 The Hessenberg QR algorithm
- •3.2.1 A numerical experiment
- •3.2.2 Complexity
- •3.3 The Householder reduction to Hessenberg form
- •3.3.2 Reduction to Hessenberg form
- •3.4 Improving the convergence of the QR algorithm
- •3.4.1 A numerical example
- •3.4.2 QR algorithm with shifts
- •3.4.3 A numerical example
- •3.5 The double shift QR algorithm
- •3.5.1 A numerical example
- •3.5.2 The complexity
- •3.6 The symmetric tridiagonal QR algorithm
- •3.6.1 Reduction to tridiagonal form
- •3.6.2 The tridiagonal QR algorithm
- •3.7 Research
- •3.8 Summary
- •Bibliography
- •4.1 The divide and conquer idea
- •4.2 Partitioning the tridiagonal matrix
- •4.3 Solving the small systems
- •4.4 Deflation
- •4.4.1 Numerical examples
- •4.6 Solving the secular equation
- •4.7 A first algorithm
- •4.7.1 A numerical example
- •4.8 The algorithm of Gu and Eisenstat
- •4.8.1 A numerical example [continued]
- •Bibliography
- •5 LAPACK and the BLAS
- •5.1 LAPACK
- •5.2 BLAS
- •5.2.1 Typical performance numbers for the BLAS
- •5.3 Blocking
- •5.4 LAPACK solvers for the symmetric eigenproblems
- •5.6 An example of a LAPACK routines
- •Bibliography
- •6 Vector iteration (power method)
- •6.1 Simple vector iteration
- •6.2 Convergence analysis
- •6.3 A numerical example
- •6.4 The symmetric case
- •6.5 Inverse vector iteration
- •6.6 The generalized eigenvalue problem
- •6.7 Computing higher eigenvalues
- •6.8 Rayleigh quotient iteration
- •6.8.1 A numerical example
- •Bibliography
- •7 Simultaneous vector or subspace iterations
- •7.1 Basic subspace iteration
- •7.2 Convergence of basic subspace iteration
- •7.3 Accelerating subspace iteration
- •7.4 Relation between subspace iteration and QR algorithm
- •7.5 Addendum
- •Bibliography
- •8 Krylov subspaces
- •8.1 Introduction
- •8.3 Polynomial representation of Krylov subspaces
- •8.4 Error bounds of Saad
- •Bibliography
- •9 Arnoldi and Lanczos algorithms
- •9.2 Arnoldi algorithm with explicit restarts
- •9.3 The Lanczos basis
- •9.4 The Lanczos process as an iterative method
- •9.6 Partial reorthogonalization
- •9.5 An error analysis of the unmodified Lanczos algorithm
- •9.7 Block Lanczos
- •9.8 External selective reorthogonalization
- •Bibliography
- •10 Restarting Arnoldi and Lanczos algorithms
- •10.2 Implicit restart
- •10.3 Convergence criterion
- •10.4 The generalized eigenvalue problem
- •10.5 A numerical example
- •10.6 Another numerical example
- •10.7 The Lanczos algorithm with thick restarts
- •10.8 Krylov–Schur algorithm
- •10.9 The rational Krylov space method
- •Bibliography
- •11 The Jacobi-Davidson Method
- •11.1 The Davidson algorithm
- •11.2 The Jacobi orthogonal component correction
- •11.2.1 Restarts
- •11.2.2 The computation of several eigenvalues
- •11.2.3 Spectral shifts
- •11.3 The generalized Hermitian eigenvalue problem
- •11.4 A numerical example
- •11.6 Harmonic Ritz values and vectors
- •11.7 Refined Ritz vectors
- •11.8 The generalized Schur decomposition
- •11.9.1 Restart
- •11.9.3 Algorithm
- •Bibliography
- •12 Rayleigh quotient and trace minimization
- •12.1 Introduction
- •12.2 The method of steepest descent
- •12.3 The conjugate gradient algorithm
- •12.4 Locally optimal PCG (LOPCG)
- •12.5 The block Rayleigh quotient minimization algorithm (BRQMIN)
- •12.7 A numerical example
- •12.8 Trace minimization
- •Bibliography
136 CHAPTER 7. SIMULTANEOUS VECTOR OR SUBSPACE ITERATIONS
has the order n = 1095. Subspace iteration is applied with five vectors as an inverse iteration to
L−1AL−T (Lx) = λ(Lx), B = LLT . (Cholesky factorization)
X(0) is chosen to be a random matrix. Here, we number the eigenvalues from small to big. The smallest six eigenvalues of (7.10) shifted by 0.01 to the right are
ˆ |
= 0.01, |
ˆ |
= 0.066635, |
λ1 |
λ4 |
||
ˆ |
= 0.022690, |
ˆ |
= 0.126631, |
λ2 |
λ5 |
||
ˆ |
= 0.054385, |
ˆ |
= 0.147592. |
λ3 |
λ6 |
and thus the ratios of the eigenvalues that determine the rate of convergence are
ˆ |
ˆ |
2 |
= 0.194, |
ˆ |
ˆ |
2 |
= 0.277, |
(λ1 |
/λ2) |
|
(λ4 |
/λ5) |
|
||
ˆ |
ˆ |
2 |
= 0.174, |
ˆ |
ˆ |
2 |
= 0.736, |
(λ2 |
/λ3) |
|
(λ5 |
/λ6) |
|
||
ˆ |
ˆ |
2 |
= 0.666. |
|
|
|
|
(λ3 |
/λ4) |
|
|
|
|
|
So, the numbers presented in Table 7.1 reflect quite accurately the predicted rates. The numbers in column 6 are a little too small, though.
The convergence criterion
max k(I − X(k)X(k) )x(ik−1)k ≤ ǫ = 10−5
1≤i≤p
was not satisfied after 50 iteration step.
7.3Accelerating subspace iteration
Subspace iteration potentially converges very slowly. It can be slow even it one starts with a subspace that contains all desired solutions! If, e.g., x(0)1 and x(0)2 are both elements in R([u1, u2]), the the vectors x(ik), i = 1, 2, . . ., still converge linearly towards u1 und u2 although they could be readily obtained from the 2 × 2 eigenvalue problem,
2 |
|
h |
|
|
i |
x1(0) |
|
# A |
(0) |
(0) |
|
"x(0) |
|
x1 |
, x2 |
y = λy |
The following theorem gives hope that the convergence rates can be improved if one proceeds in a suitable way.
Theorem 7.6 Let X Fn×p as in Theorem 7.2. Let ui, 1 ≤ i ≤ p, be the eigenvectors corresponding to the eigenvalues λ1, . . . , λp of A. Then we have
|
|
|
|
|
|
λi |
|
k |
min |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sin |
(ui, x) |
≤ c λp+1 |
|
|
||||
x R(X(k)) |
|
|
||||||
Proof. In the proof of Theorem 7.2 we have seen that |
|
|
||||||
R(X(k)) = R U |
S(k) |
, |
S(k) F(n−p)×p, |
|||||
|
|
Ip |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.3. ACCELERATING SUBSPACE ITERATION |
137 |
||||
where |
= sij λp+i |
, 1 ≤ i ≤ n − p, 1 ≤ j ≤ p. |
|
||
sij |
|
||||
(k) |
|
λj |
|
k |
|
|
|
|
|||
But we have
min
x R(X(k))
sin (ui, x) ≤ sin |
|
ui, U S(k) |
ei , |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ip |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
= |
|
|
|
|
uiui )U |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/ |
|
|
|
Ip |
|
ei |
|
|||||||||
(I |
− |
|
|
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S |
(k) |
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
s1i(λi/λp+1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
p,i(λi/λn) |
k |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
− |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
λi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
(I |
− |
uiui ) ui + |
|
|
sj−p,i |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
uj |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
λ |
p+j |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
≤ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
j=p+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
λi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
− |
|
2 |
λi |
|
|
|
− |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
n |
p |
|
2k |
|
|
|
|
k |
|
n |
|
|
p |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
uX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
uX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
t |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
t |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
= v |
|
|
sji |
2k |
|
|
|
|
|
v |
|
|
|
sji. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
uj=1 |
|
λp+j |
≤ λp+1 uj=1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
These considerations lead to the idea to complement Algorithm 7.1 by a so-called Rayleigh-Ritz step. Here we give an ‘inverted algorithm’ to compute the smallest eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors of a symmetric/Hermitian matrix. For the corresponding nonsymmetric algorithm see [1].
Algorithm 7.2 Subspace or simultaneous inverse iteration combined with Rayleigh-Ritz step
1:Let X Fn×p with X X = Ip:
2:Set X(0) := X.
3:for k = 1, 2, . . . do
4:Solve AZ(k) := X(k−1)
5: |
Q(k)R(k) := Z(k) |
|
|
|
/* QR factorization of Z(k) (or modified Gram–Schmidt) */ |
|||||||||||
6: |
ˆ (k) |
:= Q |
(k) |
|
AQ |
(k) |
, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
H |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
7: |
ˆ (k) |
=: F |
(k) |
Θ |
(k) |
F |
(k) |
ˆ (k) |
|
Fp |
× |
p |
*/ |
|||
H |
|
|
|
|
/* Spectral decomposition of H |
|
|
|||||||||
8:X(k) = Q(k)F (k).
9:end for
Remark 7.1. The columns x(ik) of X(k) are called Ritz vectors and the eigenvalues ϑ(1k) ≤ · · · ≤ ϑ(pk) in the diagonal of Θ are called Ritz values. According to the RayleighRitz principle 2.19 we have
λi ≤ ϑ(ik) 1 ≤ i ≤ p, k > 0.
138 CHAPTER 7. SIMULTANEOUS VECTOR OR SUBSPACE ITERATIONS
ˆ
The solution of the full eigenvalue problems H(k)y = ϑy is solved by the symmetric QR algorithm.
ˆ
The computation of the matrix H(k) is expensive as matrix-vector products have to be executed. The following considerations simplify matters. We write X(k) in the form
|
X(k) = Z(k)G(k), |
G(k) Fp×pnonsingular |
||
Because X(k) must have orthonormal columns we must have |
|
|||
(7.11) |
G(k) Z(k) Z(k)G(k) = Ip. |
|
||
Furthermore, the columns of Z(k)G(k) are the Ritz vectors in R(A−kX) of A2, |
||||
|
G(k) Z(k) A2Z(k)G(k) = |
(k)−2, |
|
|
where |
(k) is a diagonal matrix. Using the definition of Z(k) |
in Algorithm 7.2 we see that |
||
|
G(k) X(k−1) X(k−1)G(k) = G(k) G(k) = |
(k)−2, |
||
and that Y (k) := G(k) (k) is orthogonal. Substituting into (7.11) gives |
||||
|
Y (k) Z(k) Z(k)Y (k) = |
(k)2. |
|
|
So, the columns of Y (k) are the normalized eigenvectors of H(k) := Z(k) Z(k).
Thus we obtain a second variant of the inverse subspace iteration with Rayleigh-Ritz step.
Algorithm 7.3 Subspace or simultaneous inverse vector iteration combined with Rayleigh-Ritz step, version 2
1:Let X Fn×p with X X = Ip.
2:Set X(0) := X.
3:for k = 1, 2, . . . do
4:AZ(k) := X(k−1);
5: |
H(k) := Z(k) Z(k) /* = X(k−1) A−2X(k−1) */ |
|
6: |
H(k) =: Y (k) (k)2Y (k) |
/* Spectral decomposition of H(k) */ |
7: |
X(k) = Z(k)Y (k) (k)−1 |
/* = Z(k)G(k) */ |
8: |
end for |
|
|
|
|
Remark 7.2. An alternative to Algorithm 7.3 is the subroutine ritzit, that has been programmed by Rutishauser [4] in ALGOL, see also [2, p.293]. 
We are now going to show that the Ritz vectors converge to the eigenvectors, as Theorem 7.6 lets us hope. First we prove
Lemma 7.7 ([2, p.222]) Let y be a unit vector and ϑ F. Let λ be the eigenvalue of A closest to ϑ and let u be the corresponding eigenvector. Let
γ := |
min |
|
λ |
(A) |
− |
ϑ |
| |
|
||
λi(A)=λ| |
i |
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and let ψ = (y, u). Then |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sin ψ |
≤ |
kr(y)k |
:= |
kAy − ϑyk |
, |
|||||
|
|
γ |
|
|
|
γ |
|
|
||
where r(y, ϑ) = Ay − ϑy plays the role of a residual.
7.3. ACCELERATING SUBSPACE ITERATION |
139 |
Proof. We write y = u cos ψ + v sin ψ with kvk = 1. Then
r(y, ϑ) = Ay − ϑy = (A − ϑI)u cos ψ + (A − ϑI)v sin ψ,
= (λ − ϑ)u cos ψ + (A − ϑI)v sin ψ.
Because u (A − ϑI)v = 0, Pythagoras’ theorem implies
kr(y, ϑ)k2 = (λ − ϑ)2 cos2 ψ + k(A − ϑI)vk2 sin2 ψ ≥ γ2kvk2 sin2 ψ.
Theorem 7.8 ([2, p.298]) Let the assumptions of Theorem 7.2 be satisfied. |
Let xj(k) = |
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
(k) |
|
|
I |
ei |
X(k)ej be the j-th Ritz vector as computed be Algorithm 7.3, and let yi |
= U |
S(k) |
|||||||
(cf. the proof of Theorem 7.2). Then the following inequality holds |
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
λi |
k |
|
|
|
|
|
(k) |
(k) |
) ≤ c |
, |
1 ≤ i ≤ p. |
|
|
|
|
|
sin (xi |
, yi |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
λp+1 |
|
|
|
|
|||||
Proof. The columns of U |
Ip |
form a basis of R(X(k)). Therefore, we can write |
S(k) |
(k) |
Ip |
ti, |
ti Fp. |
xi = U |
S(k) |
Instead of the special eigenvalue problem
X(k−1) A−2X(k−1)y = H(k)y = µ−2y
in the orthonormal ‘basis’ X(k) we consider the equivalent eigenvalue problem
(7.12) |
hIp, S(k) i UA−2U |
Ip |
t = µ−2 hIp, S(k) i |
Ip |
t. |
S(k) |
S(k) |
Let (µ, t) be an eigenpair of (7.12). Then we have
|
0 = hIp, S(k) i UA−2U |
S(k) |
t − µ−2 hIp, S(k) i S(k) |
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ip |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ip |
|
|
= Λ1−2 + S(k) Λ2−2S(k) t − µ−2 Ip + S(k) S(k) t, |
|
||||||||||||||||
(7.13) |
= (Λ1−2 − µ−2I) + S(k) (Λ2−2 − µ−2I)S(k) t |
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
1 |
− |
|
|
|
|
2 |
k |
2 |
|
− |
|
|
k |
|||
|
= |
(Λ−2 |
|
|
µ−2I) + ΛkS(0) Λ−k |
(Λ−2 |
|
|
µ−2I)Λ−kS(0) |
Λk |
||||||||
|
= (Λ1−2 − µ−2I) + |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
1 |
|||||
|
λp+1 Λ1 Hk |
λp+1 Λ1 ! t |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
with |
|
|
|
|
= λ2k S(0) Λ−k |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
H |
k |
(Λ−2 |
− |
µ−2I)Λ−kS(0). |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
p+1 |
2 |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
||||
As the largest eigenvalue of Λ−2 1 is 1/λp+1, Hk is bounded,
t
t
kHkk ≤ c1 k > 0.
140 CHAPTER 7. SIMULTANEOUS VECTOR OR SUBSPACE ITERATIONS
Thus, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
→∞ |
|
|||
|
k |
k |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
Λ1 |
|
Hk |
Λ1 |
t |
−−−→ |
0. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
λp+1 |
|
|
λp+1 |
! |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
λ |
|
|
Therefore, in (7.13) we can interpret this expression as an perturbation of the diagonal matrix Λ−2 2 − µ−2I. For su ciently large k (that may depend on i) there is a µi that is close to λi, and a ti that is close to ei. We now assume that k is so big that
|µ−i 2 − λ−i 1| ≤ ρ := 12 min |λ−i 2 − λ−j 2|
λj =6 λi
such that µ−2 |
is closer to λ−2 than to any other λ−2 |
, j = i. |
|
|
|
||
i |
i |
j |
6 |
|
|
|
|
We now consider the orthonormal ‘basis’ |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
B = |
Ip |
|
1/2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
S(k) Ip + S(k) S(k) − . |
|
1/2ti |
||||
If (µi, ti) is an eigenpair of (7.12) or (7.13), respectively, then |
µi−2, Ip + S(k) S(k) |
|
|||||
is an eigenpair of |
|
|
|
|
|
||
(7.14) |
|
B A−2Bt = µ−2t. |
|
|
|
|
|
As, for su ciently large k, (λi−2, ei) is a good approximation of the eigenpair (µi−2, ti) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/2 |
Ip + S(k) S(k) |
|
1/2ei |
is a good approximation to the eigenpair |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
of (7.13), then also λi−2 |
, |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
µi−2, Ip + S(k) S(k) |
|
|
ti of (7.14). We now apply Lemma 7.7 with |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
γ = ρ, |
|
|
|
|
ϑ = λi−2, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
y = Ip + S(k) S(k) 1/2ei/ Ip + S(k) S(k) 1/2ei , |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
u = Ip |
+ S |
|
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ti/ |
|
Ip + S |
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
ti |
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(k) |
|
|
(k) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(k) |
|
|
|
(k) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
Now we have |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/2ei |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/2ei |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
kr(y)k = |
(B A−2 B − λi−2I) Ip + S(k) S(k) |
|
|
|
Ip + S(k) S(k) |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
− |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(k |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
≤ |
|
Ip + S |
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ip, S UA− U |
|
|
(k) |
− |
|
|
|
Ip + S |
|
S |
|
|
ei |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
h |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S |
|
|
λi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(k) |
|
|
(k) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(k) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
Ip |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
≤ |
|
Ip + S |
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Λ1− |
|
|
|
− |
λi− |
|
I + λp−+1Λ1 |
|
Hk |
λp−+1 |
Λ1 |
|
|
ei |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(k) |
(k) |
|
−1/2 |
|
k |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
k |
|
|
|
1 |
|
k |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
≤ |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
λp |
|
k |
|
|
λi |
|
|
k |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
p−+1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
k |
|
|
p−+1 |
1 |
|
|
i |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
λ |
Λ |
|
H |
λ |
|
e |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Λ |
|
|
|
|
e |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
λ−1 |
|
Λ |
|
|
|
|
|
H |
kk |
λ−1 |
|
Λ |
|
|
|
i |
|
|
c |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
≤ |
|
1 |
|
k |
|
1 |
|
≤ |
1 λp+1 |
λp+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Then, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
Lemma 7.7 implies that |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ip + S(k) S(k) |
|
ei ≤ ρ1 |
λp+1 |
. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sin (xi |
|
, yi |
|
) = sin |
|
Ip + S(k) S(k) |
|
|
|
ti, |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(k) |
|
(k) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/2 |
|
|
c |
|
|
λi |
k |
||||||||||
