# CS代考计算机代写 algorithm STAT 513/413: Lecture 6 Yet another bit of linear algebra: more decompositions

STAT 513/413: Lecture 6 Yet another bit of linear algebra: more decompositions
(principal components and many other things)

SVD
Let A be arbitrary p × q matrix
Singular value decomposition (SVD): A = UΛVT
where U and V are orthogonal – p × p and q × q, respectively and Λ is p × q diagonal with diagonal elements
λi 􏰀 0 (singular values)
> A = cbind(c(1,2,3),c(2,5,4)) >A
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 2
[2,] 2 5
[3,] 3 4
Note: for all what follows, instead of “decomposition” in some other sources you may encounter “factorization”; both mean the same, also for other decompositions/factorizations
1

> sa=svd(A,nu=dim(A,1))
> sa
\$d
[1] 7.6203733 0.9643188
\$u
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,] -0.2932528 -0.08121183 -0.9525793
[2,] -0.7017514 -0.65838502 0.2721655
[3,] -0.6492670 0.74828724 0.1360828
\$v
[,1] [,2]
[1,] -0.4782649 0.8782156
[2,] -0.8782156 -0.4782649
In R
2

Testing…
> t(sa\$u) %*% sa\$u
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,] 1.000000e-00 0.000000e+00 -9.714451e-17
[2,] 0.000000e+00 1.000000e+00 -1.387779e-16
[3,] -9.714451e-17 -1.387779e-16 1.000000e+00
> t(sa\$v) %*% sa\$v
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
> sa\$v %*% t(sa\$v)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
> sa\$u %*% diag(sa\$d) %*% t(sa\$v)
Error in sa\$u %*% diag(sa\$d) : non-conformable arguments
> sa\$u %*% rbind(diag(sa\$d),c(0,0)) %*% t(sa\$v)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 2
[2,] 2 5
[3,] 3 4
3

Economy class
Again, there are two versions of SVD: the one just introduced, and the other, “economy” version, in which:
– if p􏰀q: V as above, Λ as above, but square, q×q
and then only first q columns of U are taken: which means that U has orthonormal columns, UTU = I, but is not orthogonal, as UUT may differ from I
– if p􏰆q, then the other way round: Λ is p×p, U is square p×p and thus orthogonal, and V has orthonormal columns, VTV = I
4

Economy class in R: testing again
> sa=svd(A)
> sa
\$d
[1] 7.6203733 0.9643188
\$u
[,1] [,2]
[1,] -0.2932528 -0.08121183
[2,] -0.7017514 -0.65838502
[3,] -0.6492670 0.74828724
\$v
[,1] [,2]
[1,] -0.4782649 0.8782156
[2,] -0.8782156 -0.4782649
> sa\$u %*% diag(sa\$d) %*% t(sa\$v)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 2
[2,] 2 5
[3,] 3 4
5

> sa\$u %*% t(sa\$u)
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,] 0.0925926 0.25925926 0.12962963
[2,] 0.2592593 0.92592593 -0.03703704
[3,] 0.1296296 -0.03703704 0.98148148
> t(sa\$u) %*% sa\$u
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
> sa\$v %*% t(sa\$v)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
> t(sa\$v) %*% sa\$v
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
Testing continued
6

What is it good for?
Many things. There are methods that could not be done without SVD, like correspondence analysis
One important application are principal components (for more background on the method, see Rizzo, Section 5.7) – when done directly out of centered (and perhaps scaled) matrix X rather than the variance-covariance matrix
Matrix X: the matrix of data. In the typical form, columns are variables. Centered matrix: sums of columns are 0. In matrix notation 1TX = O, where 1 is a column of 1’s here
Note: if sums are 0, then the averages are 0 too. Centering is achieved by subtracting the average of every column. R has a convenient functions for it, apply and sweep.
> xcent = sweep(USArrests,2,apply(USArrests,2,mean))
> sa = svd(xcent)
Principal components are usually introduced via the eigenvalue decomposition of the (sample) variance-covariance matrix, the latter
being equal – once X is centered – to 1 XTX n−1
7

Eigenvalue decomposition
Every symmetric (and thus square) matrix S can be written in the form
S = QLQT
where Q is an orthogonal (thus square) matrix,
and L is a diagonal matrix (apparently, also square)
The matrix L is similar to Λ, but is different: its elements do not have to be nonnegative. (They are guaranteed nonnegative for a special class of matrices called nonnegative definite matrices; another special class, positive definite matrices, have them all positive)
> S=matrix(c(1,3,3,1),nrow=2,ncol=2) >S
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 3
[2,] 3 1
> eig=eigen(S)
8

Testing: you have to get it right
> eig
eigen() decomposition
\$values
[1] 4 -2
\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 0.7071068 -0.7071068
[2,] 0.7071068 0.7071068
> eig\$vectors %*% diag(eig\$values) %*% eig\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 3 -1
[2,] 1 -3
> t(eig\$vectors) %*% diag(eig\$values) %*% eig\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 -3
[2,] -3 1
> eig\$vectors %*% diag(eig\$values) %*% t(eig\$vectors)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 3
[2,] 3 1
9

The connection
Instead of doing the eigenvalue decomposition of 1 XTX n−1
we just do the SVD of the centered (don’t forget!) data matrix X: X = UΛVT and then
1 XTX = 1 VΛUTUΛVT n−1 n−1
1 T 􏰄12􏰅T T =n−1VΛΛV =V n−1Λ V =VLV
hence we can match Q=V and Λ2 =(n−1)L
the eigenvalues are just squares of singular values divided by n − 1 and eigenvectors (columns of Q) are there in V
the principal components are then
UΛ = UΛVTV = XV
their order depending on the magnitude of the corresponding elements on the diagonal of L (usually come already ordered)
10

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas

[,1]
64.802164
92.827450
124.068216
18.340035
First principal component
> sa\$d
[1] 586.12680 99.48681 45.42598 17.37953
> sa\$v
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4]
[1,] 0.04170432 -0.04482166 0.07989066 -0.99492173
[2,] 0.99522128 -0.05876003 -0.06756974 0.03893830
[3,] 0.04633575 0.97685748 -0.20054629 -0.05816914
[4,] 0.07515550 0.20071807 0.97408059 0.07232502
> xcent %*% sa\$v[,1]
Error in xcent %*% sa\$v[, 1] :
requires numeric/complex matrix/vector arguments
> as.matrix(xcent) %*% sa\$v[,1]
11

A bit more about eigenvalue decomposition
As we have seen, there is a specific function eigen() in R, which comes handy when we have more general matrices to compute the eigenvalue decomposition. In fact, the eigenvalue decomposition is defined again for every matrix S, not only for the symmetric ones: however, it guaranteed to be real only for the latter – for non-symmetric matrices the eigenvalues and eigenvectors may be complex.
It should be remarked, however, that in statistics, computing eigenvalue decomposition of a non-symmetric matrix is very rarely of interest.
Eigenvalue decomposition, if available, is a useful tool for calculating various matrices and their functions. The general principle is: if you can do something for a matrix that is diagonal, by doing it componentwise for the elements of the diagonal, then you can generalize it to the matrices posessing real (and also complex, if you can do the same operation for complex numbers) eigenvalue decomposition
12

Examples
Square root of a matrix: if L is diagonal with nonnegative diagonal elements li, then a diagonal matrix L1/2 with diagonal elements √li satisfies L1/2L1/2 = A
Consider now a general A with eigenvalue decomposition QLQT. Here L is diagonal, but in order to take square root, all elements must be nonnegative. (Note that there is no square root for complex numbers, but you can still find an appropriate L1/2, albeit not uniquely defined. In fact, neither it is uniquely defined in the real case.) This is true when A is symmetric nonnegative definite, which is of particular interest in statistics: all variance-covariance matrices are symmetric nonnegative definite.
So now, A1/2 = QL1/2QT, as is easy to verify:
A1/2A1/2 = QL1/2QTQL1/2QT = QL1/2L1/2QT = QLQT = A
Another example: inverse matrix. When is a diagonal matrix invertible? What does it mean for a general matrix? How do you define its inverse then?
13

Matrix functions
A general way of definining functions on matrices is as follows. You have a real function f(x). For a diagonal matrix L with diagonal elements li, define f(L) as a diagonal matrix with diagonal elements f(li). For a general matrix A with eigenvalue decomposition QLQT, define
eA = Q eL QT
Another example of the same principle, albeit not a special case of the previous one: determinant. What is the determinant of a diagonal matrix? How the eigenvalue decomposition can be then used to compute a determinant of a general matrix (for simplicity, with a real eigenvalue decomposition)?
14

Eigenvalues of non-symmetric matrices
> S=matrix(c(1,2,3,4),nrow=2,ncol=2)
> eigen(S)
eigen() decomposition
\$values
[1] 5.3722813 -0.3722813
\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] -0.5657675 -0.9093767
[2,] -0.8245648 0.4159736
> S=matrix(c(3,4,-2,-1),nrow=2,ncol=2)
> eigen(S)
eigen() decomposition
\$values
[1] 1+2i 1-2i
\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 0.4082483+0.4082483i 0.4082483-0.4082483i
[2,] 0.8164966+0.0000000i 0.8164966+0.0000000i
15

Yet another decomposition: Cholesky
Let S be a symmetric positive definite matrix. Then it possesses a Cholesky decomposition (note that it is not uniquely defined)
S = RTR where R is upper triangular
This is how it is in R; there are definitions in the literature requiring S = WWT, where W is lower triangular. Of course, how to obtain one from another is obvious (or isn’t?)
The Cholesky decomposition has special dedicated algorithms (in R, function chol()); but we can also piece it together via the eigenvalue and QR decompositions
Once we have the Cholesky decomposition, it can be used for many things. For instance, the system Sx = b can be solved via repeated backsolving:
first, solve RTy = b; second, solve Rx = y
Also, the inverse matrix can be done in a similar manner
16

Posted in Uncategorized

# CS代考计算机代写 algorithm STAT 513/413: Lecture 6 Yet another bit of linear algebra: more decompositions

STAT 513/413: Lecture 6 Yet another bit of linear algebra: more decompositions
(principal components and many other things)

SVD
Let A be arbitrary p × q matrix
Singular value decomposition (SVD): A = UΛVT
where U and V are orthogonal – p × p and q × q, respectively and Λ is p × q diagonal with diagonal elements
λi 􏰀 0 (singular values)
> A = cbind(c(1,2,3),c(2,5,4)) >A
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 2
[2,] 2 5
[3,] 3 4
Note: for all what follows, instead of “decomposition” in some other sources you may encounter “factorization”; both mean the same, also for other decompositions/factorizations
1

> sa=svd(A,nu=dim(A,1))
> sa
\$d
[1] 7.6203733 0.9643188
\$u
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,] -0.2932528 -0.08121183 -0.9525793
[2,] -0.7017514 -0.65838502 0.2721655
[3,] -0.6492670 0.74828724 0.1360828
\$v
[,1] [,2]
[1,] -0.4782649 0.8782156
[2,] -0.8782156 -0.4782649
In R
2

Testing…
> t(sa\$u) %*% sa\$u
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,] 1.000000e-00 0.000000e+00 -9.714451e-17
[2,] 0.000000e+00 1.000000e+00 -1.387779e-16
[3,] -9.714451e-17 -1.387779e-16 1.000000e+00
> t(sa\$v) %*% sa\$v
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
> sa\$v %*% t(sa\$v)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
> sa\$u %*% diag(sa\$d) %*% t(sa\$v)
Error in sa\$u %*% diag(sa\$d) : non-conformable arguments
> sa\$u %*% rbind(diag(sa\$d),c(0,0)) %*% t(sa\$v)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 2
[2,] 2 5
[3,] 3 4
3

Economy class
Again, there are two versions of SVD: the one just introduced, and the other, “economy” version, in which:
– if p􏰀q: V as above, Λ as above, but square, q×q
and then only first q columns of U are taken: which means that U has orthonormal columns, UTU = I, but is not orthogonal, as UUT may differ from I
– if p􏰆q, then the other way round: Λ is p×p, U is square p×p and thus orthogonal, and V has orthonormal columns, VTV = I
4

Economy class in R: testing again
> sa=svd(A)
> sa
\$d
[1] 7.6203733 0.9643188
\$u
[,1] [,2]
[1,] -0.2932528 -0.08121183
[2,] -0.7017514 -0.65838502
[3,] -0.6492670 0.74828724
\$v
[,1] [,2]
[1,] -0.4782649 0.8782156
[2,] -0.8782156 -0.4782649
> sa\$u %*% diag(sa\$d) %*% t(sa\$v)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 2
[2,] 2 5
[3,] 3 4
5

> sa\$u %*% t(sa\$u)
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,] 0.0925926 0.25925926 0.12962963
[2,] 0.2592593 0.92592593 -0.03703704
[3,] 0.1296296 -0.03703704 0.98148148
> t(sa\$u) %*% sa\$u
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
> sa\$v %*% t(sa\$v)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
> t(sa\$v) %*% sa\$v
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 0
[2,] 0 1
Testing continued
6

What is it good for?
Many things. There are methods that could not be done without SVD, like correspondence analysis
One important application are principal components (for more background on the method, see Rizzo, Section 5.7) – when done directly out of centered (and perhaps scaled) matrix X rather than the variance-covariance matrix
Matrix X: the matrix of data. In the typical form, columns are variables. Centered matrix: sums of columns are 0. In matrix notation 1TX = O, where 1 is a column of 1’s here
Note: if sums are 0, then the averages are 0 too. Centering is achieved by subtracting the average of every column. R has a convenient functions for it, apply and sweep.
> xcent = sweep(USArrests,2,apply(USArrests,2,mean))
> sa = svd(xcent)
Principal components are usually introduced via the eigenvalue decomposition of the (sample) variance-covariance matrix, the latter
being equal – once X is centered – to 1 XTX n−1
7

Eigenvalue decomposition
Every symmetric (and thus square) matrix S can be written in the form
S = QLQT
where Q is an orthogonal (thus square) matrix,
and L is a diagonal matrix (apparently, also square)
The matrix L is similar to Λ, but is different: its elements do not have to be nonnegative. (They are guaranteed nonnegative for a special class of matrices called nonnegative definite matrices; another special class, positive definite matrices, have them all positive)
> S=matrix(c(1,3,3,1),nrow=2,ncol=2) >S
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 3
[2,] 3 1
> eig=eigen(S)
8

Testing: you have to get it right
> eig
eigen() decomposition
\$values
[1] 4 -2
\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 0.7071068 -0.7071068
[2,] 0.7071068 0.7071068
> eig\$vectors %*% diag(eig\$values) %*% eig\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 3 -1
[2,] 1 -3
> t(eig\$vectors) %*% diag(eig\$values) %*% eig\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 -3
[2,] -3 1
> eig\$vectors %*% diag(eig\$values) %*% t(eig\$vectors)
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 3
[2,] 3 1
9

The connection
Instead of doing the eigenvalue decomposition of 1 XTX n−1
we just do the SVD of the centered (don’t forget!) data matrix X: X = UΛVT and then
1 XTX = 1 VΛUTUΛVT n−1 n−1
1 T 􏰄12􏰅T T =n−1VΛΛV =V n−1Λ V =VLV
hence we can match Q=V and Λ2 =(n−1)L
the eigenvalues are just squares of singular values divided by n − 1 and eigenvectors (columns of Q) are there in V
the principal components are then
UΛ = UΛVTV = XV
their order depending on the magnitude of the corresponding elements on the diagonal of L (usually come already ordered)
10

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas

[,1]
64.802164
92.827450
124.068216
18.340035
First principal component
> sa\$d
[1] 586.12680 99.48681 45.42598 17.37953
> sa\$v
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4]
[1,] 0.04170432 -0.04482166 0.07989066 -0.99492173
[2,] 0.99522128 -0.05876003 -0.06756974 0.03893830
[3,] 0.04633575 0.97685748 -0.20054629 -0.05816914
[4,] 0.07515550 0.20071807 0.97408059 0.07232502
> xcent %*% sa\$v[,1]
Error in xcent %*% sa\$v[, 1] :
requires numeric/complex matrix/vector arguments
> as.matrix(xcent) %*% sa\$v[,1]
11

A bit more about eigenvalue decomposition
As we have seen, there is a specific function eigen() in R, which comes handy when we have more general matrices to compute the eigenvalue decomposition. In fact, the eigenvalue decomposition is defined again for every matrix S, not only for the symmetric ones: however, it guaranteed to be real only for the latter – for non-symmetric matrices the eigenvalues and eigenvectors may be complex.
It should be remarked, however, that in statistics, computing eigenvalue decomposition of a non-symmetric matrix is very rarely of interest.
Eigenvalue decomposition, if available, is a useful tool for calculating various matrices and their functions. The general principle is: if you can do something for a matrix that is diagonal, by doing it componentwise for the elements of the diagonal, then you can generalize it to the matrices posessing real (and also complex, if you can do the same operation for complex numbers) eigenvalue decomposition
12

Examples
Square root of a matrix: if L is diagonal with nonnegative diagonal elements li, then a diagonal matrix L1/2 with diagonal elements √li satisfies L1/2L1/2 = A
Consider now a general A with eigenvalue decomposition QLQT. Here L is diagonal, but in order to take square root, all elements must be nonnegative. (Note that there is no square root for complex numbers, but you can still find an appropriate L1/2, albeit not uniquely defined. In fact, neither it is uniquely defined in the real case.) This is true when A is symmetric nonnegative definite, which is of particular interest in statistics: all variance-covariance matrices are symmetric nonnegative definite.
So now, A1/2 = QL1/2QT, as is easy to verify:
A1/2A1/2 = QL1/2QTQL1/2QT = QL1/2L1/2QT = QLQT = A
Another example: inverse matrix. When is a diagonal matrix invertible? What does it mean for a general matrix? How do you define its inverse then?
13

Matrix functions
A general way of definining functions on matrices is as follows. You have a real function f(x). For a diagonal matrix L with diagonal elements li, define f(L) as a diagonal matrix with diagonal elements f(li). For a general matrix A with eigenvalue decomposition QLQT, define
eA = Q eL QT
Another example of the same principle, albeit not a special case of the previous one: determinant. What is the determinant of a diagonal matrix? How the eigenvalue decomposition can be then used to compute a determinant of a general matrix (for simplicity, with a real eigenvalue decomposition)?
14

Eigenvalues of non-symmetric matrices
> S=matrix(c(1,2,3,4),nrow=2,ncol=2)
> eigen(S)
eigen() decomposition
\$values
[1] 5.3722813 -0.3722813
\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] -0.5657675 -0.9093767
[2,] -0.8245648 0.4159736
> S=matrix(c(3,4,-2,-1),nrow=2,ncol=2)
> eigen(S)
eigen() decomposition
\$values
[1] 1+2i 1-2i
\$vectors
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 0.4082483+0.4082483i 0.4082483-0.4082483i
[2,] 0.8164966+0.0000000i 0.8164966+0.0000000i
15

Yet another decomposition: Cholesky
Let S be a symmetric positive definite matrix. Then it possesses a Cholesky decomposition (note that it is not uniquely defined)
S = RTR where R is upper triangular
This is how it is in R; there are definitions in the literature requiring S = WWT, where W is lower triangular. Of course, how to obtain one from another is obvious (or isn’t?)
The Cholesky decomposition has special dedicated algorithms (in R, function chol()); but we can also piece it together via the eigenvalue and QR decompositions
Once we have the Cholesky decomposition, it can be used for many things. For instance, the system Sx = b can be solved via repeated backsolving:
first, solve RTy = b; second, solve Rx = y
Also, the inverse matrix can be done in a similar manner
16

Posted in Uncategorized