Skip to main content
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
Bumped by Community user
edited title
Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22

Local maxima of the sum of Gaussian functions in *higher*multiple dimensions* are always strict local maxima - prove/disprove/prove conditionally?

added 14 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22

We can try proving the positive definiteness of the Hessian at the critical point $x*$,, where the Hessian matrix $H(x)$ at $x$ is as follows:

We can try proving the positive definiteness of the Hessian at the critical point $x*$,, where the Hessian $H(x)$ is as follows:

We can try proving the positive definiteness of the Hessian at the critical point $x*$,, where the Hessian matrix $H(x)$ at $x$ is as follows:

added 331 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22

Thought: (1) Since $0< f_n(x) \le n,$ I'm thinking if we can explore the topology of $y \in (0,n], f_n^{-1}(y)$. It seems to me that $\forall y \in (0,n], f_n^{-1}(y)$ consists of the disjoint union of at most $n$ points or hyperspheres $S^{p-1}\subset \mathbb{R}^p.$ whose supporting hyperplanes are orthogonal to the $x_n$ axis: so for example when $p=2, f_n^{-1}(y)$ is a disjoint union of at most $n$ points or horizontal circles whose supporting planes are orthogonal to the $x_3$ axis. If we can show that, then it'll show that for the local maximum $x*$ with local maximum value $y*, f_^{-1}(y*)$$y*, f_n^{-1}(y*)$ is a point or a disjoint union of points, as otherwise it'd be a disjoint union of hyperspheres orthogonal to the axis $x_{n+1}$ , which would mean that these hyperspheres can't come arbitrarily close to $x*,$ proving the local max is a strict one. Not sure if we need Morse theory to prove this?

Now can we say something about the above map $\Phi$ that guarantees that its fixed points are isolated? I don't know, but I'm looking at this and this question on MSE that deal with isolatedness and thus finitely many Lefscetz fixed points on a compact manifold, and in our case, we know that these fixed points of $\Phi: \mathbb{R}^p\to \mathbb{R}^p$ are on a compact manifold with boundary and corners, namely $C,$ the convex hull of $\{x_1, x_2 \dots x_n\}.$ So it seems to me that all we may need to show is that: $\Phi:C \to C$ is Lefschetz, i.e. $D\Phi_{x*}:\mathbb{R}^p\to \mathbb{R}^p$ does not have the eigenvalue $1.$ Can we show that, probably?

Thought (3) [after the suggestion in the first comment]

We can try proving the positive definiteness of the Hessian at the critical point $x*$,, where the Hessian $H(x)$ is as follows:

$$H(x)={\sum_{i=1}^{n}(-2I+4{(x-x_i)(x-x_i)^{T}})exp(-||{x-x_i}||^2)}.$$ But it seems difficult to manipulate at the critical point $x*$ above.

Thought: (1) Since $0< f_n(x) \le n,$ I'm thinking if we can explore the topology of $y \in (0,n], f_n^{-1}(y)$. It seems to me that $\forall y \in (0,n], f_n^{-1}(y)$ consists of the disjoint union of at most $n$ points or hyperspheres $S^{p-1}\subset \mathbb{R}^p.$ whose supporting hyperplanes are orthogonal to the $x_n$ axis: so for example when $p=2, f_n^{-1}(y)$ is a disjoint union of at most $n$ points or horizontal circles whose supporting planes are orthogonal to the $x_3$ axis. If we can show that, then it'll show that for the local maximum $x*$ with local maximum value $y*, f_^{-1}(y*)$ is a point or a disjoint union of points, as otherwise it'd be a disjoint union of hyperspheres orthogonal to the axis $x_{n+1}$ , which would mean that these hyperspheres can't come arbitrarily close to $x*,$ proving the local max is a strict one. Not sure if we need Morse theory to prove this?

Now can we say something about the above map $\Phi$ that guarantees that its fixed points are isolated? I don't know, but I'm looking at this and this question on MSE that deal with isolatedness and thus finitely many Lefscetz fixed points on a compact manifold, and in our case, we know that these fixed points of $\Phi: \mathbb{R}^p\to \mathbb{R}^p$ are on a compact manifold with boundary and corners, namely $C,$ the convex hull of $\{x_1, x_2 \dots x_n\}.$ So it seems to me that all we may need to show is that: $\Phi:C \to C$ is Lefschetz, i.e. $D\Phi_{x*}:\mathbb{R}^p\to \mathbb{R}^p$ does not have the eigenvalue $1.$ Can we show that, probably?

Thought: (1) Since $0< f_n(x) \le n,$ I'm thinking if we can explore the topology of $y \in (0,n], f_n^{-1}(y)$. It seems to me that $\forall y \in (0,n], f_n^{-1}(y)$ consists of the disjoint union of at most $n$ points or hyperspheres $S^{p-1}\subset \mathbb{R}^p.$ whose supporting hyperplanes are orthogonal to the $x_n$ axis: so for example when $p=2, f_n^{-1}(y)$ is a disjoint union of at most $n$ points or horizontal circles whose supporting planes are orthogonal to the $x_3$ axis. If we can show that, then it'll show that for the local maximum $x*$ with local maximum value $y*, f_n^{-1}(y*)$ is a point or a disjoint union of points, as otherwise it'd be a disjoint union of hyperspheres orthogonal to the axis $x_{n+1}$ , which would mean that these hyperspheres can't come arbitrarily close to $x*,$ proving the local max is a strict one. Not sure if we need Morse theory to prove this?

Now can we say something about the above map $\Phi$ that guarantees that its fixed points are isolated? I don't know, but I'm looking at this and this question on MSE that deal with isolatedness and thus finitely many Lefscetz fixed points on a compact manifold, and in our case, we know that these fixed points of $\Phi: \mathbb{R}^p\to \mathbb{R}^p$ are on a compact manifold with boundary and corners, namely $C,$ the convex hull of $\{x_1, x_2 \dots x_n\}.$ So it seems to me that all we may need to show is that: $\Phi:C \to C$ is Lefschetz, i.e. $D\Phi_{x*}:\mathbb{R}^p\to \mathbb{R}^p$ does not have the eigenvalue $1.$ Can we show that, probably?

Thought (3) [after the suggestion in the first comment]

We can try proving the positive definiteness of the Hessian at the critical point $x*$,, where the Hessian $H(x)$ is as follows:

$$H(x)={\sum_{i=1}^{n}(-2I+4{(x-x_i)(x-x_i)^{T}})exp(-||{x-x_i}||^2)}.$$ But it seems difficult to manipulate at the critical point $x*$ above.

added 54 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
added 54 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
added 43 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
added 602 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
added 2 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
deleted 529 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
added 48 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
added 48 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
added 228 characters in body
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
edited title
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
edited title
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading
Source Link
Learning math
  • 1.5k
  • 1
  • 15
  • 22
Loading