2
$\begingroup$

Given an $m \times n$ matrix $A$ and a vector $c \in \mathbb R^n$, define $\eta(A,c) \ge 0$, $$ \eta(A,c) := \sup_{u \in \mathbb R^n} u^\top c - \frac{1}{2}\|u\|^2 - \|Au\|. $$ Note that $\eta(A,c) = \|c\|^2/2 - M_f(c)$, where $M_f(c) := \min_{u \in \mathbb R^n}\dfrac{1}{2}\|u-c\|^2 + \|Au\|$ defines the Moreau envelope of the function $f(x):=\|Ax\|$ at the point $c$.

Question. What is an analytic formula for $\eta(A,c)$, perhaps by means of the singular-values of $A$ ?

(If it helps, it may be assumed that $m=n$ and $A$ is positive-definite).

Upper and lower-bounds

If $\sigma_\min(A)$ is the least singular-value of $A$ and $\sigma_\max(A)$ is its largest singular-value (i.e is operator norm), then, it is clear that $$ \eta(\sigma_\max(A) I_m,c) \le \eta(A,c) \le \eta(\sigma_\min(A) I_m,c). $$

One the other hand, a simple calculation reveals that $\eta(\theta I_m,c) = \dfrac{1}{4}(\|c\|-\theta)_+^2$ for all $\theta \in \mathbb R$. Thus, $$ \frac{1}{4}(\|c\|-\sigma_\max(A))_+ \le \eta(A,c) \le \frac{1}{4}(\|c\|-\sigma_\min(A))_+^2. $$

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think you can get something if $A^{-T}A^{-1}$ is diagonal, but apart from that, I don't know. $\endgroup$
    – Dirk
    Commented Jun 3, 2021 at 10:49
  • $\begingroup$ This makes sense and is compatible with my trivial bounds. Thanks for the input. $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Aug 17, 2021 at 6:01

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

I have to point out that in most cases, there is no closed-form solution of such problems (say, Moreau-envelope of $\|Ax\|_1$ is also the case), and this can be proved for your case.

Now back to your problem. Let's assume that the SVD decomposition of $A$ is $A=U^\top DV$, where $D$ is a diagonal matrix. Our target problem is: $$ \min_{x} \frac12\|x-c\|^2+\|U^{\top}DVx\| $$ Let $y=Vx$, then this problem is equivalent to: $$ \min_{y} \frac12\|y-Vc\|^2+\|Dy\| $$ Now, we need a simple fact. Assume $a,b\geq0$, then: $$ \sqrt{ab}=\min_{t\geq 0} \frac{a}{2t}+\frac{tb}{2} $$ Using this fact, let's rewrite this problem as: $$ \min_{t\geq 0,y} \frac12\|y-Vc\|^2+\frac{t}{2}\|Dy\|^2+\frac{1}{2t} $$ If you minimize $y$ first, then you can express $y$ in closed-form using parameter $t$: $$ y_i=\frac{(Vc)_i}{D_it+1} $$ If you substitute $y_i$ to the expression, you probably would get: $$ \min_{t\geq 0} \frac12\|Vc\|^2-\sum_i\frac{(Vc)_i^2}{2D_it+1}+\frac{1}{2t} $$ As you can see from this equation, if $D_i$'s are not identitcal, then you would encounter a high-order polynomial, which of course does not admit closed-form solution (and closed-form optimal value) as long as the order succeeds 4.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think the first paragraph ("A common wrong impression, which many novices in optimization would have...") of your answer is appropriate or adds any insight. It is at best an opinion, and at worst presumptuous. $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Aug 17, 2021 at 5:29
  • $\begingroup$ @dohmatob Sorry, no offence. That's my personal presumptuousness. I have deleted this paragraph. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 17, 2021 at 5:37
  • $\begingroup$ @dohmatob Here are some insights why this type of problems does not have closed-form solution. Usually, we can start to solve this problem analytically in $\mathbb R^2$ or $\mathbb R^3$ and see whether this solution in different regions have different types of expression. If such regions is hard to describe or the number of regions grows exponentially as the dimension grows, then it's very possible that this problem does not have closed-form solution. Sorry, I know it's vague and not rigorous, but I can not describe it more clearly. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 17, 2021 at 5:46
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think this can be made rigorous. Failure to find a short representation (a closed-formula if you will) is not proof of nonexistence of such a representation. These are two different things. $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Aug 17, 2021 at 5:52
  • $\begingroup$ Citing the case of $\|Ax\|_1$ doesn't do justice to the point you're trying to make. An $L_2$-norm (as in my problem), is not just any norm: it is the norm induced by the inner-product via which the Moreau envelop itself is defined, thus one could hope that it enjoys special previledges (and the problem somehow simplifies). In any case, I've sufficient knowledge in convex analysis to know that proxing a general composite function like $g \circ A$ (for convex $g$ and bounded linear operator $A$) is in general not feasible in closed-form, but this is besides the point in my question... $\endgroup$
    – dohmatob
    Commented Aug 17, 2021 at 5:52

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .