Steepest Descent and Conjugate Gradient Methods with Variable Preconditioning

From MaRDI portal
Publication:3537448

DOI10.1137/060675290zbMATH Open1156.65030arXivmath/0605767OpenAlexW2161992803WikidataQ56504438 ScholiaQ56504438MaRDI QIDQ3537448FDOQ3537448


Authors: Ilya V. Lashuk, Andrew Knyazev Edit this on Wikidata


Publication date: 6 November 2008

Published in: SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications (Search for Journal in Brave)

Abstract: We analyze the conjugate gradient (CG) method with variable preconditioning for solving a linear system with a real symmetric positive definite (SPD) matrix of coefficients A. We assume that the preconditioner is SPD on each step, and that the condition number of the preconditioned system matrix is bounded above by a constant independent of the step number. We show that the CG method with variable preconditioning under this assumption may not give improvement, compared to the steepest descent (SD) method. We describe the basic theory of CG methods with variable preconditioning with the emphasis on ``worst case' scenarios, and provide complete proofs of all facts not available in the literature. We give a new elegant geometric proof of the SD convergence rate bound. Our numerical experiments, comparing the preconditioned SD and CG methods, not only support and illustrate our theoretical findings, but also reveal two surprising and potentially practically important effects. First, we analyze variable preconditioning in the form of inner-outer iterations. In previous such tests, the unpreconditioned CG inner iterations are applied to an artificial system with some fixed preconditioner as a matrix of coefficients. We test a different scenario, where the unpreconditioned CG inner iterations solve linear systems with the original system matrix A. We demonstrate that the CG-SD inner-outer iterations perform as well as the CG-CG inner-outer iterations in these tests. Second, we show that variable preconditioning may surprisingly accelerate the SD and thus the CG convergence. Specifically, we compare the CG methods using a two-grid preconditioning with fixed and randomly chosen coarse grids, and observe that the fixed preconditioner method is twice as slow as the method with random preconditioning.


Full work available at URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0605767




Recommendations





Cited In (14)





This page was built for publication: Steepest Descent and Conjugate Gradient Methods with Variable Preconditioning

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q3537448)