Inverse problem for Lagrangian mechanics: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
en>CarrieVS
→Background and statement of the problem: Repairing links to disambiguation pages - You can help!
 
en>DG-on-WP
→Background and statement of the problem: corrected statement of variational problem
Line 1: Line 1:
Golda is what's created on my beginning certification even though it is not the name on my birth certificate. To perform lacross is the thing I adore most of all. For many years he's been residing in Alaska and he doesn't strategy on changing it. Distributing production is where her main earnings comes from.<br><br>Check out my web page :: [http://m-card.co.kr/xe/mcard_2013_promote01/29877 love psychic]
{{Multiple issues|
{{refimprove|date=April 2007}}
{{expert-subject|date=November 2008}}
}}
 
In mathematics, '''eigenvalue perturbation''' is a [[perturbation theory|perturbation]] approach to finding [[Eigenvector|eigenvalues and eigenvectors]] of systems perturbed from one with known eigenvectors and eigenvalues. It also allows one to determine the sensitivity of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors with respect to changes in the system. The following derivations are essentially self-contained and can be found in many texts on numerical linear algebra<ref name="Trefethen258">{{cite book |title=Numerical Linear Algebra |last=Trefethen |first=Lloyd N. |authorlink=Lloyd N. Trefethen|year=1997 |publisher=SIAM (Philadelphia, PA) |isbn=0-89871-361-7 |page=258 }}</ref>  or numerical functional analysis.
 
==Example==
Suppose we have solutions to the [[generalized eigenvalue problem]],
 
:<math>[K_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i} [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i}. \qquad (1)</math>
 
That is, we know <math>\lambda_{0i}</math> and <math>\mathbf{x}_{0i}</math> for <math>i=1,\dots,N</math>.  Now suppose we want to change the matrices by a small amount. That is, we want to let
 
:<math>[K] = [K_0]+[\delta K] \, </math>
 
and
 
:<math>[M] = [M_0]+[\delta M] \, </math>
 
where all of the <math>\delta</math> terms are much smaller than the corresponding term. We expect answers to be of the form
 
:<math>\lambda_i = \lambda_{0i}+\delta\lambda_{0i} \, </math>
 
and
 
:<math>\mathbf{x}_i = \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \delta\mathbf{x}_{0i}. \, </math>
 
==Steps==
We assume that the matrices are [[symmetric matrix|symmetric]] and [[positive-definite matrix|positive definite]] and assume we have scaled the eigenvectors such that
 
: <math>\mathbf{x}_{0j}^\top[M_0]\mathbf{x}_{0i} = \delta_i^j \qquad(2)</math>
 
where <math>\delta_i^j</math> is the [[Kronecker delta]].
 
Now we want to solve the equation
 
:<math>[K]\mathbf{x}_i = \lambda_i [M] \mathbf{x}_i. </math>
 
Substituting, we get
 
:<math>([K_0]+[\delta K])(\mathbf{x}_{0i} + \delta \mathbf{x}_{i}) = (\lambda_{0i}+\delta\lambda_{i})([M_0]+[\delta M])(\mathbf{x}_{0i}+\delta\mathbf{x}_{i}),</math>
 
which expands to
 
:<math>
\begin{align}
\left[K_0\right]\mathbf{x}_{0i} & + [\delta K]\mathbf{x}_{0i} + [K_0]\delta \mathbf{x}_i + [\delta K]\delta \mathbf{x}_i \\[6pt]
& =  \lambda_{0i}[M_0]\mathbf{x}_{0i}+
            \lambda_{0i}[M_0]\delta\mathbf{x}_i +
            \lambda_{0i}[\delta M]\mathbf{x}_{0i} +
            \delta\lambda_i[M_0]\mathbf{x}_{0i} \\[6pt]
& {} + \lambda_{0i}[\delta M]\delta\mathbf{x}_i +
          \delta\lambda_i[\delta M]\mathbf{x}_{0i} +
          \delta\lambda_i[M_0]\delta\mathbf{x}_i +
          \delta\lambda_i[\delta M]\delta\mathbf{x}_i.
\end{align}
</math>
 
Canceling from (1) leaves
 
:<math>
\begin{align}
\left[\delta K\right]\mathbf{x}_{0i} & + [K_0]\delta \mathbf{x}_i + [\delta K]\delta \mathbf{x}_i \\[6pt]
& =  \lambda_{0i}[M_0]\delta\mathbf{x}_i +
            \lambda_{0i}[\delta M]\mathbf{x}_{0i} +
            \delta\lambda_i[M_0]\mathbf{x}_{0i} \\[6pt]
& {} + \lambda_{0i}[\delta M]\delta\mathbf{x}_i +
          \delta\lambda_i[\delta M]\mathbf{x}_{0i} +
          \delta\lambda_i[M_0]\delta\mathbf{x}_i +
          \delta\lambda_i[\delta M]\delta\mathbf{x}_i.
\end{align}
</math>
 
Removing the higher-order terms, this simplifies to
 
:<math>[K_0] \delta\mathbf{x}_i+[\delta K] \mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i}[M_0] \delta \mathbf{x}_i + \lambda_{0i}[\delta M]\mathrm{x}_{0i} + \delta \lambda_i [M_0]\mathbf{x}_{0i}. \qquad(3)</math>
 
When the matrix is symmetric, the unperturbed eigenvectors are orthogonal and so we use them as a basis for the perturbed eigenvectors. That is, we want to construct
 
:<math>\delta \mathbf{x}_i = \sum_{j=1}^N \epsilon_{ij} \mathbf{x}_{0j} \qquad(4)</math>
 
where the <math>\epsilon_{ij}</math> are small constants that are to be determined.  Substituting (4) into (3) and rearranging gives
 
:<math>[K_0]\sum_{j=1}^N \epsilon_{ij} \mathbf{x}_{0j} + [\delta K]\mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i} [M_0] \sum_{j=1}^N \epsilon_{ij} \mathbf{x}_{0j} + \lambda_{0i} [\delta M] \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \delta\lambda_i [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i}. \qquad (5)</math>
 
Or:
:<math>\sum_{j=1}^N \epsilon_{ij} [K_0] \mathbf{x}_{0j} + [\delta K]\mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i} [M_0] \sum_{j=1}^N \epsilon_{ij} \mathbf{x}_{0j} + \lambda_{0i} [\delta M] \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \delta\lambda_i [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i}.</math>
 
By equation (1):
 
:<math>\sum_{j=1}^N \epsilon_{ij} \lambda_{0j} [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0j} + [\delta K]\mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i} [M_0] \sum_{j=1}^N \epsilon_{ij} \mathbf{x}_{0j} + \lambda_{0i} [\delta M] \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \delta\lambda_i [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i}. </math>
 
Because the eigenvectors are orthogonal, we can remove the summations by left multiplying by <math>\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top</math>:
 
:<math>\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top \epsilon_{ii} \lambda_{0i} [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[\delta K]\mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i} \mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[M_0] \epsilon_{ii} \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \lambda_{0i}\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top [\delta M] \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \delta\lambda_i\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i}. </math>
 
By use of equation (1) again:
 
:<math>\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[K_0] \epsilon_{ii} \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[\delta K]\mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i} \mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[M_0] \epsilon_{ii} \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \lambda_{0i}\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top [\delta M] \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \delta\lambda_i\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i}. ~~(6) </math>
 
The two terms containing <math>\epsilon_{ii}</math> are equal because left-multiplying (1) by <math>\mathbf{x}_{0i} ^\top</math> gives
 
:<math>\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[K_0]\mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i}\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[M_0]\mathbf{x}_{0i}.</math>
 
Canceling those terms in (6) leaves
 
:<math>\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[\delta K]\mathbf{x}_{0i} = \lambda_{0i} \mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[\delta M] \mathbf{x}_{0i} + \delta\lambda_i \mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top [M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i}.</math>
 
Rearranging gives
 
:<math>\delta\lambda_i  = \frac{\mathbf{x}^\top_{0i}([\delta K] - \lambda_{0i}[\delta M] )\mathbf{x}_{0i}}{\mathbf{x}_{0i}^\top[M_0] \mathbf{x}_{0i}}</math>
 
But by (2), this denominator is equal to 1. Thus
 
:<math>\delta\lambda_i  = \mathbf{x}^\top_{0i}([\delta K] - \lambda_{0i}[\delta M] )\mathbf{x}_{0i}</math>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;■
 
Then, by left-multiplying equation (5) by <math>\mathbf{x}_{0k}</math> (for <math>i\neq k</math>):
 
:<math>\epsilon_{ik} = \frac{\mathbf{x}^\top_{0k}([\delta K] - \lambda_{0i}[\delta M])\mathbf{x}_{0i}}{\lambda_{0i}-\lambda_{0k}}, \qquad i\neq k.</math>
 
Or by changing the name of the indices:
 
:<math>\epsilon_{ij} = \frac{\mathbf{x}^\top_{0j}([\delta K] - \lambda_{0i}[\delta M])\mathbf{x}_{0i}}{\lambda_{0i}-\lambda_{0j}}, \qquad i\neq j.</math>
 
To find <math>\epsilon_{ii}</math>, use
 
:<math>\mathbf{x}^\top_i[M]\mathbf{x}_i = 1 \Rightarrow \epsilon_{ii}=-\frac{1}{2}\mathbf{x}^\top_{0i}[\delta M]\mathbf{x}_{0i}.</math>
 
== Summary ==
:<math>\lambda_i = \lambda_{0i} + \mathbf{x}^\top_{0i} ([\delta K] - \lambda_{0i}[\delta M]) \mathbf{x}_{0i}</math>
and
:<math>\mathbf{x}_i = \mathbf{x}_{0i}(1 - \frac{1}{2} \mathbf{x}^\top_{0i}[\delta M] \mathbf{x}_{0i}) + \sum_{j=1\atop j\neq i}^N \frac{\mathbf{x}^\top_{0j}([\delta K] - \lambda_{0i}[\delta M])\mathbf{x}_{0i}}{\lambda_{0i}-\lambda_{0j}}\mathbf{x}_{0j}</math>
 
for infinitesimal  <math>\delta K </math> and <math>\delta M </math> (the high order terms in (3) being negligible)
 
==Results==
This means it is possible to efficiently do a [[sensitivity analysis]] on <math>\lambda_i</math> as a function of changes in the entries of the matrices. (Recall that the matrices are symmetric and so changing <math>K_{(k\ell)}</math> will also change <math>K_{(\ell k)}</math>, hence the <math>(2-\delta_k^\ell)</math> term.)
 
:<math>\frac{\partial \lambda_i}{\partial K_{(k\ell)}} = \frac{\partial}{\partial K_{(k\ell)}}\left(\lambda_{0i} + \mathbf{x}^\top_{0i} ([\delta K] - \lambda_{0i}[\delta M]) \mathbf{x}_{0i}\right) = x_{0i(k)} x_{0i(\ell)} (2 - \delta_k^\ell) </math>
 
and
 
:<math>\frac{\partial \lambda_i}{\partial M_{(k\ell)}} = \frac{\partial}{\partial M_{(k\ell)}}\left(\lambda_{0i} + \mathbf{x}^\top_{0i} ([\delta K] - \lambda_{0i}[\delta M]) \mathbf{x}_{0i}\right) =
\lambda_i x_{0i(k)} x_{0i(\ell)}(2-\delta_k^\ell).</math>
 
Similarly
 
:<math>\frac{\partial\mathbf{x}_i}{\partial K_{(k\ell)}} = \sum_{j=1\atop j\neq i}^N \frac{x_{0j(k)} x_{0i(\ell)}(2-\delta_k^\ell)}{\lambda_{0i}-\lambda_{0j}}\mathbf{x}_{0j}</math>
 
and
 
:<math>\frac{\partial \mathbf{x}_i}{\partial M_{(k\ell)}} =
    -\mathbf{x}_{0i}\frac{x_{0i(k)}x_{0i(\ell)}}{2}(2-\delta_k^\ell) -
  \sum_{j=1\atop j\neq i}^N
      \frac{\lambda_{0i}x_{0j(k)} x_{0i(\ell)}}{\lambda_{0i}-\lambda_{0j}}\mathbf{x}_{0j}(2-\delta_k^\ell).</math>
 
==See also==
 
* [[Bauer–Fike theorem]]
 
==References==
<references>
<!-- Please keep these in alphabetical order. -->
 
*{{cite book |first=Lloyd N. |last=Trefethen |year=1997 |title=Numerical Linear Algebra |publisher=SIAM |location=Philadelphia, PA|isbn = 0-89871-361-7}}
 
</references>
 
[[Category:Perturbation theory]]
[[Category:Linear algebra]]
[[Category:Numerical linear algebra]]

Revision as of 19:19, 17 January 2014

Template:Multiple issues

In mathematics, eigenvalue perturbation is a perturbation approach to finding eigenvalues and eigenvectors of systems perturbed from one with known eigenvectors and eigenvalues. It also allows one to determine the sensitivity of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors with respect to changes in the system. The following derivations are essentially self-contained and can be found in many texts on numerical linear algebra[1] or numerical functional analysis.

Example

Suppose we have solutions to the generalized eigenvalue problem,

[K0]𝐱0i=λ0i[M0]𝐱0i.(1)

That is, we know λ0i and 𝐱0i for i=1,…,N. Now suppose we want to change the matrices by a small amount. That is, we want to let

[K]=[K0]+[δK]

and

[M]=[M0]+[δM]

where all of the δ terms are much smaller than the corresponding term. We expect answers to be of the form

λi=λ0i+δλ0i

and

𝐱i=𝐱0i+δ𝐱0i.

Steps

We assume that the matrices are symmetric and positive definite and assume we have scaled the eigenvectors such that

𝐱0j⊤[M0]𝐱0i=δij(2)

where δij is the Kronecker delta.

Now we want to solve the equation

[K]𝐱i=λi[M]𝐱i.

Substituting, we get

([K0]+[δK])(𝐱0i+δ𝐱i)=(λ0i+δλi)([M0]+[δM])(𝐱0i+δ𝐱i),

which expands to

[K0]𝐱0i+[δK]𝐱0i+[K0]δ𝐱i+[δK]δ𝐱i=λ0i[M0]𝐱0i+λ0i[M0]δ𝐱i+λ0i[δM]𝐱0i+δλi[M0]𝐱0i+λ0i[δM]δ𝐱i+δλi[δM]𝐱0i+δλi[M0]δ𝐱i+δλi[δM]δ𝐱i.

Canceling from (1) leaves

[δK]𝐱0i+[K0]δ𝐱i+[δK]δ𝐱i=λ0i[M0]δ𝐱i+λ0i[δM]𝐱0i+δλi[M0]𝐱0i+λ0i[δM]δ𝐱i+δλi[δM]𝐱0i+δλi[M0]δ𝐱i+δλi[δM]δ𝐱i.

Removing the higher-order terms, this simplifies to

[K0]δ𝐱i+[δK]𝐱0i=λ0i[M0]δ𝐱i+λ0i[δM]x0i+δλi[M0]𝐱0i.(3)

When the matrix is symmetric, the unperturbed eigenvectors are orthogonal and so we use them as a basis for the perturbed eigenvectors. That is, we want to construct

δ𝐱i=∑j=1Nϵij𝐱0j(4)

where the ϵij are small constants that are to be determined. Substituting (4) into (3) and rearranging gives

[K0]∑j=1Nϵij𝐱0j+[δK]𝐱0i=λ0i[M0]∑j=1Nϵij𝐱0j+λ0i[δM]𝐱0i+δλi[M0]𝐱0i.(5)

Or:

∑j=1Nϵij[K0]𝐱0j+[δK]𝐱0i=λ0i[M0]∑j=1Nϵij𝐱0j+λ0i[δM]𝐱0i+δλi[M0]𝐱0i.

By equation (1):

∑j=1Nϵijλ0j[M0]𝐱0j+[δK]𝐱0i=λ0i[M0]∑j=1Nϵij𝐱0j+λ0i[δM]𝐱0i+δλi[M0]𝐱0i.

Because the eigenvectors are orthogonal, we can remove the summations by left multiplying by 𝐱0i⊤:

𝐱0i⊤ϵiiλ0i[M0]𝐱0i+𝐱0i⊤[δK]𝐱0i=λ0i𝐱0i⊤[M0]ϵii𝐱0i+λ0i𝐱0i⊤[δM]𝐱0i+δλi𝐱0i⊤[M0]𝐱0i.

By use of equation (1) again:

𝐱0i⊤[K0]ϵii𝐱0i+𝐱0i⊤[δK]𝐱0i=λ0i𝐱0i⊤[M0]ϵii𝐱0i+λ0i𝐱0i⊤[δM]𝐱0i+δλi𝐱0i⊤[M0]𝐱0i.(6)

The two terms containing ϵii are equal because left-multiplying (1) by 𝐱0i⊤ gives

𝐱0i⊤[K0]𝐱0i=λ0i𝐱0i⊤[M0]𝐱0i.

Canceling those terms in (6) leaves

𝐱0i⊤[δK]𝐱0i=λ0i𝐱0i⊤[δM]𝐱0i+δλi𝐱0i⊤[M0]𝐱0i.

Rearranging gives

δλi=𝐱0i⊤([δK]−λ0i[δM])𝐱0i𝐱0i⊤[M0]𝐱0i

But by (2), this denominator is equal to 1. Thus

δλi=𝐱0i⊤([δK]−λ0i[δM])𝐱0i   ■

Then, by left-multiplying equation (5) by 𝐱0k (for i≠k):

ϵik=𝐱0k⊤([δK]−λ0i[δM])𝐱0iλ0i−λ0k,i≠k.

Or by changing the name of the indices:

ϵij=𝐱0j⊤([δK]−λ0i[δM])𝐱0iλ0i−λ0j,i≠j.

To find ϵii, use

𝐱i⊤[M]𝐱i=1⇒ϵii=−12𝐱0i⊤[δM]𝐱0i.

Summary

λi=λ0i+𝐱0i⊤([δK]−λ0i[δM])𝐱0i

and

𝐱i=𝐱0i(1−12𝐱0i⊤[δM]𝐱0i)+∑j=1j≠iN𝐱0j⊤([δK]−λ0i[δM])𝐱0iλ0i−λ0j𝐱0j

for infinitesimal δK and δM (the high order terms in (3) being negligible)

Results

This means it is possible to efficiently do a sensitivity analysis on λi as a function of changes in the entries of the matrices. (Recall that the matrices are symmetric and so changing K(kℓ) will also change K(ℓk), hence the (2−δkℓ) term.)

∂λi∂K(kℓ)=∂∂K(kℓ)(λ0i+𝐱0i⊤([δK]−λ0i[δM])𝐱0i)=x0i(k)x0i(ℓ)(2−δkℓ)

and

∂λi∂M(kℓ)=∂∂M(kℓ)(λ0i+𝐱0i⊤([δK]−λ0i[δM])𝐱0i)=λix0i(k)x0i(ℓ)(2−δkℓ).

Similarly

∂𝐱i∂K(kℓ)=∑j=1j≠iNx0j(k)x0i(ℓ)(2−δkℓ)λ0i−λ0j𝐱0j

and

∂𝐱i∂M(kℓ)=−𝐱0ix0i(k)x0i(ℓ)2(2−δkℓ)−∑j=1j≠iNλ0ix0j(k)x0i(ℓ)λ0i−λ0j𝐱0j(2−δkℓ).

See also

References

  1. ↑ 20 year-old Real Estate Agent Rusty from Saint-Paul, has hobbies and interests which includes monopoly, property developers in singapore and poker. Will soon undertake a contiki trip that may include going to the Lower Valley of the Omo.

    My blog: http://www.primaboinca.com/view_profile.php?userid=5889534