2
MIN tr(ABCD)
s.t BC=I

An optimization problem with trace in the objective function, but matrix equation in the constraint. So, you see the problem right away when constructing the Lagrangian (you end up adding scalar with matrices).

I'm reading the solution and it goes like this when building the Lagrangian:

L=tr(ABCD) - tr((BC-I)*Z)

Can you explain this solution? Where did the Z come from? how does it help solving the problem mentioned above. How was tr() added to the constraint.

John Deterious
  • 261
  • 1
  • 8

1 Answers1

1

I think, you need the trace in this setting, since the constraint is not scalar, but matrix-valued. The $Z$ is your matrix-valued Lagrange multiplier, which cannot be scalar in this setting.

I have written down a the Lagrange approach for such very general equality constraints: \begin{align} \max_{x \in X} f(x) \\ \text{s.t. g(x) = 0}, \end{align} where $f:X \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$, and $g: X \rightarrow Y$, where $X$ and $Y$ are Hilbert spaces (like $\mathbb{R}^k$, $\mathcal{L}^2$,...).

The Lagrange function is given by $$L(x, \Lambda) = f(x) + \langle \Lambda, g(x) \rangle_Y,$$

where $\Lambda \in Y$ is the Lagrange multiplier, and $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle_Y$ is the inner product of $Y$.

The question is: Does the set of matrices that is some superset of the image of $BC-I$ in your notation, form a Hilbert space $Y$ with the trace of the product of two matrices being their inner product; i.e. $\langle A, B \rangle_X := \mathrm{trace}(AB)$? That is at least not obvious for me.

Jonas
  • 759
  • "Z is your matrix-valued Lagrange multiplier" Makes perfect sense. Thank you. – John Deterious Apr 08 '19 at 23:21
  • Does the answer explain where the trace comes to be, feeling still confused? – zyxue Aug 28 '21 at 22:21
  • I find the trace explained at https://math.stackexchange.com/a/1104412/348916, it's from inner product $\langle A, B \rangle = \text{tr}(A^T B)$, e.g. $A$ is the Lagrange multiplier, and $B$ is the matrix constraint. – zyxue Aug 29 '21 at 16:37