• No se han encontrado resultados

OBSERVACIÓN SOBRE LAS ESTRATEGIAS METODOLÓGICAS UTILIZADAS

COLEGIO GIMNASIO LOS PORTALES Diseño de la Secuencia Didáctica

OBSERVACIÓN SOBRE LAS ESTRATEGIAS METODOLÓGICAS UTILIZADAS

After the projection onto the target hyperplaneH has been carried out, consider now the joint con- straint of H and the target hypersphere K. First note that L=HK is a hypercircle, that is a hypersphere in the subspaceH, with intrinsic dimensionality reduced by one:

Lemma 15 Consider L=H∩K andρ=λ2 2−λ

2

1/n. Then the following holds: (a) L=L˜ :={qH| kqmk2

2=ρ}. (b) L,∅if and only ifλ2≥λ1/√n.

Proof (a) Follows immediately from Remark 14.

(b)Lis nonempty if and only ifρ0 using (a), andρ= (λ2+λ1/√n) (λ2−λ1/√n). Hence, with

λ1,λ2>0 one obtainsρ≥0 if and only ifλ2−λ1/√n≥0.

HenceL,∅by the requirement thatλ2≤λ1≤ √nλ2. Further, the following observation follows immediately from Proposition 4 andkak2=kbk2=λ2for alla,bL:

Remark 16 For all a,bL it iskabk22=2 λ2

2− ha, bi , henceha,bi=λ2 2−1/2· ka−bk 2 2. Therefore, onL the dot product is equal to the Euclidean norm up to an additive constant. Next consider projections ontoLand note that the solution set with respect toDis not changed by this operation. The major arguments for this result have been taken over from Theis et al. (2005). Here, the statements from Lemma 15 have been incorporated and the resulting quadratic equation was solved explicitly, simplifying the original version of Theis et al. (2005).

Lemma 17 Let rH with r,m. Let s:=m+δ(rm)whereδ:=√ρ/krmk2. Then: (a) δ>0, s∈L, andkq−rk22− ks−rk 2 2=1/δ· kq−sk 2 2for all q∈L. (b) s=projL(r). (c) projD(r) =projD(s).

Proof (a) First note thatδ>0 because ofr,m. Clearlys= (1δ)m+δr. Further,sHbecause ofeTs=λ1, ands∈Lbecause ofks−mk22=ρand Lemma 15.

Let qL be arbitrary. One obtains kqk2 =ksk2 with q,sK and therefore application of Proposition 4 yieldskqrk22− ksrk22=2hsq,ri. With Remark 14 followshm, ri=λ2

1/nand krk22=krmk22+λ2

1/n. Hence,hs,ri= (1−δ)hm,ri+δhr, ri=λ21/n+δkr−mk22. On the other hand, fromsm=δ(rm)and hencer= (11/δ)m+1/δ·s, and using Remark 16 it follows that hq,ri= (11/δ)λ2

1/n+1/δ· λ22−1/2· kq−sk22

. Therefore withδkrmk22/δone obtains

hsq, rikrmk22+1/δ· λ2 1/n−λ22+1/2· kq−sk22 = 1 2δkq−sk 2 2, and the claim follows directly by substitution.

(b) LetqL, then (a) implieskqrk22− ksrk22=1/δ· kqsk2

2≥0 with equality if and only ifq=sbecause ofk·k2being positive definite. Thussis the unique projection ofrontoL.

(c) With (a) followskqsk22− kpsk22kqrk22− kprk22 for all p,qDbecause of DL. For projD(r)projD(s), letpprojD(r)andqD. By definitionkprk22≤ kqrk22, and thuskqsk22− kpsk220 withδ>0, hence pprojD(s). For the converse, letpprojD(s)and qD. Similarly,kqrk22− kp−rk 2 2=1/δ· kq−sk 2 2− kp−sk 2 2 ≥0, thuspprojD(r).

Lemma 17 does not hold whenr=m, which forms a null set. In practice, however, this can occur when the input vectorxfor Algorithm 1 is poorly chosen, for example if all entries are equal. In this case, projL(r) =L, hence any point fromLcan be chosen for further processing.

Remark 18 One possibility in the case r=m would be to choose the point s:=α ∑n−1

i=1ei+βen

whereα,βRfor sprojL(r), that is forcing the last entry to be unequal to the other ones. For satisfying sL, setα:=λ1/n+√ρ/√n(n−1)andβ:=λ1−α(n−1) =λ1/n−√ρ(n−1)/√n. This yields

αβ= √ρ 1/n(n1)+√n−1/n>0, henceα,β. This choice has the convenient side effect of s being sorted in descending order.

Combining these properties ofH andL, it can now be shown that projections ontoDare invariant to affine-linear transformations with positive scaling:

Corollary 19 Letα>0,βRand xRn. ThenprojD(αx+βe) =projD(x).

Proof Let α>0, βR and x Rn. With Lemma 13 and Lemma 17 it is enough to show that projL(projH(αx+βe)) =projL(projH(x)). Let ˜x:=αx+βe, ˜r:=projH(x)˜ and ˜s:=projL(r)˜ . Lemma 13 andeTe=nyield ˜r= (αx+βe) +1/n· λ1αeTxβeTee=αx+1/n· λ1αeTxe. Hence ˜ris independent ofβ. Lemma 17 yields ˜s=m+δ˜(r˜m), where ˜δ:=√ρ/kr˜mk2. Application of Proposition 4 yields kr˜k22=kαxk22+ 1/n· λ1−αeTx e 2 2+2 αx, 1/n· λ1αeTxe =α2kxk22+1/n· λ1αeTx λ1+αeTx=α2kxk2 2+1/n· λ 2 1−α2(eTx)2 , and with Remark 14 followskmk22=kk22λ2

1/n=α2 kxk22−1/n·(eTx)2

. Letr:=projH(x)and s:=projL(r), then Lemma 13 and Lemma 17 implyr=x+1/n· λ1eTxeands=m+δ(rm), whereδ:=√ρ/krmk2. Likewisekr−mk22=kxk22−1/n·(eTx)2, and henceδ/δ˜=kr˜−mk2/krmk2=α,

whereα>0 must hold. This yields ˜

s=m+δ˜(r˜m) =m+δ/α· αx+λ1/n·e−α/n·eTxe−λ1/n·e=m+δ x−1/n·eTxe=s, which shows that the projection is invariant.

Therefore, shifting and positive scaling of the argument of Algorithm 1 do not change the outcome. An overview of the steps carried out this far is given in Figure 8. Consider a point xRn and

s:=projL(projH(x)). WhensRn

≥0, then alreadys∈Dand hences∈projD(x). Therefore only

situations in whichs<Rn

≥0holds are relevant in the remainder of this discussion.

C.2 Simplex Geometry

The joint constraint of the target hyperplaneHwith non-negativity yields simplexC. The following definition is likewise to definitions from Chen and Ye (2011) and Michelot (1986):

Definition 20 For n∈N, n1, the set△n:={αRn

≥0|eTα=1}is calledcanonicaln-simplex. It is clear thatC=Rn

≥0∩H={λ1α|α∈ △n}is a scaled canonical simplex. Further, for an index set I⊆ {1, . . . ,n}the setCI ={c∈C|ci=0 for alli<I}is a face of the simplex, which intrin-

sically possesses the structure of a simplex itself—although of reduced intrinsic dimensionality. Consider the following observation on the topology ofCembedded in the subspaceH:

Proposition 21 Let c=λ1α∈C withα∈ △n. Then c∈∂C in the metric space (H,k·k2)if and only if there is a j∈ {1, . . . ,n}withαj=0.

D L ρ r m s C

Figure 8: Sketch of the situation in Section C.1, projected onto target hyperplaneH.ris the projec- tion of the input pointxontoH.sis the projection ofronto the hypercircleL, which has squared radiusρ. The intersection ofH with the non-negative orthant is a simplex and denoted byC. The feasible setDis the intersection ofCandL, and is marked with solid black lines. With Lemma 13 and Lemma 17 follows that projD(x) =projD(r) =projD(s), hence the next steps consist of projectingsontoCfor finding the projection ofxontoD.

The proof is simple and omitted as it does not contribute to deeper insight. Hence the facesCI are

subsets of∂C, which is the topological border ofCin(H, k·k2). Using Proposition 21 a statement on the inradius ofC can be made, which in turn can be used to show that for n=2 no simplex projection has to be carried out at all:

Proposition 22 The squared inradius of C isρin:= λ 2 1

n(n−1). It is L⊆C for n=2.

Proof BecauseC is closed and convex, it is enough to consider the distance between interior points and boundary points. Hence the insphere radius of a point pCcan be computed as being the minimum distance to any of the boundary points. With Proposition 21 these points can be characterized as points where at least one entry vanishes. Using Lagrange multipliers it can be shown that minc∈∂Ckm−ck22=ρin. Further, it can be shown that no point other thanmis center of a larger insphere. This is achieved by constructing projections on certain faces ofC, as is discussed in detail in the forthcoming Lemma 26. Whenn=2 andλ2≤λ1, which is fulfilled by requirement onλ1andλ2, thenρ=λ22−λ

2

1/n≤λ21/2=ρin, andL⊆Cfollows with Lemma 15.

The projection withinHfrom outside a simplex is unique and must be located on its boundary:

Remark 23 Let sH\C. ThenprojC(s)∂C in(H, k·k2).

The proof is obvious becauseCis closed and convex. By combination of Proposition 21 and Re- mark 23, it is now evident that the projection withinH ontoCyields vanishing entries. After the

first projection ontoH, this subspace is never left throughout the arguments presented here, such that Remark 23 always applies. It has yet to be shown that the projection ontoDpossesses zero entries in the same coordinates. This way, a reduction of problem dimensionality can be achieved, and an it- erative algorithm can be constructed to compute the projection ontoD. The algorithm is guaranteed to terminate at the latest when the problem dimensionality equals two with Proposition 22.