l n 1 l n 2 l nn 1 1 1039 where the l ij j 1 n 1 i j 1 n are the multipliers

# L n 1 l n 2 l nn 1 1 1039 where the l ij j 1 n 1 i j

• 213
• 100% (2) 2 out of 2 people found this document helpful

This preview shows page 170 - 173 out of 213 pages.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . l n 1 l n 2 · · · l n,n - 1 1 , (10.39) where the l ij , j = 1 , . . . , n - 1, i = j + 1 , . . . , n are the multipliers (com- puted after all the rows have been rearranged), we arrive at the anticipated factorization PA = LU . Incidentally, up to sign, Gaussian elimination also produces the determinant of A because det( PA ) = ± det( A ) = det( LU ) = det( U ) = a (1) 11 a (2) 22 · · · a ( n ) nn (10.40) and so det( A ) is plus or minus the product of all the pivots in the elimination process. In the implementation of Gaussian elimination the array storing the aug- mented matrix A b is overwritten to save memory. The pseudo code with partial pivoting (assuming a i,n +1 = b i , i = 1 , . . . , n ) is presented in Algo- rithm 3. 10.2.1 The Cost of Gaussian Elimination We now do an operation count of Gaussian elimination to solve an n × n linear system Ax = b . We focus on the elimination as we already know that the work for the step of backward substitution is O ( n 2 ). For each round of elimination, j = 1 , . . . , n - 1, we need one division to compute each of the n - j multipliers and ( n - j )( n - j + 1) multiplications and to ( n - j )( n - j + 1) sums (subtracts) perform the eliminations. Thus, the total number number of operations is W ( n ) = n - 1 X j =1 [2( n - j )( n - j + 1) + ( n - j )] = n - 1 X j =1 2( n - j ) 2 + 3( n - j ) (10.41) and using (10.10) and m X i =1 i 2 = m ( m + 1)(2 m + 1) 6 , (10.42)
162 CHAPTER 10. LINEAR SYSTEMS OF EQUATIONS I Algorithm 3 Gaussian Elimination with Partial Pivoting 1: for j = 1 , . . . , n - 1 do 2: Find m such that | a mj | = max j i n | a ij | 3: if | a mj | = 0 then 4: stop . Matrix is singular 5: end if 6: a jk a mk , k = j, . . . , n + 1 . Exchange rows 7: for i = j + 1 , . . . , n do 8: m a ij /a jj . Compute multiplier 9: a ik a ik - m * a jk , k = j + 1 , . . . , n + 1 . Elimination 10: a ij m . Store multiplier 11: end for 12: end for 13: for i = n, n - 1 , . . . , 1 do . Backward Substitution 14: x i a i,n +1 - n X j = i +1 a ij x j ! /a ii 15: end for we get W ( n ) = 2 3 n 3 + O ( n 2 ) . (10.43) Thus, Gaussian elimination is computationally rather expensive for large systems of equations. 10.3 LU and Choleski Factorizations If Gaussian elimination can be performed without row interchanges, then we obtain an LU factorization of A , i.e. A = LU . This factorization can be advantageous when solving many linear systems with the same n × n matrix A but different right hand sides because we can turn the problem Ax = b into two triangular linear systems, which can be solved much more economically in O ( n 2 ) operations. Indeed, from LUx = b and setting y = Ux we have Ly = b, (10.44) Ux = y. (10.45)
10.3. LU AND CHOLESKI FACTORIZATIONS 163 Given b , we can solve the first system for y with forward substitution and then we solve the second system for x with backward substitution. Thus, while the LU factorization of A has an O ( n 3 ) cost, subsequent solutions to the linear system with the same matrix A but different right hand sides can be done in O ( n 2 ) operations. When can we obtain the factorization A = LU ? the following result provides a useful sufficient condition.
• • • 