In this paper we study the problem of predictability in partially observable discrete event systems, i.e., the question whether an observer can predict the occurrence of a fault. We extend the definition of predictability to consider the time interval where the fault will occur: the @math -predictability does not only specify that the fault will be predicted before it occurs, but also that the predictor will be able to predict that its occurrence will occur in @math to @math observations from now. We also provide a quadratic algorithm that decides predictability of the system.
Together with J 'eron and Marchand, they proposed an additional improvement to lower the complexity down to quadratic @cite_8 . We claim here that their algorithm is not quite quadratic (we discuss this question at the end of this section). Their approach is very similar to the approach presented in the previous section: They construct a twin plant and verify predictability by checking whether there exists a pair @math such that @math and @math .
@cite_8
2343345052 2963964051 2170546552 2950958145
This paper concerns the worst-case complexity of Gauss-Seidel method for solving a positive semi-definite linear system; or equivalently, that of cyclic coordinate descent (C-CD) for minimizing a convex quadratic function. The known provable complexity of C-CD can be @math times slower than gradient descent (GD) and @math times slower than randomized coordinate descent (R-CD). However, these gaps seem rather puzzling since so far they have not been observed in practice; in fact, C-CD usually converges much faster than GD and sometimes comparable to R-CD. Thus some researchers believe the gaps are due to the weakness of the proof, but not that of the C-CD algorithm itself. In this paper we show that the gaps indeed exist. We prove that there exists an example for which C-CD takes at least @math or @math operations, where @math is the condition number, @math is a well-studied quantity that determines the convergence rate of R-CD, and @math hides the dependency on @math . This implies that C-CD can indeed be @math times slower than GD, and @math times slower than R-CD in the worst case. Our result establishes one of the few examples in continuous optimization that demonstrates a large gap between a deterministic algorithm and its randomized counterpart. Based on the example, we establish several almost tight complexity bounds of C-CD for quadratic problems. One difficulty with the analysis of the constructed example is that the spectral radius of a non-symmetric iteration matrix does not necessarily constitutes a lower bound for the convergence rate. We prove conditional near-quadratic running time lower bounds for approximate Bichromatic Closest Pair with Euclidean, Manhattan, Hamming, or edit distance. Specifically, unless the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH) is false, for every δ>0 there exists a constant e>0 such that computing a (1+e)-approximation to the Bichromatic Closest Pair requires Ω(n2−δ) time. In particular, this implies a near-linear query time for Approximate Nearest Neighbor search with polynomial preprocessing time. Our reduction uses the recently introduced Distributed PCP framework, but obtains improved efficiency using Algebraic Geometry (AG) codes. Efficient PCPs from AG codes have been constructed in other settings before, but our construction is the first to yield new hardness results. Mulmuley [Mul12a] recently gave an explicit version of Noether’s Normalization lemma for ring of invariants of matrices under simultaneous conjugation, under the conjecture that there are deterministic black-box algorithms for polynomial identity testing (PIT). He argued that this gives evidence that constructing such algorithms for PIT is beyond current techniques. In this work, we show this is not the case. That is, we improve Mulmuley’s reduction and correspondingly weaken the conjecture regarding PIT needed to give explicit Noether Normalization. We then observe that the weaker conjecture has recently been nearly settled by the authors ([FS12]), who gave quasipolynomial size hitting sets for the class of read-once oblivious algebraic branching programs (ROABPs). This gives the desired explicit Noether Normalization unconditionally, up to quasipolynomial factors. As a consequence of our proof we give a deterministic parallel polynomial-time algorithm for deciding if two matrix tuples have intersecting orbit closures, under simultaneous conjugation. We also study the strength of conjectures that Mulmuley requires to obtain similar results as ours. We prove that his conjectures are stronger, in the sense that the computational model he needs PIT algorithms for is equivalent to the well-known algebraic branching program (ABP) model, which is provably stronger than the ROABP model. Finally, we consider the depth-3 diagonal circuit model as defined by Saxena [Sax08], as PIT algorithms for this model also have implications in Mulmuley’s work. Previous work (such as [ASS12] and [FS12]) have given quasipolynomial size hitting sets for this model. In this work, we give a much simpler construction of such hitting sets, using techniques of Shpilka and Volkovich [SV09]. We consider the problem of selecting the best subset of exactly @math columns from an @math matrix @math . We present and analyze a novel two-stage algorithm that runs in @math time and returns as output an @math matrix @math consisting of exactly @math columns of @math . In the first (randomized) stage, the algorithm randomly selects @math columns according to a judiciously-chosen probability distribution that depends on information in the top- @math right singular subspace of @math . In the second (deterministic) stage, the algorithm applies a deterministic column-selection procedure to select and return exactly @math columns from the set of columns selected in the first stage. Let @math be the @math matrix containing those @math columns, let @math denote the projection matrix onto the span of those columns, and let @math denote the best rank- @math approximation to the matrix @math . Then, we prove that, with probability at least 0.8, @math This Frobenius norm bound is only a factor of @math worse than the best previously existing existential result and is roughly @math better than the best previous algorithmic result for the Frobenius norm version of this Column Subset Selection Problem (CSSP). We also prove that, with probability at least 0.8, @math This spectral norm bound is not directly comparable to the best previously existing bounds for the spectral norm version of this CSSP. Our bound depends on @math , whereas previous results depend on @math ; if these two quantities are comparable, then our bound is asymptotically worse by a @math factor.