Re: [Algorithms] Best-fit brightness plane
Brought to you by:
vexxed72
|
From: Alex M. <am...@cs...> - 2003-12-09 08:26:16
|
>The SVD also does this - it factors a matrix into: > >U D VT > >Where U and VT are orthogonal matrices and D is a diagonal matrix. The >pseudo inverse is: I would just add here that U and VT are more than just orthogonal. They are chosen rather specially. They are orthonormal, and together provide orthonormal bases for all four fundamental subspaces of the original matrix A -- the column space, the row space, the nullspace and the left nullspace. One way to get some intuition for the decomposition is to think of U and VT as (essentially) rotation matrices (there's a possible reflection in there). Then you can roughly consider the decomposition as a rotation followed by a nonuniform scale, followed by a final rotation. >So this means that using the normal equations gives you the same result >as just using the pseudo-inverse of the orignal system of equations - >but you don't have to square the condition number of the matrix. With >large systmes (or ones where the normal equations has a zero eigenvalue) >using the SVD (and truncating small singular values) is more robust... I'll vouch for this too. In my experience, it's been beneficial to zero out not only very small (in an absolute sense) singular values, but also those singular values that are below some small fraction of the largest singular value (to get rid of singular values that are small in a relative sense). Alex |