Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Euclidean distance degree in manifold optimization

Zehua Lai, Lek-Heng Lim, Ke Ye

TL;DR

This work computes the Euclidean distance degree (ED) for the flag, Grassmann, and Stiefel manifolds embedded as real affine subvarieties, using their complex loci to apply algebraic geometry. The authors show that EDs take explicit, parameter-free forms: $\text{ED}( ext{Flag})=\binom{n}{k_1,k_2-k_1,\dots,n-k_p}$, $\text{ED}(\text{Gr})=\binom{n}{k}$, and $\text{ED}(\text{V}_B)=2^k$, with extensions to Schubert subvarieties yielding $\binom{m-k}{l-k}$. They provide exact stationary-point characterizations and, in many cases, closed-form nearest-point (projection) solutions, shedding light on the computational complexity of manifold optimization. The results suggest inherent tractability challenges for these common manifolds while framing ED as a useful, objective complexity measure; the paper also outlines open problems on the symplectic Grassmannian and general Schubert varieties.

Abstract

We determine the Euclidean distance degrees of the three most common manifolds arising in manifold optimization: flag, Grassmann, and Stiefel manifolds. For the Grassmannian, we will also determine the Euclidean distance degree of an important class of Schubert varieties that often appear in applications. Our technique goes further than furnishing the value of the Euclidean distance degree; it will also yield closed-form expressions for all stationary points of the Euclidean distance function in each instance. We will discuss the implications of these results on the tractability of manifold optimization problems.

Euclidean distance degree in manifold optimization

TL;DR

This work computes the Euclidean distance degree (ED) for the flag, Grassmann, and Stiefel manifolds embedded as real affine subvarieties, using their complex loci to apply algebraic geometry. The authors show that EDs take explicit, parameter-free forms: , , and , with extensions to Schubert subvarieties yielding . They provide exact stationary-point characterizations and, in many cases, closed-form nearest-point (projection) solutions, shedding light on the computational complexity of manifold optimization. The results suggest inherent tractability challenges for these common manifolds while framing ED as a useful, objective complexity measure; the paper also outlines open problems on the symplectic Grassmannian and general Schubert varieties.

Abstract

We determine the Euclidean distance degrees of the three most common manifolds arising in manifold optimization: flag, Grassmann, and Stiefel manifolds. For the Grassmannian, we will also determine the Euclidean distance degree of an important class of Schubert varieties that often appear in applications. Our technique goes further than furnishing the value of the Euclidean distance degree; it will also yield closed-form expressions for all stationary points of the Euclidean distance function in each instance. We will discuss the implications of these results on the tractability of manifold optimization problems.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 6 sections, 15 theorems, 63 equations.

Key Result

Proposition 3.1

Let $A\in \mathop{\mathrm{\mathsf{S}}}\nolimits^2(\mathbb{R}^n)$ have distinct eigenvalues and let $A = Q \mathop{\mathrm{diag}}\nolimits(a_1,\dots, a_n) Q^{\mathsf{T}}$ be an eigenvalue decomposition with $Q \in \mathop{\mathrm{O}}\nolimits_n(\mathbb{R})$. Then $X \in \mathop{\mathrm{Flag}}\nolimi where $P_\tau$ is the permutation matrix associated to $\tau \in \mathfrak{S}_n$. The number of dis

Theorems & Definitions (26)

  • Proposition 3.1
  • proof
  • Lemma 3.2: Canonical form for complex symmetric matrices
  • Theorem 3.3
  • proof
  • Corollary 3.4
  • Corollary 3.5: Nearest point on a flag manifold
  • proof
  • Corollary 4.1
  • Corollary 4.2
  • ...and 16 more