robust rational approximation with barycentric
play

Robust rational approximation with barycentric representations - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Robust rational approximation with barycentric representations Silviu Filip , CAIRN team, Univ Rennes, Inria, CNRS, IRISA joint work with Bernhard Beckermann, Yuji Nakatsukasa and Lloyd N. Trefethen March 13, 2018 1 / 17 Rational functions Why


  1. Robust rational approximation with barycentric representations Silviu Filip , CAIRN team, Univ Rennes, Inria, CNRS, IRISA joint work with Bernhard Beckermann, Yuji Nakatsukasa and Lloyd N. Trefethen March 13, 2018 1 / 17

  2. Rational functions Why are they important? → powerful approximations near singularities or on unbounded domains 2 / 17

  3. Rational functions Why are they important? → powerful approximations near singularities or on unbounded domains Some applications: elementary + special functions recursive filter design matrix exponentials & stiff PDEs optimal control problems ... 2 / 17

  4. Rational minimax approximation Input: f ∈ C ([ a, b ]) , target type ( m, n ) ∈ N 2 � p � Output: r ∗ ∈ R m,n = q , p ∈ R m [ x ] , q ∈ R n [ x ] s.t. � f − r ∗ � ∞ is minimal . → denote this minimax error with E m,n ( f ) 3 / 17

  5. Rational minimax approximation Input: f ∈ C ([ a, b ]) , target type ( m, n ) ∈ N 2 � p � Output: r ∗ ∈ R m,n = q , p ∈ R m [ x ] , q ∈ R n [ x ] s.t. � f − r ∗ � ∞ is minimal . → denote this minimax error with E m,n ( f ) → theoretical results: 3 / 17

  6. Rational minimax approximation Input: f ∈ C ([ a, b ]) , target type ( m, n ) ∈ N 2 � p � Output: r ∗ ∈ R m,n = q , p ∈ R m [ x ] , q ∈ R n [ x ] s.t. � f − r ∗ � ∞ is minimal . → denote this minimax error with E m,n ( f ) → theoretical results: existence & unicity of r ∗ [de la Vallée Poussin, Walsh] 3 / 17

  7. Rational minimax approximation Input: f ∈ C ([ a, b ]) , target type ( m, n ) ∈ N 2 � p � Output: r ∗ ∈ R m,n = q , p ∈ R m [ x ] , q ∈ R n [ x ] s.t. � f − r ∗ � ∞ is minimal . → denote this minimax error with E m,n ( f ) → theoretical results: existence & unicity of r ∗ [de la Vallée Poussin, Walsh] presence of the defect : → if r ∗ = p ∗ /q ∗ in irreducible form, then its defect is d = min { m − deg p ∗ , n − deg q ∗ } 3 / 17

  8. Rational minimax approximation Input: f ∈ C ([ a, b ]) , target type ( m, n ) ∈ N 2 � p � Output: r ∗ ∈ R m,n = q , p ∈ R m [ x ] , q ∈ R n [ x ] s.t. � f − r ∗ � ∞ is minimal . → denote this minimax error with E m,n ( f ) → theoretical results: existence & unicity of r ∗ [de la Vallée Poussin, Walsh] presence of the defect : → if r ∗ = p ∗ /q ∗ in irreducible form, then its defect is d = min { m − deg p ∗ , n − deg q ∗ } Alternation Theorem [Achieser 1930]: → f − r ∗ equioscillates at least m + n + 2 − d times 3 / 17

  9. A classic example: f ( x ) = | x | , x ∈ [ − 1 , 1] 4 / 17

  10. A classic example: f ( x ) = | x | , x ∈ [ − 1 , 1] → consider best uniform approximations: degree 8 polynomial Error curve 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 4 / 17

  11. A classic example: f ( x ) = | x | , x ∈ [ − 1 , 1] → consider best uniform approximations: degree 8 polynomial type (4 , 4) rational function Error curve 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 4 / 17

  12. A classic example: f ( x ) = | x | , x ∈ [ − 1 , 1] → asymptotic behavior E n, 0 ( f ) ∼ β/n, β = 0 . 2801 ... [Varga & Carpenter 1985] E n,n ( f ) ∼ 8 e −√ n , [Newman 1964, Stahl 1993] 5 / 17

  13. A classic example: f ( x ) = | x | , x ∈ [ − 1 , 1] → asymptotic behavior E n, 0 ( f ) ∼ β/n, β = 0 . 2801 ... [Varga & Carpenter 1985] E n,n ( f ) ∼ 8 e −√ n , [Newman 1964, Stahl 1993] → rational minimax approximations can be difficult to compute e.g. [Varga, Ruttan & Carpenter 1991] conjecture Stahl’s result using 200-digit arithmetic for n � 80 5 / 17

  14. A classic example: f ( x ) = | x | , x ∈ [ − 1 , 1] → asymptotic behavior E n, 0 ( f ) ∼ β/n, β = 0 . 2801 ... [Varga & Carpenter 1985] E n,n ( f ) ∼ 8 e −√ n , [Newman 1964, Stahl 1993] → rational minimax approximations can be difficult to compute e.g. [Varga, Ruttan & Carpenter 1991] conjecture Stahl’s result using 200-digit arithmetic for n � 80 → codes (the Remez algorithm): Maple: numapprox[minimax] Mathematica: MinimaxApproximation 5 / 17

  15. A classic example: f ( x ) = | x | , x ∈ [ − 1 , 1] → asymptotic behavior E n, 0 ( f ) ∼ β/n, β = 0 . 2801 ... [Varga & Carpenter 1985] E n,n ( f ) ∼ 8 e −√ n , [Newman 1964, Stahl 1993] → rational minimax approximations can be difficult to compute e.g. [Varga, Ruttan & Carpenter 1991] conjecture Stahl’s result using 200-digit arithmetic for n � 80 → codes (the Remez algorithm): Maple: numapprox[minimax] Mathematica: MinimaxApproximation Chebfun (Matlab): minimax 5 / 17

  16. A classic example: f ( x ) = | x | , x ∈ [ − 1 , 1] 10 0 10 -5 10 -10 10 -15 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 10 -12 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 10 -12 10 -10 10 -8 10 -6 10 -4 10 -2 10 0 6 / 17

  17. Barycentric representations → many different ways of representing rational functions monomial/monomial, Chebyshev/Chebyshev, partial fraction, etc. 7 / 17

  18. Barycentric representations → many different ways of representing rational functions monomial/monomial, Chebyshev/Chebyshev, partial fraction, etc. → barycentric form for type ( n, n ) rational functions n n � r ( z ) = N ( z ) α k β k � � D ( z ) = z − t k z − t k k =0 k =0 Notation: { α k } , { β k } barycentric coefficients { t k } support points 7 / 17

  19. Barycentric representations → many different ways of representing rational functions monomial/monomial, Chebyshev/Chebyshev, partial fraction, etc. → barycentric form for type ( n, n ) rational functions n n � r ( z ) = N ( z ) α k β k � � D ( z ) = z − t k z − t k k =0 k =0 Notation: { α k } , { β k } barycentric coefficients { t k } support points Why use adaptive barycentric formulas? → problem dependent { t k } ⇒ well conditioned representation 7 / 17

  20. The rational Remez algorithm 8 / 17

  21. The rational Remez algorithm Some assumptions: no defect ( d = 0 ) → required diagonal case m = n → for convenience 8 / 17

  22. The rational Remez algorithm Some assumptions: no defect ( d = 0 ) → required diagonal case m = n → for convenience Step 1: choose a reference set a � x 0 < · · · < x 2 n +1 � b 8 / 17

  23. The rational Remez algorithm Some assumptions: no defect ( d = 0 ) → required diagonal case m = n → for convenience Step 1: choose a reference set a � x 0 < · · · < x 2 n +1 � b → iterate the following steps until convergence: 8 / 17

  24. The rational Remez algorithm Some assumptions: no defect ( d = 0 ) → required diagonal case m = n → for convenience Step 1: choose a reference set a � x 0 < · · · < x 2 n +1 � b → iterate the following steps until convergence: Step 2: find r ∈ R n,n and λ ∈ R s.t. f ( x k ) − r ( x k ) = ( − 1) k +1 λ, k = 0 , . . . , 2 n + 1 8 / 17

  25. The rational Remez algorithm Some assumptions: no defect ( d = 0 ) → required diagonal case m = n → for convenience Step 1: choose a reference set a � x 0 < · · · < x 2 n +1 � b → iterate the following steps until convergence: Step 2: find r ∈ R n,n and λ ∈ R s.t. f ( x k ) − r ( x k ) = ( − 1) k +1 λ, k = 0 , . . . , 2 n + 1 Step 3: among local extrema of f − r , take 2 n + 2 new points a � x ′ 0 < · · · < x ′ 2 n +1 � b, f − r alternates in sign + at least one global extrema over [ a, b ] and | f ( x ′ k ) − r ( x ′ k ) | � | λ | , k = 0 , . . . , 2 n + 1 8 / 17

  26. The rational Remez algorithm Convergence: → usually quadratic [Curtis & Osborne 1966] → guaranteed only if starting reference set is close enough to optimal 9 / 17

  27. The rational Remez algorithm Convergence: → usually quadratic [Curtis & Osborne 1966] → guaranteed only if starting reference set is close enough to optimal What can go wrong? → no pole-free solution in Step 2 9 / 17

  28. Step 1 : initial reference set → need suff. good initial guess for { x k } 10 / 17

  29. Step 1 : initial reference set → need suff. good initial guess for { x k } Our strategy: use Carathéodory-Fejér (CF) approximation [Trefethen & Gutknecht 1983] AAA-Lawson approx. (adaptively re-weighted least squares AAA variant) extrapolation from lower degree approx. ( (2 , 2) , (3 , 3) , (4 , 4) , . . . ) 10 / 17

  30. Step 2 : find r → find r = N/D ∈ R n,n s.t. N ( x k ) = D ( x k )( f ( x k ) − ( − 1) k +1 λ ) , k = 0 , . . . , 2 n + 1 11 / 17

  31. Step 2 : find r → find r = N/D ∈ R n,n s.t. N ( x k ) = D ( x k )( f ( x k ) − ( − 1) k +1 λ ) , k = 0 , . . . , 2 n + 1 → matrix form       f ( x 0 ) − 1 f ( x 1 ) 1       Cα =  − λ  Cβ,   ...     − 1          ...  f ( x 2 n +1 ) C ∈ R (2 n +2) × ( n +1) Cauchy matrix, C k,j = 1 / ( x k − t j ) 11 / 17

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend