2
$\begingroup$

I have the following matrix inequality that I need to express as an LMI

$ A^T Q^{-1} A - Q + \sum_i A_i^T Q^{-1} A_i < 0$

($Q > 0$, $A = XQ+YB$, $A_i = X_i Q+Y_i B$)

which I rewrote to

$ A^T Q^{-1} A - Q < - \sum_i A_i^T Q^{-1} A_i$

Now I want to use Schur's complement and express this inequality as

$ \begin{bmatrix} -Q & A^T \\ A & -Q \end{bmatrix} < \sum_i \begin{bmatrix} 0 & A_i^T \\ A_i & Q \end{bmatrix} $

and therefore

$ \begin{bmatrix} -Q & A^T \\ A & -Q \end{bmatrix} - \sum_i \begin{bmatrix} 0 & A_i^T \\ A_i & Q \end{bmatrix} < 0 $

which is a form my solver, solving for Q and B, should be able to handle.

Can I use the Schur complement in this way and are these two inequalities equivalent?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Which variables are known and which variables do you want to solve for? $\endgroup$ – Kwin van der Veen Dec 1 '18 at 23:48
  • $\begingroup$ @KwinvanderVeen I have edited my question. X and Y are known, Q and B are unknown $\endgroup$ – Alex bGoode Dec 2 '18 at 1:51
  • $\begingroup$ The matrices $A_i$ are also known as well? $\endgroup$ – Kwin van der Veen Dec 2 '18 at 2:55
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, they have the same structure, $X_i$ and $Y_i$ are known $\endgroup$ – Alex bGoode Dec 2 '18 at 12:38
2
$\begingroup$

You can't use Schur's complement in that way. Namely when you have the matrix inequalities

$$ A - B^\top C^{-1} B \succ 0, \quad C \succ 0, $$

then you can combine this into the following one matrix inequality

$$ M = \begin{bmatrix} A & B^\top \\ B & C \end{bmatrix} \succ 0. $$

This is because $M$ can be decomposed as follows

$$ M = \underbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} I & B^\top C^{-1} \\ 0 & I \end{bmatrix} }_{T^\top} \begin{bmatrix} A - B^\top C^{-1} B & 0 \\ 0 & C \end{bmatrix} \underbrace{ \begin{bmatrix} I & 0 \\ C^{-1} B & I \end{bmatrix} }_{T}. $$

Namely $M \succ 0$ means that $x^\top M\,x > 0\ \forall\, x\neq0$. So when using $x=T\,y$ one gets $x^\top M\,x = y^\top T^\top M\,T\,y$. It holds that $x\neq0$ iff $y\neq0$, since $T$ is full rank (lower triangular with ones on the diagonal), thus it also has to hold that $T^\top M\,T \succ 0$.

But remember that this equivalent matrix inequality formulation only works because the matrix $T$ transforms $M$ into a block diagonal matrix with the blocks the original matrix inequalities. So your proposition only works if there exists a transformation $T$ such that

$$ T^\top \left( \begin{bmatrix} Q & -A^\top \\ -A & Q \end{bmatrix} + \sum_i \begin{bmatrix} 0 & A_i^\top \\ A_i & Q \end{bmatrix} \right) T $$

gives back the original matrix inequalities as blocks on the diagonal.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, I will need to take some time and understand your answer. Do you have any pointers on how I can transform my original problem into an LMI or should I post another question for this? $\endgroup$ – Alex bGoode Dec 2 '18 at 12:40
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexbGoode what are the sizes of $Y$ and $B$? If $Y$ has a rank equal to the size of $Q$ then you could define $A$ as a variable and later use that to solve for $B$. $\endgroup$ – Kwin van der Veen Dec 2 '18 at 12:50
  • $\begingroup$ Nevermind, you only have one $B$ and multiple $A$/$A_i$. $\endgroup$ – Kwin van der Veen Dec 2 '18 at 13:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.