
Citation: Li-Tao Zhang, Chao-Qian Li, Yao-Tang Li. A parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(2): 1021-1033. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019048
[1] | Eduardo González-Olivares, Claudio Arancibia-Ibarra, Alejandro Rojas-Palma, Betsabé González-Yañez . Bifurcations and multistability on the May-Holling-Tanner predation model considering alternative food for the predators. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 4274-4298. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019213 |
[2] | Huanyi Liu, Hengguo Yu, Chuanjun Dai, Zengling Ma, Qi Wang, Min Zhao . Dynamical analysis of an aquatic amensalism model with non-selective harvesting and Allee effect. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 8857-8882. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021437 |
[3] | Pei Yu, Xiangyu Wang . Analysis on recurrence behavior in oscillating networks of biologically relevant organic reactions. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 5263-5286. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019263 |
[4] | Wenjie Yang, Qianqian Zheng, Jianwei Shen, Linan Guan . Bifurcation and pattern dynamics in the nutrient-plankton network. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(12): 21337-21358. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023944 |
[5] | Urszula Ledzewicz, Behrooz Amini, Heinz Schättler . Dynamics and control of a mathematical model for metronomic chemotherapy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2015, 12(6): 1257-1275. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.1257 |
[6] | V. Volpert, B. Xu, A. Tchechmedjiev, S. Harispe, A. Aksenov, Q. Mesnildrey, A. Beuter . Characterization of spatiotemporal dynamics in EEG data during picture naming with optical flow patterns. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(6): 11429-11463. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023507 |
[7] | Meiqiao Wang, Wuquan Li . Distributed adaptive control for nonlinear multi-agent systems with nonlinear parametric uncertainties. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7): 12908-12922. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023576 |
[8] | Rongjie Yu, Hengguo Yu, Chuanjun Dai, Zengling Ma, Qi Wang, Min Zhao . Bifurcation analysis of Leslie-Gower predator-prey system with harvesting and fear effect. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(10): 18267-18300. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023812 |
[9] | Wisdom S. Avusuglo, Kenzu Abdella, Wenying Feng . Stability analysis on an economic epidemiological model with vaccination. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2017, 14(4): 975-999. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2017051 |
[10] | Kelum Gajamannage, Erik M. Bollt . Detecting phase transitions in collective behavior using manifold's curvature. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2017, 14(2): 437-453. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2017027 |
Consider the following 2×2 block saddle point problems
A(xy)≡(ABT−B0)(xy)=(fg), | (1.1) |
where A∈Rn,n is symmetric positive definite, B∈Rm,n,m≤n. It appears in many different applications of scientific computing, such as constrained optimization [49], the finite element method for solving the Navier-Stokes equation [29,30,31], and constrained least squares problems and generalized least squares problems [1,38,44,45] and so on; see [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,20,35,39,40] and references therein.
In recent years, there has been a surge of interest in the saddle point problem of the form (1), and a large number of stationary iterative methods have been proposed. For example, Santos et al. [38] studied preconditioned iterative methods for solving the singular augmented system with A=I. Yuan et al. [44,45] proposed several variants of SOR method and preconditioned conjugate gradient methods for solving general augmented system (1) arising from generalized least squares problems where A can be symmetric and positive semidefinite and B can be rank deficient. The SOR-like method requires less arithmetic work per iteration step than other methods but it requires choosing an optimal iteration parameter in order to achieve a comparable rate of convergence. Golub et al. [32] presented SOR-like algorithms for solving linear systems (1). Darvishi et al. [28] studied SSOR method for solving the augmented systems. Bai et al. [2,3,23,49] presented GSOR method, parameterized Uzawa (PU) and the inexact parameterized Uzawa (PIU) methods for solving linear systems (1). Zhang and Lu [46] showed the generalized symmetric SOR method for augmented systems. Peng and Li [37] studied the unsymmetric block overrelaxation-type methods for saddle point. Bai and Golub [4,5,6,7,8,33,40] presented splitting iteration methods such as Hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting (HSS) iteration scheme and its preconditioned variants, Krylov subspace methods such as preconditioned conjugate gradient (PCG), preconditioned MINRES (PMINRES) and restrictively preconditioned conjugate gradient (RPCG) iteration schemes, and preconditioning techniques related to Krylov subspace methods such as HSS, block-diagonal, block-triangular and constraint preconditioners and so on. Bai and Wang's 2009 LAA paper [40] and Chen and Jiang's 2008 AMC paper [23] studied some general approaches about the relaxed splitting iteration methods. Wu, Huang and Zhao [42] presented modified SSOR (MSSOR) method for augmented systems. Cao, Du and Niu [19] introduced a shift-splitting preconditioner and a local shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems (1). Moreover, the authors studied some properties of the local shift-splitting preconditioned matrix and numerical experiments of a model stokes problem are presented to show the effectiveness of the proposed preconditioners. Recently, Chen and Ma [22] presented a generalized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems with symmetric positive definite (1, 1)-block and gave theoretical analysis and numerical experiments.
For large, sparse or structure matrices, iterative methods are an attractive option. In particular, Krylov subspace methods apply techniques that involve orthogonal projections onto subspaces of the form
K(A,b)≡span{b,Ab,A2b,...,An−1b,...}. |
The conjugate gradient method (CG), minimum residual method (MINRES) and generalized minimal residual method (GMRES) are common Krylov subspace methods. The CG method is used for symmetric, positive definite matrices, MINRES for symmetric and possibly indefinite matrices and GMRES for unsymmetric matrices [39].
In this paper, based on generalized shift-splitting preconditioners presented by Chen and Ma [22], I establish a parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems with symmetric positive definite (1, 1)-block. Furthermore, the preconditioner is based on a parameterized shift-splitting of the saddle point matrix, resulting in an unconditional convergent fixed-point iteration, which has the intersection with the generalized shift-splitting preconditioner. However, the relaxed parameters of the parameterized shift-splitting methods are not optimal and only lie in the convergence region of the method.
Recently, for the coefficient matrix of the augmented system (1.1), Chen and Ma [22] made the following splitting
A=12(αI+ABT−BβI)−12(αI−A−BTBβI), | (2.1) |
where α>0,β>0 are two constant numbers and I is the identity matrix (with appropriate dimension). Based on the iteration methods studied in [19,22], a parameterized shift-splitting of the saddle point matrix A can be constructed as follows:
A=12(αI+A(1−αβ)BT−BβI)−12(αI−A−(1+αβ)BTBβI), | (2.2) |
where α>0,β>0 are two constant numbers and I is the identity matrix (with appropriate dimension). By this special splitting, the following parameterized shift-splitting method can be defined for solving the saddle point problem (1.1):
Parameterized shift-splitting (PSS) method: Given initial vectors u0∈Rm+n, and two relaxed parameters α>0 and β>0. For k=0,1,2,... until the iteration sequence {uk} converges, compute
12(αI+A(1−αβ)BT−BβI)uk+1=12(αI−A−(1+αβ)BTBβI)uk+(fg), | (2.3) |
where α>0,β>0 are two constant numbers. It is easy to see that the iteration matrix of the Parameterized shift-splitting iteration is
Γ=(αI+A(1−αβ)BT−BβI)−1(αI−A−(1+αβ)BTBβI). | (2.4) |
If we use a Krylov subspace method such as GMRES (Generalized Minimal Residual) method or its restarted variant to approximate the solution of this system of linear equations, then
TPSS=12(αI+A(1−αβ)BT−BβI), | (2.5) |
can be served as a preconditioner. We call the preconditioner PPSS the parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for the nonsymmetric saddle point matrix A.
In every iteration of the parameterized shift-splitting iteration (2.5) or the preconditioned Krylov subspace method, we need solve a residual equation
(αI+A(1+αβ)BT−BβI)z=r | (2.6) |
needs to be solved for a given vector r at each step. Since the matrix PPSS has the following matrix factorization
TPSS=12(I1−αββBT0I)(A+αI+1−αββBTB00βI)(I0−1βBI). | (2.7) |
Let r=[rT1,rT2]T and z=[zT1,zT2]T, where r1,z1∈Rn and r2,z2∈Rm. Then by (8), it can resuly in
(z1z2)=(I01−αββI)(A+αI+1−αββBTB00βI)(I−1βBT0I)(r1r2). | (2.8) |
Hence, analogous to Algorithm 2.1 in [19], we can derive the following algorithmic version of the generalized shift-splitting iteration method.
Algorithm 2.1. For a given vector r=[rT1,rT2]T, the vector z=[zT1,zT2]T can be computed by (9) from the following steps:
Step 1: t1=r1−1−αββBTr2;
Step 2: Solve (A+αI+1−αββBTB)z1=t1;
Step 3: z2=1β(Bz1+r2).
Now, we turn to study the convergence of the parameterized shift-splitting iteration for solving symmetric saddle point problems. It is well known that the iteration method (2.5) is convergent for every initial guess if and only if ρ(Γ)<1, where ρ(Γ) denotes the spectral radius of Γ). Let λ be an eigenvalue of Γ) and [x∗,y∗]∗ be the corresponding eigenvector. Then we have
(αI−A−(1+αβ)BTBβI)(xy)=λ(αI+A(1−αβ)BT−BβI)(xy), | (2.9) |
or equivalently,
(λ−1)αx+(λ+1)Ax+(1+αβ+λ−λαβ)BTy=0,(λ+1)Bx+(1−λ)βy=0. | (2.10) |
To get the convergence of the parameterized shift-splitting iteration, we first give some lemmas.
Lemma 2.1. Let A be a symmetric positive definite matrix, and B has full row rank. Let Γ be defined as in (5) with α>0 and β>0. If λ be an eigenvalue of Γ, then λ≠±1.
Proof. Let [x∗,y∗]∗ be the corresponding eigenvector of λ. if λ=1, then from (11) we have
(ABTB0)(xy)=0. | (2.11) |
It is easy to get that the coefficient matrix of (2.11) is nonsingular. Hence x=0 and y=0. which contradicts the assumption that [x∗,y∗]∗ is an eigenvector of the iteration matrix Γ. So λ≠1.
Now, we prove that λ≠−1. If λ=−1, then from (2.10) we can obtain
−2αx+2αβBTy=0,and−2βy=0. | (2.12) |
Since α>0,β>0, from (2.12) we get x=0 and y=0, which also contradict the assumption that [x∗,y∗]∗ is an eigenvector of the iteration matrix Γ. So λ≠−1. This completes the proof.
Lemma 2.2. Assume A be a symmetric positive definite matrix, and B has full row rank. Let λ be an eigenvalue of Γ(with α>0 and β>0) and [x∗,y∗]∗ be the corresponding eigenvector with x∈Cn and y∈Cm. Then x≠0. Moreover, if y=0, then |λ|<1.
Proof. If x=0, then from (11) we have (1+αβ+λ−λαβ)BTy=0. By Lemma 2.1 we know that λ≠−1 and α>0,β>0. Thus we have BTy=0. Because BT has full column rank, we get y=0, which contradicts with the assumption that [x∗,y∗]∗ is an eigenvector. Thus x≠0. From Lemma 2.2 [21], we easy know |λ|≤∥(αI+A)−1(αI−A)∥2.
Theorem 2.3. Assume A∈Rn×n be a symmetric positive definite matrix, and B∈Rm×n has full row rank, and let α,β be two positive constants. Let ρ(Γ) denote the spectral radius of the parameterized shift-splitting iteration matrix. Then it holds that
ρ(Γ)<1,∀α>0,β>0, | (2.13) |
i.e., the parameterized shift-splitting iteration converges to the unique solution of the saddle point problem (1.1).
Proof. Let λ be an eigenvalue of Γ and [x∗,y∗]∗ be the corresponding eigenvector with x∈Cn and y∈Cm. By Lemma 2.1 we obtain λ≠1. Then we can obtain from (2.10) that
y=λ+1β(λ−1)Bx. | (2.14) |
Substituting (2.14) into the first equation of (2.10), we get
(λ−1)αx+(λ+1)Ax+(1+αβ+λ−λαβ)(λ+1)β(λ−1)BTBx=0. | (2.15) |
By Lemma 2.2, we obtain that x≠0. Multiplying β(λ−1) as well as x∗x∗x on both sides of Eq. (2.15), we have
αβ(λ−1)2+β(λ2−1)x∗Axx∗x+(1+αβ+λ−λαβ)(λ+1)x∗BTBxx∗x=0. | (2.16) |
Let
a=x∗Axx∗x,b=x∗BTBxx∗x. | (2.17) |
Because A is a symmetric positive definite matrix and B has full row rank, we get a>0 and b≥0. Substituting (2.17) into (2.16), we know that λ satisfies the following real quadratic equation
λ2+2b−2αβαβ+βa+b+αβbλ+αβ−βa+b+αβbαβ+βa+b+αβb=0. | (2.18) |
Then from Lemma 2.2, we know that a sufficient and necessary condition for the roots of the real quadratic equation (2.18) to satisfy |λ|<1 is
|αβ−βa+b+αβbαβ+βa+b+αβb|<1, | (2.19) |
and
|2b−2αβαβ+βa+b+αβb|<1+αβ−βa+b+αβbαβ+βa+b+αβb. | (2.20) |
It is easy to find that (2.19) and (2.20) hold for all α>0 and β>0 when a>0 and b>0. Also, if b=0, there is a x≠0 such that Bx=0. Then by Lemma 2.1, from (2.10) we have y=0. Hence, by Lemma 2.2 we have |λ|<1. Thus ρ(Γ)<1. Then, we get (2.13), e.e., the parameterized shift-splitting iteration converges to the unique solution of the saddle point problem (1.1).
Remark 2.1. When α=0, The parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner reduces to the local shift-splitting preconditioner. Moreover, the parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner in this paper and the generalized shift-splitting preconditioner in [21] are two different preconditioning modes. Moreover, they have an intersection.
Remark 2.2 From Theorem 2.3, we know that the parameterized shift-splitting iteration method is uncondit0inally convergent.
In this section, I present one example to illustrate the effectiveness of the parameter shift-splitting preconditioner for GMRES(m) method and MINRES to solve the linear systems (1) in the sense of iteration step (denoted as "It"), elapsed CPU time in seconds (denoted as "CPU"), and relative residual error (denoted as "RES"). All numerical examples are carried out in Matlab 7.0. In our experiments, all runs with respect to both GSS method and PSS method are started from initial vector ((x(0))T,(y(0))T)T=0, and terminated if the current iteration satisfy RES<10−6.
Example 3.1. [18] Consider the linear system of equations (1) with
T=I⊗V+V⊗IandW=10(I⊗VC+VC⊗I)+9(e1eTl+eleT1)⊗I, |
where V=tridiag(−1,2,−1)∈Rl×l,VC=V−e1eTl−eleT1∈Rl×l and e1 and el are the first and last unit vectors in Rl, respectively. Here T and K correspond to the five-point centered difference matrices approximating the negative Laplacian operator with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions and periodic boundary conditions, respectively, on a uniform mesh in the unit square [0,1]×[0,1] with the mesh-size h=1l+1.
In Figures 1 ~ 4, I report the eigenvalue distribution for the generalized shift-splitting preconditioned matrix T−1GSSA and the parameter shift-splitting preconditioned matrix for different parameter, respectively. In Tables 1 ~ 4, we report iteration counts, relative residual and cpu time about preconditioned matrices T−1GSSA and T−1PSSA with l=16 and l=24 when choosing different parameters. Figures 1 ~ 4 and Tables 1 ~ 4 show that the GSS preconditioner and PSS preconditioner have the same eigenvalue distribution and the convergence when choosing different parameters.
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2 | 6.5007×10−7 | 0.147 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.0657×10−7 | 0.074 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 6.5785×10−7 | 0.367 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 5.9859×10−7 | 0.262 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 2 | 6.4956×10−7 | 0.142 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2 | 6.5008×10−7 | 0.146 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.0664×10−7 | 0.072 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 4.6159×10−7 | 0.329 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 6.1723×10−7 | 0.268 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 2 | 6.4961×10−7 | 0.151 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 9(1) | 1.8872×10−8 | 0.394 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 8(1) | 3.4887×10−7 | 0.359 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 13(1) | 3.2668×10−7 | 0.499 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 11(1) | 4.7948×10−7 | 0.432 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 13(1) | 8.5534×10−7 | 0.530 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 9(1) | 1.8871×10−8 | 0.402 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 8(1) | 3.4834×10−7 | 0.358 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 13(1) | 3.2640×10−7 | 0.510 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 11(1) | 4.7939×10−7 | 0.432 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 13(1) | 8.5183×10−7 | 0.493 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2.5 | 9.8445×10−7 | 1.557 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.6139×10−7 | 0.583 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 7.2770×10−7 | 3.166 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 9.6488×10−7 | 2.366 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 17 | 9.2708×10−7 | 10.313 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2.5 | 9.8383×10−7 | 1.551 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.6147×10−7 | 0.580 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 6.9932×10−7 | 3.382 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 9.4912×10−7 | 2.391 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 20.5 | 9.0799×10−7 | 12.469 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 16(1) | 7.7884×10−8 | 5.527 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 13(1) | 7.5976×10−7 | 4.262 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 20(1) | 6.4167×10−7 | 6.343 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 16(1) | 8.7812×10−7 | 5.338 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 21(1) | 6.5959×10−7 | 6.970 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 16(1) | 7.7882×10−8 | 5.500 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 13(1) | 7.5943×10−7 | 4.400 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 20(1) | 6.4171×10−7 | 6.298 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 16(1) | 8.7812×10−7 | 5.288 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 21(1) | 6.6135×10−7 | 6.897 |
In this paper, the author presents a parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems with symmetric positive definite (1,1)−block. Theoretical analysis shows that PSS method is an unconditional convergent fixed-point iteration. Furthermore, numerical example indicates that the GSS preconditioner and PSS preconditioner have the same eigenvalue distribution and the convergence when choosing different parameters.
This research of this author is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11226337, 11501525), Excellent Youth Foundation of Science & Technology Innovation of Henan Province (184100510001, 184100510004), Science & Technology Innovation Talents in Universities of Henan Province(16HASTIT040, 17HASTIT012), Aeronautical Science Foundation of China (2016ZG55019, 2017ZD55014), Project of Youth Backbone Teachers of Colleges and Universities of Henan Province (2015GGJS-003, 2015GGJS-179), Advanced Technological Research Project of Henan Province (182102110129), Henan Province Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2013031), Research on Innovation Ability Evaluation Index System and Evaluation Model (142400411268). The work of Chaoqian Li is supported partly by the Applied Basic Research Programs of Science and Technology Department of Yunnan Province [2018FB001], Outstanding Youth Cultivation Project for Yunnan Province [2018YDJQ021] and Program for Excellent Young Talents in Yunnan University. The work of Yaotang Li is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (11861077).
All authors confirm that there is no conflict of interest in this paper.
[1] | M. Arioli, I. S. Du and P. P. M. de Rijk, On the augmented system approach to sparse leastsquares problems, Numer. Math., 55 (1989), 667–684. |
[2] | Z. Z. Bai, B. N. Parlett and Z. Q. Wang, On generalized successive overrelaxation methods for augmented linear systems, Numer. Math., 102 (2005), 1–38. |
[3] | Z. Z. Bai and Z. Q. Wang, On parameterized inexact Uzawa methods for generalized saddle point problems, Linear Algebra Appl., 428 (2008), 2900–2932. |
[4] | Z. Z. Bai and X. Yang, On HSS-based iteration methods for weakly nonlinear systems, Appl. Numer. Math., 59 (2009), 2923–2936. |
[5] | Z. Z. Bai, G. H. Golub and K. N. Michael, On inexact hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting methods for non-Hermitian positive definite linear systems, Linear Algebra Appl., 284 (2008), 413–440. |
[6] | Z. Z. Bai, Several splittings for non-Hermitian linear systems, Science in China, Series A: Math., 51 (2008), 1339–1348. |
[7] | Z. Z. Bai, G. H. Golub, L. Z. Lu and J. F. Yin, Block-Triangular and skew-Hermitian splitting methods for positive definite linear systems, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 26 (2005), 844–863. |
[8] | Z. Z. Bai, G. H. Golub and M. K.Ng, Hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting methods for non- Hermitian positive definite linear systems, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. A., 24 (2003), 603–626. |
[9] | Z. Z. Bai, G. H. Golub and M. K. Ng, On successive-overrelaxation acceleration of the Hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting iteration. Available from: http://www.sccm.stanford.edu/wrap/pubtech. html. |
[10] | Z. Z. Bai, G. H. Golub and C. K. Li, Optimal parameter in Hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting method for certain twoby- two block matrices, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 28 (2006), 28:583–603. |
[11] | Z. Z. Bai, G. H. Golub and M. K. Ng, On successive-overrelaxation acceleration of the Hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting iterations, Numer. Linear Algebra Appl., 14 (2007), 319–335. |
[12] | Z. Z. Bai, G. H. Golub and J. Y. Pan, Preconditioned Hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting methods for non-Hermitian positive semidefinite linear systems, Numer. Math., 98 (2004), 1–32. |
[13] | Z. Z. Bai and M. K. Ng, On inexact preconditioners for nonsymmetric matrices, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 26 (2005), 1710–1724. |
[14] | Z. Z. Bai, M. K. Ng and Z. Q.Wang, Constraint preconditioners for symmetric indefinite matrices, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 31 (2009), 410–433. |
[15] | Z. Z. Bai, Optimal parameters in the HSS-like methods for saddle-point problems, Numer. Linear Algebra Appl., 16 (2009), 447–479. |
[16] | Z. Z. Bai, J. F. Yin and Y. F. Su, A shift-splitting preconditioner for non-Hermitian positive definite matrices, J. Comput. Math., 24 (2006), 539–552. |
[17] | Z. Z. Bai, G. H. Golub and J. Y. Pan, Preconditioned Hermitian and skew-Hermitian splitting methods for non-Hermitian positive semidefinite linear systems. Technical Report SCCM-02-12, Scientific Computing and Computational Mathematics Program, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 2002. |
[18] | Z. Z. Bai, M. Benzi and F. Chen, Modified HSS iteration methods for a class of complex symmetric linear systems, Comput., 87 (2010), 93–111. |
[19] | Y. Cao, J. Du and Q. Niu, Shift-splitting preconditioners for saddle point problems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 272 (2014), 239–250. |
[20] | Y. Cao, L. Q. Yao and M. Q. Jiang, A modified dimensional split preconditioner for generalized saddle point problems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 250 (2013), 70–82. |
[21] | Y. Cao, L. Q. Yao, M. Q. Jiang and Q. Niu, A relaxed HSS preconditioner for saddle point problems from meshfree discretization, J. Comput. Math., 31 (2013), 398–421. |
[22] | C. R. Chen and C. F. Ma, A generalized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems, Appl. Math. Lett., 43 (2015), 49–55. |
[23] | F. Chen and Y. L. Jiang, A generalization of the inexact parameterized Uzawa methods for saddle point problems, Appl. Math. Comput., 206 (2008), 765–771. |
[24] | L. B. Cui, C. Chen, W. Li and M.K. Ng, An eigenvalue problem for even order tensors with its applications, Linear Multilinear Algebra, 64 (2016), 602–621. |
[25] | L. B. Cui, W. Li and M. K. Ng, Primitive tensors and directed hypergraphs, Linear Algebra Appl., 471 (2015), 96–108. |
[26] | L. B. Cui, C. X. Li and S. L. Wu, The relaxation convergence of multisplitting AOR method for linear complementarity problem, Linear Multilinear Algebra, DOI: 10.1080/03081087.2018.1511680. |
[27] | L. B. Cui and Y. S. Song, On the uniqueness of the positive Z-eigenvector for nonnegative tensors, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 352 (2019), 72C78. |
[28] | M. T. Darvishi and P. Hessari, Symmetric SOR method for augmented systems, Appl. Math. Comput., 183 (2006), 409–415. |
[29] | H. Elman and D. Silvester, Fast nonsymmetric iterations and preconditioning for Navier-Stokes equations, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 17 (1996), 33–46. |
[30] | H. Elman and G. H. Golub, Inexact and preconditioned Uzawa algorithms for saddle point problems, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 31 (1994), 1645–1661. |
[31] | B. Fischer, A. Ramage, D. J. Silvester and A. J.Wathen, Minimum residual methods for augmented systems, BIT, 38 (1998), 527–543. |
[32] | G. H. Golub, X. Wu and J. Y. Yuan, SOR-like methods for augmented systems, BIT, 55 (2001), 71–85. |
[33] | M. Q. Jiang and Y. Cao, On local Hermitian skew-Hermitian splitting iteration methods for generalized saddle point problems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 231 (2009), 973–982. |
[34] | X.Y. Li, L. Gao, Q. K. Pan, L. Wan and K. M. Chao, An e ective hybrid genetic algorithm and variable neighborhood search for integrated process planning and scheduling in a packaging machine workshop, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics: Systems, 2018, DOI 10.1109/TSMC.2018.2881686. |
[35] | X. Y. Li, C. Lu, L. Gao, S. Q. Xiao and L.Wen, An E ective Multi-Objective Algorithm for Energy Efficient Scheduling in a Real-Life Welding Shop, IEEE T. Ind. Inform., 14 (2018), 5400–5409. |
[36] | X. Y. Li and L. Gao, An E ective Hybrid Genetic Algorithm and Tabu Search for Flexible Job Shop Scheduling Problem, Int. J. Prod. Econ., 174 (2016), 93–110. |
[37] | X. F. Peng and W. Li, On unsymmetric block overrelaxation-type methods for saddle point, Appl. Math. Comput., 203 (2008), 660–671. |
[38] | C. H. Santos, B. P. B. Silva and J. Y. Yuan, Block SOR methods for rank deficient least squares problems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 100 (1998), 1–9. |
[39] | H. A. Van der Vorst, Iterative Krylov Methods for Large Linear Systems, Cambridge Monographs on Applied and Computational Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2003. |
[40] | L. Wang and Z. Z. Bai, Convergence conditions for splitting iteration methods for non-Hermitian linear systems, Linear Algebra Appl., 428 (2008), 453–468. |
[41] | S. Wright, Stability of augmented system factorizations in interior-point methods, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 18 (1997), 191–222. |
[42] | S. L.Wu, T. Z. Huang and X. L. Zhao, A modified SSOR iterative method for augmented systems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 228 (2009), 424–433. |
[43] | D. M. Young, Iteratin Solution for Large Systems, Academic Press, New York, 1971. |
[44] | J. Y. Yuan, Numerical methods for generalized least squares problems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 66 (1996), 571–584. |
[45] | J. Y. Yuan and A. N. Iusem, Preconditioned conjugate gradient method for generalized least squares problems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 71 (1996), 287–297. |
[46] | G. F. Zhang and Q. H. Lu, On generalized symmetric SOR method for augmented systems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 1 (2008), 51–58. |
[47] | L. T. Zhang, A new preconditioner for generalized saddle matrices with highly singular(1,1) blocks, Int. J. Comput. Math., 91 (2014), 2091–2101. |
[48] | L. T. Zhang, T. Z. Huang, S. H. Cheng and Y. P. Wang, Convergence of a generalized MSSOR method for augmented systems, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 236 (2012), 1841–1850. |
[49] | B. Zheng, Z. Z. Bai and X. Yang, On semi-convergence of parameterized Uzawa methods for singular saddle point problems, Linear Algebra Appl., 431 (2009), 808–817. |
[50] | Y. Z. Zhou, W. C. Yi, L. Gao and X. Y. Li, Adaptive di erential evolution with sorting crossover rate for continuous optimization problems, IEEE T. Cybernetics, 47 (2017), 2742–2753. |
1. | Bo Wu, Xing-Bao Gao, A modified parameterized shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems, 2021, 40, 2238-3603, 10.1007/s40314-020-01383-5 | |
2. | Shengzhong Song, Zhengda Huang, A two-parameter shift-splitting preconditioner for saddle point problems, 2022, 124, 08981221, 7, 10.1016/j.camwa.2022.08.018 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2 | 6.5007×10−7 | 0.147 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.0657×10−7 | 0.074 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 6.5785×10−7 | 0.367 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 5.9859×10−7 | 0.262 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 2 | 6.4956×10−7 | 0.142 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2 | 6.5008×10−7 | 0.146 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.0664×10−7 | 0.072 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 4.6159×10−7 | 0.329 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 6.1723×10−7 | 0.268 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 2 | 6.4961×10−7 | 0.151 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 9(1) | 1.8872×10−8 | 0.394 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 8(1) | 3.4887×10−7 | 0.359 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 13(1) | 3.2668×10−7 | 0.499 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 11(1) | 4.7948×10−7 | 0.432 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 13(1) | 8.5534×10−7 | 0.530 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 9(1) | 1.8871×10−8 | 0.402 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 8(1) | 3.4834×10−7 | 0.358 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 13(1) | 3.2640×10−7 | 0.510 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 11(1) | 4.7939×10−7 | 0.432 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 13(1) | 8.5183×10−7 | 0.493 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2.5 | 9.8445×10−7 | 1.557 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.6139×10−7 | 0.583 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 7.2770×10−7 | 3.166 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 9.6488×10−7 | 2.366 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 17 | 9.2708×10−7 | 10.313 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2.5 | 9.8383×10−7 | 1.551 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.6147×10−7 | 0.580 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 6.9932×10−7 | 3.382 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 9.4912×10−7 | 2.391 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 20.5 | 9.0799×10−7 | 12.469 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 16(1) | 7.7884×10−8 | 5.527 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 13(1) | 7.5976×10−7 | 4.262 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 20(1) | 6.4167×10−7 | 6.343 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 16(1) | 8.7812×10−7 | 5.338 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 21(1) | 6.5959×10−7 | 6.970 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 16(1) | 7.7882×10−8 | 5.500 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 13(1) | 7.5943×10−7 | 4.400 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 20(1) | 6.4171×10−7 | 6.298 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 16(1) | 8.7812×10−7 | 5.288 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 21(1) | 6.6135×10−7 | 6.897 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2 | 6.5007×10−7 | 0.147 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.0657×10−7 | 0.074 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 6.5785×10−7 | 0.367 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 5.9859×10−7 | 0.262 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 2 | 6.4956×10−7 | 0.142 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2 | 6.5008×10−7 | 0.146 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.0664×10−7 | 0.072 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 4.6159×10−7 | 0.329 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 6.1723×10−7 | 0.268 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 2 | 6.4961×10−7 | 0.151 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 9(1) | 1.8872×10−8 | 0.394 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 8(1) | 3.4887×10−7 | 0.359 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 13(1) | 3.2668×10−7 | 0.499 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 11(1) | 4.7948×10−7 | 0.432 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 13(1) | 8.5534×10−7 | 0.530 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 9(1) | 1.8871×10−8 | 0.402 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 8(1) | 3.4834×10−7 | 0.358 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 13(1) | 3.2640×10−7 | 0.510 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 11(1) | 4.7939×10−7 | 0.432 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 13(1) | 8.5183×10−7 | 0.493 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2.5 | 9.8445×10−7 | 1.557 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.6139×10−7 | 0.583 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 7.2770×10−7 | 3.166 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 9.6488×10−7 | 2.366 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 17 | 9.2708×10−7 | 10.313 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItBiCGSTAB | ResBiCGSTAB | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 2.5 | 9.8383×10−7 | 1.551 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 1 | 8.6147×10−7 | 0.580 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 5.5 | 6.9932×10−7 | 3.382 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 4 | 9.4912×10−7 | 2.391 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 20.5 | 9.0799×10−7 | 12.469 |
T−1PSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 16(1) | 7.7884×10−8 | 5.527 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 13(1) | 7.5976×10−7 | 4.262 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 20(1) | 6.4167×10−7 | 6.343 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 16(1) | 8.7812×10−7 | 5.338 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 21(1) | 6.5959×10−7 | 6.970 | |
T−1GSSA | α | β | ItGMRES | ResGMRES | CPU(s) |
0.001 | 0.002 | 16(1) | 7.7882×10−8 | 5.500 | |
0.003 | 0.001 | 13(1) | 7.5943×10−7 | 4.400 | |
0.005 | 0.006 | 20(1) | 6.4171×10−7 | 6.298 | |
0.007 | 0.004 | 16(1) | 8.7812×10−7 | 5.288 | |
0.009 | 0.008 | 21(1) | 6.6135×10−7 | 6.897 |