Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) - Linear Algebra
- Consider a matrix with SVD where . If we form the rank-2 approximation using the first two singular values, what percentage of the Frobenius norm of is preserved in ? Answer: Approximately 92.3% When you encounter SVD approximation problems, you're dealing with how well lower-rank matrices can represent the original data. The key insight is that the Frobenius norm has a direct relationship with singular values. For any matrix with SVD , the Frobenius norm squared equals the sum of squared singular values: . With , we get . The rank-2 approximation uses only the first two singular values, so . The percentage preserved is . Looking at the wrong answers: Choice A (76.9%) might come from incorrectly using , which adds singular values instead of squaring them. Choice B (83.3%) could result from the calculation , also from the linear addition error. Choice C (50%) might stem from thinking half the singular values means half the norm is preserved, ignoring that larger singular values contribute disproportionately. Remember: In SVD approximations, always square the singular values when working with Frobenius norms. The largest singular values capture most of the matrix's "energy," so low-rank approximations often preserve surprisingly high percentages of the original norm.
- A data matrix has SVD with singular values . For principal component analysis, if we want to retain at least 90% of the variance, how many principal components should we keep? Answer: 2 In PCA, the variance explained by each component is proportional to . Total variance: . We need 90% of 146 = 131.4. First component: 100 (68.5%). First two: 100 + 36 = 136 (93.2%). Since 136 > 131.4, we need 2 components. Choice A uses 3 components (unnecessary). Choice C uses all components. Choice D uses only 1 component (insufficient at 68.5%).
- For a matrix with singular value decomposition , suppose the singular values are , , and . If , what is the trace of ? Answer: 73 Since , we have . Therefore, . The eigenvalues of are the diagonal entries of , which are , , and . The trace equals the sum of eigenvalues: . Choice B uses only . Choice C uses . Choice D uses .
- Consider the matrix . If the largest singular value of is approximately 5.46, what is the smallest singular value approximately? Answer: 0.37 For a matrix, the product of singular values equals . Here, . If , then , so . Choice A uses . Choice B subtracts: . Choice C assumes the singular values are eigenvalues and uses symmetry incorrectly.
- In the reduced SVD of an matrix with rank , which statement about the orthogonal matrices is correct? Answer: has orthonormal columns and has orthonormal columns When you encounter SVD questions, focus on understanding what "reduced" means and how rank affects matrix dimensions. The reduced SVD is a compact form that eliminates unnecessary zero singular values and their corresponding vectors. In the reduced SVD , the matrix has rank , meaning it has exactly non-zero singular values. The reduced form constructs matrices to match this rank: becomes , becomes , and becomes . Since has dimensions , it contains orthonormal columns. Similarly, has dimensions , so it also contains orthonormal columns. Choice A describes the full SVD, not the reduced version. In the full SVD, would indeed have orthonormal columns and would have orthonormal columns, but this includes columns corresponding to zero singular values that are eliminated in the reduced form. Choice C incorrectly focuses on rows rather than columns. While and do have rows each in their transpose forms, the question asks about the orthogonal matrices themselves, where we count orthonormal columns. Choice D suggests the dimensions depend on and , but since cannot exceed either or (rank is bounded by both dimensions), these expressions simply equal . Study tip: Remember that "reduced" SVD means "rank-sized" - everything scales to match the rank .
- Let be a matrix with rank 3. In the singular value decomposition , what are the dimensions of the matrices , , and ? Answer: is , is , is In the full SVD, is always (here ), is (here ), and is (here ). The rank only affects how many singular values are nonzero, not the matrix dimensions. Choice B gives the reduced SVD dimensions. Choice C reverses some dimensions. Choice D incorrectly uses the rank as a matrix dimension.
- If is a matrix with singular values , , , what is the dimension of the null space of ? Answer: 1 When you encounter singular values in a linear algebra problem, you're dealing with the Singular Value Decomposition (SVD), which reveals crucial information about a matrix's fundamental subspaces. The key insight is that zero singular values directly tell you about the dimensions of the null spaces. For any matrix, the SVD gives you non-zero singular values, where is the rank of the matrix. Since has singular values , , and , only two are non-zero, so . The dimension of the null space of equals , where is the number of rows. Since is , we have . This makes C correct. Looking at the wrong answers: A) 3 incorrectly assumes the null space dimension equals the number of rows. B) 2 mistakenly uses the rank itself rather than subtracting it from the row count. D) 0 would only be true if had full row rank (rank 3), which would require all three singular values to be non-zero. Remember this pattern: for an matrix with non-zero singular values, and . The number of zero singular values always equals the total dimension of both null spaces combined.
- For a matrix with SVD , which expression correctly represents the pseudoinverse ? Answer: where has for nonzero and 0 elsewhere When you encounter pseudoinverse problems, remember that the pseudoinverse extends the concept of matrix inversion to non-square or singular matrices using the Singular Value Decomposition (SVD). The pseudoinverse formula derives directly from the SVD structure. If , then the pseudoinverse is . Notice how this "reverses" the SVD: the and matrices swap positions and lose their transposes, while is the pseudoinverse of the diagonal matrix . For , you take the reciprocal of each nonzero singular value and leave zeros as zeros (since is undefined). This construction ensures exists even when isn't invertible. Answer C correctly gives with the proper handling of . Answer A incorrectly uses , which has the wrong transposes—this would give you something like instead of . Answer B attempts , but doesn't exist when has zero singular values, and the matrix order is wrong anyway. Answer D suggests using standard matrix inversion on , but this expression isn't even equal to , and standard inversion fails for non-invertible matrices. Study tip: Remember the pseudoinverse formula as "flip and transpose": from to . The matrices swap positions and drop their transposes, while uses reciprocals of nonzero values only.