Orthogonal Projection and Distance [on hold]
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Find the distance from a vector $v$ which is $(1,2,3,4)$ onto a subspace spanned by $v_1=(1,-1,1,0)^T$ and $v_2=(1,2,1,1)^T$
What I tried was finding the distance $||v-w||$ where $w$ is the projection of $v$ onto the subspace $P_E(v)$.
I came across a different method in which we first need to find the basis of the orthogonal complement of the two vectors that span $E$, say, $x$ and then find the projection of $v$ onto $x$ to find the distance $||P_x(w)||$
I tried the two methods and some questions, the answer actually matched while for a few it did not. I'm not sure what I'm missing here. How do we calculate the distance between a vector and a subspace? Do the two methods yield same answers? If not, why? Please try to explain in the context of the question given above. Thanks.
linear-algebra vector-spaces self-learning projection
put on hold as off-topic by user302797, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, José Carlos Santos, Cesareo, Ali Caglayan Dec 2 at 20:19
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user302797, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, José Carlos Santos, Cesareo, Ali Caglayan
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Find the distance from a vector $v$ which is $(1,2,3,4)$ onto a subspace spanned by $v_1=(1,-1,1,0)^T$ and $v_2=(1,2,1,1)^T$
What I tried was finding the distance $||v-w||$ where $w$ is the projection of $v$ onto the subspace $P_E(v)$.
I came across a different method in which we first need to find the basis of the orthogonal complement of the two vectors that span $E$, say, $x$ and then find the projection of $v$ onto $x$ to find the distance $||P_x(w)||$
I tried the two methods and some questions, the answer actually matched while for a few it did not. I'm not sure what I'm missing here. How do we calculate the distance between a vector and a subspace? Do the two methods yield same answers? If not, why? Please try to explain in the context of the question given above. Thanks.
linear-algebra vector-spaces self-learning projection
put on hold as off-topic by user302797, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, José Carlos Santos, Cesareo, Ali Caglayan Dec 2 at 20:19
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user302797, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, José Carlos Santos, Cesareo, Ali Caglayan
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
1
If the answers didn’t match in some cases, then there must be errors in your calculations. Unless you give some examples of your attempted solutions, there’s not much we can do to identify those errors for you.
– amd
Dec 2 at 5:54
I just wanted to know whether the two methods were actually equivalent. For some questions, the first method turns out to be very tiring computationally, so the not matching of answers could also result from the fact that I do not usually simply the calculations a lot. That said, my only concern was whether there was any difference in the two methods. What I really want to know is what method suits this type of question better.
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 7:15
For my part, the choice of method depends on what I’m given to start with and the dimensions of the relevant spaces. The results should be the same; only the amount of work needed to find them differs.
– amd
Dec 2 at 20:04
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Find the distance from a vector $v$ which is $(1,2,3,4)$ onto a subspace spanned by $v_1=(1,-1,1,0)^T$ and $v_2=(1,2,1,1)^T$
What I tried was finding the distance $||v-w||$ where $w$ is the projection of $v$ onto the subspace $P_E(v)$.
I came across a different method in which we first need to find the basis of the orthogonal complement of the two vectors that span $E$, say, $x$ and then find the projection of $v$ onto $x$ to find the distance $||P_x(w)||$
I tried the two methods and some questions, the answer actually matched while for a few it did not. I'm not sure what I'm missing here. How do we calculate the distance between a vector and a subspace? Do the two methods yield same answers? If not, why? Please try to explain in the context of the question given above. Thanks.
linear-algebra vector-spaces self-learning projection
Find the distance from a vector $v$ which is $(1,2,3,4)$ onto a subspace spanned by $v_1=(1,-1,1,0)^T$ and $v_2=(1,2,1,1)^T$
What I tried was finding the distance $||v-w||$ where $w$ is the projection of $v$ onto the subspace $P_E(v)$.
I came across a different method in which we first need to find the basis of the orthogonal complement of the two vectors that span $E$, say, $x$ and then find the projection of $v$ onto $x$ to find the distance $||P_x(w)||$
I tried the two methods and some questions, the answer actually matched while for a few it did not. I'm not sure what I'm missing here. How do we calculate the distance between a vector and a subspace? Do the two methods yield same answers? If not, why? Please try to explain in the context of the question given above. Thanks.
linear-algebra vector-spaces self-learning projection
linear-algebra vector-spaces self-learning projection
asked Dec 2 at 5:34
Shinjini Rana
7915
7915
put on hold as off-topic by user302797, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, José Carlos Santos, Cesareo, Ali Caglayan Dec 2 at 20:19
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user302797, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, José Carlos Santos, Cesareo, Ali Caglayan
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
put on hold as off-topic by user302797, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, José Carlos Santos, Cesareo, Ali Caglayan Dec 2 at 20:19
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – user302797, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會, José Carlos Santos, Cesareo, Ali Caglayan
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
1
If the answers didn’t match in some cases, then there must be errors in your calculations. Unless you give some examples of your attempted solutions, there’s not much we can do to identify those errors for you.
– amd
Dec 2 at 5:54
I just wanted to know whether the two methods were actually equivalent. For some questions, the first method turns out to be very tiring computationally, so the not matching of answers could also result from the fact that I do not usually simply the calculations a lot. That said, my only concern was whether there was any difference in the two methods. What I really want to know is what method suits this type of question better.
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 7:15
For my part, the choice of method depends on what I’m given to start with and the dimensions of the relevant spaces. The results should be the same; only the amount of work needed to find them differs.
– amd
Dec 2 at 20:04
add a comment |
1
If the answers didn’t match in some cases, then there must be errors in your calculations. Unless you give some examples of your attempted solutions, there’s not much we can do to identify those errors for you.
– amd
Dec 2 at 5:54
I just wanted to know whether the two methods were actually equivalent. For some questions, the first method turns out to be very tiring computationally, so the not matching of answers could also result from the fact that I do not usually simply the calculations a lot. That said, my only concern was whether there was any difference in the two methods. What I really want to know is what method suits this type of question better.
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 7:15
For my part, the choice of method depends on what I’m given to start with and the dimensions of the relevant spaces. The results should be the same; only the amount of work needed to find them differs.
– amd
Dec 2 at 20:04
1
1
If the answers didn’t match in some cases, then there must be errors in your calculations. Unless you give some examples of your attempted solutions, there’s not much we can do to identify those errors for you.
– amd
Dec 2 at 5:54
If the answers didn’t match in some cases, then there must be errors in your calculations. Unless you give some examples of your attempted solutions, there’s not much we can do to identify those errors for you.
– amd
Dec 2 at 5:54
I just wanted to know whether the two methods were actually equivalent. For some questions, the first method turns out to be very tiring computationally, so the not matching of answers could also result from the fact that I do not usually simply the calculations a lot. That said, my only concern was whether there was any difference in the two methods. What I really want to know is what method suits this type of question better.
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 7:15
I just wanted to know whether the two methods were actually equivalent. For some questions, the first method turns out to be very tiring computationally, so the not matching of answers could also result from the fact that I do not usually simply the calculations a lot. That said, my only concern was whether there was any difference in the two methods. What I really want to know is what method suits this type of question better.
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 7:15
For my part, the choice of method depends on what I’m given to start with and the dimensions of the relevant spaces. The results should be the same; only the amount of work needed to find them differs.
– amd
Dec 2 at 20:04
For my part, the choice of method depends on what I’m given to start with and the dimensions of the relevant spaces. The results should be the same; only the amount of work needed to find them differs.
– amd
Dec 2 at 20:04
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Hint.
Given $vec v_1, vec v_2,vec v_3$ with the usual scalar product, $vec ucdot vec v = sum u_i v_i$ we have
$$
d^2 = ||vec v -alphavec v_1-beta vec v_2||^2 = f(alpha,beta)
$$
now calculating
$$
min_{alpha,beta} f(alpha,beta)
$$
we will solve this problem.
NOTE
$||vec u|| = sqrt{vec ucdotvec u}$
Is this the Least Squares method? Could you explain the problems with the method that I am trying to use?
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 13:12
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
In the finite-dimensional case just use the Gram-determinant $G$, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramian_matrix#Gram_determinant.
$sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $3$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v$, $v_1$ and $v_2$, whereas $sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $2$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v_1$ and $v_2$, its base. Now use that a parallelepiped's volume is its base area times its height, so the desired distance is $sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}/sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$.
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Hint.
Given $vec v_1, vec v_2,vec v_3$ with the usual scalar product, $vec ucdot vec v = sum u_i v_i$ we have
$$
d^2 = ||vec v -alphavec v_1-beta vec v_2||^2 = f(alpha,beta)
$$
now calculating
$$
min_{alpha,beta} f(alpha,beta)
$$
we will solve this problem.
NOTE
$||vec u|| = sqrt{vec ucdotvec u}$
Is this the Least Squares method? Could you explain the problems with the method that I am trying to use?
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 13:12
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Hint.
Given $vec v_1, vec v_2,vec v_3$ with the usual scalar product, $vec ucdot vec v = sum u_i v_i$ we have
$$
d^2 = ||vec v -alphavec v_1-beta vec v_2||^2 = f(alpha,beta)
$$
now calculating
$$
min_{alpha,beta} f(alpha,beta)
$$
we will solve this problem.
NOTE
$||vec u|| = sqrt{vec ucdotvec u}$
Is this the Least Squares method? Could you explain the problems with the method that I am trying to use?
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 13:12
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Hint.
Given $vec v_1, vec v_2,vec v_3$ with the usual scalar product, $vec ucdot vec v = sum u_i v_i$ we have
$$
d^2 = ||vec v -alphavec v_1-beta vec v_2||^2 = f(alpha,beta)
$$
now calculating
$$
min_{alpha,beta} f(alpha,beta)
$$
we will solve this problem.
NOTE
$||vec u|| = sqrt{vec ucdotvec u}$
Hint.
Given $vec v_1, vec v_2,vec v_3$ with the usual scalar product, $vec ucdot vec v = sum u_i v_i$ we have
$$
d^2 = ||vec v -alphavec v_1-beta vec v_2||^2 = f(alpha,beta)
$$
now calculating
$$
min_{alpha,beta} f(alpha,beta)
$$
we will solve this problem.
NOTE
$||vec u|| = sqrt{vec ucdotvec u}$
answered Dec 2 at 12:52
Cesareo
7,4303416
7,4303416
Is this the Least Squares method? Could you explain the problems with the method that I am trying to use?
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 13:12
add a comment |
Is this the Least Squares method? Could you explain the problems with the method that I am trying to use?
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 13:12
Is this the Least Squares method? Could you explain the problems with the method that I am trying to use?
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 13:12
Is this the Least Squares method? Could you explain the problems with the method that I am trying to use?
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 13:12
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
In the finite-dimensional case just use the Gram-determinant $G$, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramian_matrix#Gram_determinant.
$sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $3$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v$, $v_1$ and $v_2$, whereas $sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $2$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v_1$ and $v_2$, its base. Now use that a parallelepiped's volume is its base area times its height, so the desired distance is $sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}/sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
In the finite-dimensional case just use the Gram-determinant $G$, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramian_matrix#Gram_determinant.
$sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $3$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v$, $v_1$ and $v_2$, whereas $sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $2$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v_1$ and $v_2$, its base. Now use that a parallelepiped's volume is its base area times its height, so the desired distance is $sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}/sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
In the finite-dimensional case just use the Gram-determinant $G$, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramian_matrix#Gram_determinant.
$sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $3$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v$, $v_1$ and $v_2$, whereas $sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $2$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v_1$ and $v_2$, its base. Now use that a parallelepiped's volume is its base area times its height, so the desired distance is $sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}/sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$.
In the finite-dimensional case just use the Gram-determinant $G$, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramian_matrix#Gram_determinant.
$sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $3$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v$, $v_1$ and $v_2$, whereas $sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$ ist the $2$-volume of the parallelepiped spanned by $v_1$ and $v_2$, its base. Now use that a parallelepiped's volume is its base area times its height, so the desired distance is $sqrt{G(v,v_1,v_2)}/sqrt{G(v_1,v_2)}$.
answered Dec 2 at 14:44
Michael Hoppe
10.6k31733
10.6k31733
add a comment |
add a comment |
1
If the answers didn’t match in some cases, then there must be errors in your calculations. Unless you give some examples of your attempted solutions, there’s not much we can do to identify those errors for you.
– amd
Dec 2 at 5:54
I just wanted to know whether the two methods were actually equivalent. For some questions, the first method turns out to be very tiring computationally, so the not matching of answers could also result from the fact that I do not usually simply the calculations a lot. That said, my only concern was whether there was any difference in the two methods. What I really want to know is what method suits this type of question better.
– Shinjini Rana
Dec 2 at 7:15
For my part, the choice of method depends on what I’m given to start with and the dimensions of the relevant spaces. The results should be the same; only the amount of work needed to find them differs.
– amd
Dec 2 at 20:04