4 ms·
The article mentions a companion paper about how this was used to speed up physics computation, so it sounds useful at least in that domain.
by dooglius 7y ago
The article mentions a companion paper about how this was used to speed up physics computation, so it sounds useful at least in that domain.
- 77pt77 7y agoGiven that this really looks like a generalization of Cramer's rule, I really doubt it is computationally more efficient. Maybe if you want to know only a few things about the eigen-vectors, or only a few. For a full solution, I really doubt it.
- jordigh 7y agoI believe "speed up" in this sense is really akin to how Cramer's rule lets you write down a relatively neat formula for the solution of a linear system, not that it would actually help with performing the calculation numerically. Computing a full set of eigenvalues of a numerical matrix is pretty slow and the eigenvectors almost come for free; it seems like a very computationally backwards way to get n+1 full sets of eigenvalues only to get slightly incomplete data about the values of the eigenvectors. I don't know anything about the physics of it, but I doubt that the researchers had numerical matrices that this formula helped with; I expect it was all done symbolically instead.