I have a linear program with order N^4 variables and order N^4 constraints. If I want to solve this in AMPL, I define the constraints one by one without having to bother about the exact coefficient matrices. No memory issues arises. When using the standard LP-solver in Matlab however, I need to define the matrices explicitly.
When I have variables with four subscripts, this will lead to a massively sparse matrix of dimension order N^4 x N^4. This matrix won't even fit in memory for non trivial problem sizes.
Is there a way to get around this problem using Matlab, apart from various column generation/cutting plane techniques? Since AMPL manages to solve it, I suppose they're either automating some kind of decomposition, or they somehow solve the LP without explicitly working with this sparse monster matrix.
Apart from sparse mentioned by m.s. you can also use AMPL API for MATLAB. It is especially useful if you already have an AMPL model and want to work with it from MATLAB.
Converting my comment into an answer:
MATLAB supports sparse matrices using the sparse command which allows you to build your constraint matrix without exceeding memory limits.
Related
I am facing the following problem: I have a system of 160000 linear equations with 160000 variables. I am going to write two programs on conjugate gradient method and steepest descent method to solve it. The matrix is block tridiagonal with only 5 non zero diagonals, thus it's not necessary to create and store the matrix. But I am having the following problem: when I go to the iterarion stepe, there must be dot product of vectors involved. I have tried the following commands: dot(u,v), u'*v, which are commonly used. But when I run the program, MATLAB told me the data size is too large for the memory.
To resolve this problem, I tried to decompose the huge vector into sparse vectors with small support, then calculate the dot products of small vectors and finally glue them together. But it seems that this method is more complicated and not very efficient, and it is easy (especially for beginners like me) to make mistakes. I wonder if there're any more efficient ways to deal with this problem. Thanks in advance.
I have two very sparse distributed matrixes of dimension 1,000,000,000 x 1,000,000,000 and I want to compute the matrix multiplication efficiently.
I tried to create a BlockMatrix from a CoordinateMatrix but it's a lot of memory (where in reality the non zero data are around ~500'000'000) and the time of computation is enormous.
So there is another way to create a sparse matrix and compute a multiplication efficiently in a distributed way in Spark? Or i have to compute it manually?
You must obviously use a storage format for sparse matrices that makes use of their sparsity.
Now, without knowing anything about how you handle matrices and which libraries you use, there's no helping you but to ask you to look at the linear algebra libraries of your choice and look for sparse storage formats; the "good old" Fortran-based libraries that underly a lot of modern math libs support them, and so chances are that you really have to do but a little googling with yourlibraryname + "sparse matrix".
second thoughts:
Sparse matrixes really don't lend themselves to distribution very well; think about the operations you'd have to do to coordinate distribution compared to the actual multiplications/additions.
Also, ~5e8 non-zero elements in a 1e18 element matrix are definitely a lot of memory, and since you don't specify how much you consider a lot to be, it's very possible there's nothing wrong with it. Assuming you're using the default double precision, that's 5e8 * 8B = 4GB of pure numbers, not counting the coordinates needed for sparse storage. So, if you've got ~10GB of memory, I wouldn't be surprised at all.
As there is no build-in method in Spark to perform a matrix multiplication with sparse matrixes. I resolved by reduce at best the sparsity of the matrices before perform the matrice multiplication with BlockMatrix (that not support sparse matrix).
Last edit: Even with the sparsity optimization I had a lot of problems with large dataset. Finally, I decided to implement it myself. Now is running very fast. I hope that a matrix implementation with sparse matrix will be implemented in Spark as I think there are a lot of application that can make use of this.
I have this problem which requires solving for X in AX=B. A is of the order 15000 x 15000 and is sparse and symmetric. B is 15000 X 7500 and is NOT sparse. What is the fastest way to solve for X?
I can think of 2 ways.
Simplest possible way, X = A\B
Using for loop,
invA = A\speye(size(A))
for i = 1:size(B,2)
X(:,i) = invA*B(:,i);
end
Is there a better way than the above two? If not, which one is best between the two I mentioned?
First things first - never, ever compute inverse of A. That is never sparse except when A is a diagonal matrix. Try it for a simple tridiagonal matrix. That line on its own kills your code - memory-wise and performance-wise. And computing the inverse is numerically less accurate than other methods.
Generally, \ should work for you fine. MATLAB does recognize that your matrix is sparse and executes sparse factorization. If you give a matrix B as the right-hand side, the performance is much better than if you only solve one system of equations with a b vector. So you do that correctly. The only other technical thing you could try here is to explicitly call lu, chol, or ldl, depending on the matrix you have, and perform backward/forward substitution yourself. Maybe you save some time there.
The fact is that the methods to solve linear systems of equations, especially sparse systems, strongly depend on the problem. But in almost any (sparse) case I imagine, factorization of a 15k system should only take a fraction of a second. That is not a large system nowadays. If your code is slow, this probably means that your factor is not that sparse sparse anymore. You need to make sure that your matrix is properly reordered to minimize the fill (added non-zero entries) during sparse factorization. That is the crucial step. Have a look at this page for some tests and explanations on how to reorder your system. And have a brief look at example reorderings at this SO thread.
Since you can answer yourself which of the two is faster, I'll try yo suggest the next options.
Solve it using a GPU. Plenty of details can be found online, including this SO post, a matlab benchmarking of A/b, etc.
Additionally, there's the MATLAB add-on of LAMG (Lean Algebraic Multigrid). LAMG is a fast graph Laplacian solver. It can solve Ax=b in O(m) time and storage.
If your matrix A is symmetric positive definite, then here's what you can do to solve the system efficiently and stably:
First, compute the cholesky decomposition, A=L*L'. Since you have a sparse matrix, and you want to exploit it to accelerate the inversion, you should not apply chol directly, which would destroy the sparsity pattern. Instead, use one of the reordering method described here.
Then, solve the system by X = L'\(L\B)
Finally, if are not dealing with potential complex values, then you can replace all the L' by L.', which gives a bit further acceleration because it's just trying to transpose instead of computing the complex conjugate.
Another alternative would be the preconditioned conjugate gradient method, pcg in Matlab. This one is very popular in practice, because you can trade off speed for accuracy, i.e. give it less number of iterations, and it will give you a (usually pretty good) approximate solution. You also never need to store the matrix A explicitly, but just be able to compute matrix-vector product with A, if your matrix doesn't fit into memory.
If this takes forever to solve in your tests, you are probably going into virtual memory for the solve. A 15k square (full) matrix will require 1.8 gigabytes of RAM to store in memory.
>> 15000^2*8
ans =
1.8e+09
You will need some serious RAM to solve this, as well as the 64 bit version of MATLAB. NO factorization will help you unless you have enough RAM to solve the problem.
If your matrix is truly sparse, then are you using MATLAB's sparse form to store it? If not, then MATLAB does NOT know the matrix is sparse, and does not use a sparse factorization.
How sparse is A? Many people think that a matrix that is half full of zeros is "sparse". That would be a waste of time. On a matrix that size, you need something that is well over 99% zeros to truly gain from a sparse factorization of the matrix. This is because of fill-in. The resulting factorized matrix is almost always nearly full otherwise.
If you CANNOT get more RAM (RAM is cheeeeeeeeep you know, certainly once you consider the time you have wasted trying to solve this) then you will need to try an iterative solver. Since these tools do not factorize your matrix, if it is truly sparse, then they will not go into virtual memory. This is a HUGE savings.
Since iterative tools often require a preconditioner to work as well as possible, it can take some study to find the best preconditioner.
I have this problem which requires solving for X in AX=B. A is of the order 15000 x 15000 and is sparse and symmetric. B is 15000 X 7500 and is NOT sparse. What is the fastest way to solve for X?
I can think of 2 ways.
Simplest possible way, X = A\B
Using for loop,
invA = A\speye(size(A))
for i = 1:size(B,2)
X(:,i) = invA*B(:,i);
end
Is there a better way than the above two? If not, which one is best between the two I mentioned?
First things first - never, ever compute inverse of A. That is never sparse except when A is a diagonal matrix. Try it for a simple tridiagonal matrix. That line on its own kills your code - memory-wise and performance-wise. And computing the inverse is numerically less accurate than other methods.
Generally, \ should work for you fine. MATLAB does recognize that your matrix is sparse and executes sparse factorization. If you give a matrix B as the right-hand side, the performance is much better than if you only solve one system of equations with a b vector. So you do that correctly. The only other technical thing you could try here is to explicitly call lu, chol, or ldl, depending on the matrix you have, and perform backward/forward substitution yourself. Maybe you save some time there.
The fact is that the methods to solve linear systems of equations, especially sparse systems, strongly depend on the problem. But in almost any (sparse) case I imagine, factorization of a 15k system should only take a fraction of a second. That is not a large system nowadays. If your code is slow, this probably means that your factor is not that sparse sparse anymore. You need to make sure that your matrix is properly reordered to minimize the fill (added non-zero entries) during sparse factorization. That is the crucial step. Have a look at this page for some tests and explanations on how to reorder your system. And have a brief look at example reorderings at this SO thread.
Since you can answer yourself which of the two is faster, I'll try yo suggest the next options.
Solve it using a GPU. Plenty of details can be found online, including this SO post, a matlab benchmarking of A/b, etc.
Additionally, there's the MATLAB add-on of LAMG (Lean Algebraic Multigrid). LAMG is a fast graph Laplacian solver. It can solve Ax=b in O(m) time and storage.
If your matrix A is symmetric positive definite, then here's what you can do to solve the system efficiently and stably:
First, compute the cholesky decomposition, A=L*L'. Since you have a sparse matrix, and you want to exploit it to accelerate the inversion, you should not apply chol directly, which would destroy the sparsity pattern. Instead, use one of the reordering method described here.
Then, solve the system by X = L'\(L\B)
Finally, if are not dealing with potential complex values, then you can replace all the L' by L.', which gives a bit further acceleration because it's just trying to transpose instead of computing the complex conjugate.
Another alternative would be the preconditioned conjugate gradient method, pcg in Matlab. This one is very popular in practice, because you can trade off speed for accuracy, i.e. give it less number of iterations, and it will give you a (usually pretty good) approximate solution. You also never need to store the matrix A explicitly, but just be able to compute matrix-vector product with A, if your matrix doesn't fit into memory.
If this takes forever to solve in your tests, you are probably going into virtual memory for the solve. A 15k square (full) matrix will require 1.8 gigabytes of RAM to store in memory.
>> 15000^2*8
ans =
1.8e+09
You will need some serious RAM to solve this, as well as the 64 bit version of MATLAB. NO factorization will help you unless you have enough RAM to solve the problem.
If your matrix is truly sparse, then are you using MATLAB's sparse form to store it? If not, then MATLAB does NOT know the matrix is sparse, and does not use a sparse factorization.
How sparse is A? Many people think that a matrix that is half full of zeros is "sparse". That would be a waste of time. On a matrix that size, you need something that is well over 99% zeros to truly gain from a sparse factorization of the matrix. This is because of fill-in. The resulting factorized matrix is almost always nearly full otherwise.
If you CANNOT get more RAM (RAM is cheeeeeeeeep you know, certainly once you consider the time you have wasted trying to solve this) then you will need to try an iterative solver. Since these tools do not factorize your matrix, if it is truly sparse, then they will not go into virtual memory. This is a HUGE savings.
Since iterative tools often require a preconditioner to work as well as possible, it can take some study to find the best preconditioner.
I have a matrix of size 200000 X 200000 .I need to find the eigen values for this .I was using matlab till now but as the size of the matrix is unhandleable by matlab i have shifted to perl and now even perl is unable to handle this huge matrix it is saying out of memory.I would like to know if i can find out the eigen values of this matrix using some other programming language which can handle such huge data. The elements are not zeros mostly so no option of going for sparse matrix. Please help me in solving this.
I think you may still have luck with MATLAB. Take a look into their distributed computing toolbox. You'd need some kind of parallel environment, a computing cluster.
If you don't have a computational cluster, you might look into distributed eigenvalue/vector calculation methods that could be employed on Amazon EC2 or similar.
There is also a discussion of parallel eigenvalue calculation methods here, which may direct you to better libraries and programming approaches than Perl.