Paper detail

Robust Dropping Criteria for F-norm Minimization Based Sparse Approximate Inverse Preconditioning

Dropping tolerance criteria play a central role in Sparse Approximate Inverse preconditioning. Such criteria have received, however, little attention and have been treated heuristically in the following manner: If the size of an entry is below some empirically small positive quantity, then it is set to zero. The meaning of "small" is vague and has not been considered rigorously. It has not been clear how dropping tolerances affect the quality and effectiveness of a preconditioner $M$. In this paper, we focus on the adaptive Power Sparse Approximate Inverse algorithm and establish a mathematical theory on robust selection criteria for dropping tolerances. Using the theory, we derive an adaptive dropping criterion that is used to drop entries of small magnitude dynamically during the setup process of $M$. The proposed criterion enables us to make $M$ both as sparse as possible as well as to be of comparable quality to the potentially denser matrix which is obtained without dropping. As a byproduct, the theory applies to static F-norm minimization based preconditioning procedures, and a similar dropping criterion is given that can be used to sparsify a matrix after it has been computed by a static sparse approximate inverse procedure. In contrast to the adaptive procedure, dropping in the static procedure does not reduce the setup time of the matrix but makes the application of the sparser $M$ for Krylov iterations cheaper. Numerical experiments reported confirm the theory and illustrate the robustness and effectiveness of the dropping criteria.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.