TheoremBase

Subdividing the segment from yy to y+hy+h into NN equal parts and summing the two subgradient inequalities on each part brackets the increment between two Riemann-type sums, which differ from the quadratic expression by O(1/N)O(1/N); letting NN grow gives the estimate, and the transpose identity replaces MM by its symmetric part.

Proof

We use the notation of the statement. Algebraic manipulations of dot products use The Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n Is Symmetric, Bilinear and Positive Definite, and M(λv+μw)=λ Mv+μ MwM(\lambda v+\mu w)=\lambda\,Mv+\mu\,Mw is claim 1 of Linearity, Compatibility with the Matrix Product, and a Norm Bound for the Matrix-Vector Product. Membership in a subdifferential always refers to Subdifferential of a Real-Valued Function on a Convex Subset of Rn\mathbb{R}^n (i).

The matrix SS. By claim 2 of Elementary Properties of the Transpose of a Real Matrix, (M+M⊤)⊤=M⊤+(M⊤)⊤(M+M^{\top})^{\top}=M^{\top}+(M^{\top})^{\top}, and (M⊤)⊤=M(M^{\top})^{\top}=M by claim 1 of that lemma; hence (M+M⊤)⊤=M+M⊤(M+M^{\top})^{\top}=M+M^{\top} and, again by claim 2, S⊤=SS^{\top}=S, so S∈S(n)S\in\mathcal{S}(n). Moreover, for h∈Rnh\in\mathbb{R}^{n}, claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Transpose of a Real Matrix with v=w=hv=w=h gives h⋅(Mh)=(M⊤h)⋅h=h⋅(M⊤h)h\cdot(Mh)=(M^{\top}h)\cdot h=h\cdot(M^{\top}h), the last step by claim 1 of The Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n Is Symmetric, Bilinear and Positive Definite; hence, by claim 1 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum,

h⋅(Sh)=12(h⋅(Mh)+h⋅(M⊤h))=h⋅(Mh).(S)h\cdot(Sh)=\tfrac{1}{2}\bigl(h\cdot(Mh)+h\cdot(M^{\top}h)\bigr)=h\cdot(Mh). \tag{S}

Claim 1. Let h∈Rnh\in\mathbb{R}^{n} with ∥h∥<δ\lVert h\rVert<\delta. If h=0h=0 the asserted inequality reads 0≤00\le0, so assume h≠0h\neq0. Let N∈NN\in\mathbb{N}, and for k∈{0,1,…,N}k\in\{0,1,\dots,N\} put tk=k/Nt_{k}=k/N and yk=y+tkhy_{k}=y+t_{k}h, so that y0=yy_{0}=y and yN=y+hy_{N}=y+h. Since 0≤tk≤10\le t_{k}\le1, claim 5 of Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n: Square, Distance, Vanishing, Coordinate Bounds, Homogeneity, Triangle Inequalities and Expansion of a Square gives ∥yk−y∥=tk∥h∥≤∥h∥<δ\lVert y_{k}-y\rVert=t_{k}\lVert h\rVert\le\lVert h\rVert<\delta.

Because Rn\mathbb{R}^{n} is open and convex, The Subdifferential of a Convex Function on an Open Convex Set is Nonempty (ii) shows that ∂f(yk)\partial f(y_{k}) is nonempty; choose qk∈∂f(yk)q_{k}\in\partial f(y_{k}) for each of the finitely many indices kk, and take q0=pq_{0}=p, which is legitimate since p∈∂f(y)=∂f(y0)p\in\partial f(y)=\partial f(y_{0}).

The subgradient inequality at yky_{k} tested at yk+1y_{k+1}, and at yk+1y_{k+1} tested at yky_{k}, give

1N qk⋅h≤f(yk+1)−f(yk)≤1N qk+1⋅h(0≤k≤N−1),\tfrac{1}{N}\,q_{k}\cdot h\le f(y_{k+1})-f(y_{k})\le\tfrac{1}{N}\,q_{k+1}\cdot h\qquad(0\le k\le N-1),

since yk+1−yk=1Nhy_{k+1}-y_{k}=\tfrac{1}{N}h. Summing over kk and noting that the middle terms telescope to f(y+h)−f(y)f(y+h)-f(y),

1N∑k=0N−1qk⋅h  ≤  f(y+h)−f(y)  ≤  1N∑k=1Nqk⋅h.(T)\tfrac{1}{N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}q_{k}\cdot h\;\le\;f(y+h)-f(y)\;\le\;\tfrac{1}{N}\sum_{k=1}^{N}q_{k}\cdot h. \tag{T}

Put rk=qk−p−M(yk−y)r_{k}=q_{k}-p-M(y_{k}-y). Since ∥yk−y∥<δ\lVert y_{k}-y\rVert<\delta, the hypothesis gives ∥rk∥≤ε∥yk−y∥=εtk∥h∥≤ε∥h∥\lVert r_{k}\rVert\le\varepsilon\lVert y_{k}-y\rVert=\varepsilon t_{k}\lVert h\rVert\le\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert, so by The Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality on Rn\mathbb{R}^n

∣rk⋅h∣≤ε∥h∥2.|r_{k}\cdot h|\le\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}.

Since M(yk−y)=tk MhM(y_{k}-y)=t_{k}\,Mh, we get qk⋅h=p⋅h+tk (Mh)⋅h+rk⋅hq_{k}\cdot h=p\cdot h+t_{k}\,(Mh)\cdot h+r_{k}\cdot h. Using ∑k=0N−1k=12N(N−1)\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}k=\tfrac{1}{2}N(N-1) and ∑k=1Nk=12N(N+1)\sum_{k=1}^{N}k=\tfrac{1}{2}N(N+1),

1N∑k=0N−1tk=N−12N,1N∑k=1Ntk=N+12N,\tfrac{1}{N}\sum_{k=0}^{N-1}t_{k}=\frac{N-1}{2N},\qquad\tfrac{1}{N}\sum_{k=1}^{N}t_{k}=\frac{N+1}{2N},

and each of the two averages of the rk⋅hr_{k}\cdot h has absolute value at most ε∥h∥2\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}, by claim 5 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field. Hence (T) becomes

p⋅h+N−12N(Mh)⋅h−ε∥h∥2  ≤  f(y+h)−f(y)  ≤  p⋅h+N+12N(Mh)⋅h+ε∥h∥2.p\cdot h+\frac{N-1}{2N}(Mh)\cdot h-\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}\;\le\;f(y+h)-f(y)\;\le\;p\cdot h+\frac{N+1}{2N}(Mh)\cdot h+\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}.

Writing Θ=f(y+h)−f(y)−p⋅h−12(Mh)⋅h\Theta=f(y+h)-f(y)-p\cdot h-\tfrac{1}{2}(Mh)\cdot h and using N±12N−12=±12N\frac{N\pm1}{2N}-\frac{1}{2}=\pm\frac{1}{2N}, this says

−12N∣(Mh)⋅h∣−ε∥h∥2  ≤  Θ  ≤  12N∣(Mh)⋅h∣+ε∥h∥2.-\frac{1}{2N}\bigl|(Mh)\cdot h\bigr|-\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}\;\le\;\Theta\;\le\;\frac{1}{2N}\bigl|(Mh)\cdot h\bigr|+\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}.

The number ∣(Mh)⋅h∣|(Mh)\cdot h| does not depend on NN, so by The Archimedean Property of the Real Numbers the quantity 12N∣(Mh)⋅h∣\frac{1}{2N}|(Mh)\cdot h| is smaller than any prescribed positive real for NN large. Hence ∣Θ∣≤ε∥h∥2|\Theta|\le\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2} by claim 6 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field, and by (S) together with claim 1 of The Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n Is Symmetric, Bilinear and Positive Definite this is the asserted inequality.

Claim 2. Let ε>0\varepsilon>0 and let δ>0\delta>0 be as supplied by the hypothesis for this ε\varepsilon. By claim 1, every hh with ∥h∥<δ\lVert h\rVert<\delta satisfies y+h∈Rny+h\in\mathbb{R}^{n} and

∣f(y+h)−f(y)−p⋅h−12h⋅(Sh)∣≤ε∥h∥2.\Bigl|f(y+h)-f(y)-p\cdot h-\tfrac{1}{2}h\cdot(Sh)\Bigr|\le\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}.

Since S∈S(n)S\in\mathcal{S}(n), this is precisely the condition of Twice Differentiability at a Point (i) with U=RnU=\mathbb{R}^{n}, first-order coefficient pp and Hessian SS.

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…