Properties of semi-conjugate gradient methods for solving unsymmetric positive definite linear systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conjugate gradient (CG) method is a classic Krylov subspace method for solving symmetric positive definite linear systems. We analyze an analogous semi-conjugate gradient (SCG) method, a special case of the existing semi-conjugate direction (SCD) methods, for unsymmetric positive definite linear systems. Unlike CG, SCG requires the solution of a lower triangular linear system to produce each semi-conjugate direction. We prove that SCG is theoretically equivalent to the full orthogonalization method (FOM), which is based on the Arnoldi process and converges in a finite number of steps. Because SCG's triangular system increases in size each iteration, Dai and Yuan [Study on semi-conjugate direction methods for non-symmetric systems, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 60(8) (2004), pp. 1383–1399] proposed a sliding window implementation (SWI) to improve efficiency. We show that the directions produced are still locally semi-conjugate. A counter-example illustrates that SWI is different from the direct incomplete orthogonalization method (DIOM), which is FOM with a sliding window. Numerical experiments from the convection-diffusion equation and other applications show that SCG is robust and that the sliding window implementation SWI allows SCG to solve large systems efficiently.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".