We analyze the conjugate gradient (CG) method with variable preconditioning for solving a linear system with a real symmetric positive definite (SPD) matrix of coefficients $A$. We assume that the preconditioner is SPD on each step, and that the condition number of the preconditioned system matrix is bounded above by a constant independent of the step number. We show that the CG method with variable preconditioning under this assumption may not give improvement, compared to the steepest descent (SD) method. We describe the basic theory of CG methods with variable preconditioning with the emphasis on “worst case” scenarios, and provide complete proofs of all facts not available in the literature. We give a new elegant geometric proof of the SD convergence rate bound. Our numerical experiments, comparing the preconditioned SD and CG methods, not only support and illustrate our theoretical findings, but also reveal two surprising and potentially practically important effects. First, we analyze variable preconditioning in the form of inner-outer iterations. In previous such tests, the unpreconditioned CG inner iterations are applied to an artificial system with some fixed preconditioner as a matrix of coefficients. We test a different scenario, where the unpreconditioned CG inner iterations solve linear systems with the original system matrix $A$. We demonstrate that the CG-SD inner-outer iterations perform as well as the CG-CG inner-outer iterations in these tests. Second, we compare the CG methods using a two-grid preconditioning with fixed and randomly chosen coarse grids, and observe that the fixed preconditioner method is twice as slow as the method with random preconditioning.
[1]
J. G. Corput.
On the method of steepest descent
,
1960
.
[2]
G. Forsythe.
On the asymptotic directions of thes-dimensional optimum gradient method
,
1968
.
[3]
LashukIlya,et al.
Steepest Descent and Conjugate Gradient Methods with Variable Preconditioning
,
2007
.
[4]
Owe Axelsson,et al.
Variable-step multilevel preconditioning methods, I: Self-adjoint and positive definite elliptic problems
,
1994,
Numer. Linear Algebra Appl..
[5]
Valeria Simoncini,et al.
Theory of Inexact Krylov Subspace Methods and Applications to Scientific Computing
,
2003,
SIAM J. Sci. Comput..
[6]
L. Kantorovich,et al.
Functional analysis in normed spaces
,
1952
.
[7]
K. Neymeyr.
A geometric theory for preconditioned inverse iteration. I : Extrema of the Rayleigh quotient
,
2001
.
[8]
Valeria Simoncini,et al.
On the Occurrence of Superlinear Convergence of Exact and Inexact Krylov Subspace Methods
,
2005,
SIAM Rev..
[9]
O. Axelsson,et al.
A black box generalized conjugate gradient solver with inner iterations and variable-step preconditioning
,
1991
.
[10]
Spyridon Kamvissis,et al.
On the Method of Steepest Descent
,
2005
.
[11]
E. D'yakonov.
Optimization in Solving Elliptic Problems
,
1995
.
[12]
Gene H. Golub,et al.
Inexact Preconditioned Conjugate Gradient Method with Inner-Outer Iteration
,
1999,
SIAM J. Sci. Comput..
[13]
Valeria Simoncini,et al.
Flexible Inner-Outer Krylov Subspace Methods
,
2002,
SIAM J. Numer. Anal..