# General eigenvalue problem proposal Classic List Threaded 4 messages Open this post in threaded view
|

## General eigenvalue problem proposal

 I saw the project ideas list for octave for GSoC 2013 and I'm interested in the implementation of the eig function. I'm guessing that the goal is to achieve the different forms for calling the "eig" function in Matlab in order to ensure full portability. I've made a comparation and I'm listing the differences I found here: Matlab:d = eig(A)          Ax=λx d = eig(A,B)       Ax=λBx[V,D] = eig(A)[V,D] = eig(A,'nobalance')* [V,D] = eig(A,B)[V,D] = eig(A,B,flag)*Octave: -- Loadable Function: LAMBDA = eig (A) -- Loadable Function: LAMBDA = eig (A, B)  -- Loadable Function: [V, LAMBDA] = eig (A) -- Loadable Function: [V, LAMBDA] = eig (A, B)I was told that the generalized eigenvalue problem is not implemented yet, but isn't it the "eig(A, B)" call form? Anyways, Other difference I found was the possiblity to avoid the balance process for the eigenvalue problem and choosing wheter to use the cholesky factorization or the QZ method when B is singular, and maybe that's what is not implemented yet. Am I correct with the current overview on this?
Open this post in threaded view
|

## Re: General eigenvalue problem proposal

 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Rafael Gonzalez wrote: I saw the project ideas list for octave for GSoC 2013 and I'm interested in the implementation of the eig function. I'm guessing that the goal is to achieve the different forms for calling the "eig" function in Matlab in order to ensure full portability. I've made a comparation and I'm listing the differences I found here: Matlab:d = eig(A)          Ax=λx d = eig(A,B)       Ax=λBx[V,D] = eig(A)[V,D] = eig(A,'nobalance')* [V,D] = eig(A,B)[V,D] = eig(A,B,flag)*Octave: -- Loadable Function: LAMBDA = eig (A) -- Loadable Function: LAMBDA = eig (A, B)  -- Loadable Function: [V, LAMBDA] = eig (A) -- Loadable Function: [V, LAMBDA] = eig (A, B)I was told that the generalized eigenvalue problem is not implemented yet, but isn't it the "eig(A, B)" call form? Anyways, Other difference I found was the possiblity to avoid the balance process for the eigenvalue problem and choosing wheter to use the cholesky factorization or the QZ method when B is singular, and maybe that's what is not implemented yet. Am I correct with the current overview on this?  The generalized eigenvalue problem is treated in octave, though not quite thesame as in matlab.It looks to me like balancing is not done at all in eig, unlike in ML where it is the default for the standard eigenvalue problem (no indication in the ML doc if balancingis done in the generalized case). In octave the user must use the "balance" command prior to eig(). What is not clear to me is how the correct eigenvectors are recovered if the user does this. It would be easy to change the behaviour tomatch ML by changing calls to *geev to *geevx. The balance/permute optionin *geevx allows for more options than ML allows so we could add more options than just the 'nobalance' option. The same applies to *ggevx for the generalized case.I've always felt that a refinement procedure after an eigensolution is better than bothering the user with a decision whether or not to balance.-- Ed Meyer