Row ordering — where it appears
Named by 2 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
A constraint is a weight at infinity
Stack an equality constraint on top of a least-squares problem with a large weight and the answer approaches the constrained one like 1/τ². The limit is takeable to any accuracy — and how far it can be taken is a property of the solver, not of the problem. One of them stops at the square root of the precision, and one of them does not stop.
The weight the factor met first
The route to one minus a leverage through the orthogonal factor was said to lose a digit for every decade of the condition number, whatever else it does. Put a weight on one row and it does not. With the heavy row first, the complement keeps every digit at κ(A) = 2.5·10⁹ while both subtractions return nothing. With the same row last it loses digits as the row's scale grows. And two heavy rows that leave κ(A) at 3.1 still lose six digits when the light rows come first. The law was about the order the factor met the rows, and the condition number had been standing in for it.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Condition numberExact ground truthMethod of weightingQR factorisationBackward stabilityCatastrophic cancellationEquality constrained least-squaresHouseholderHouseholder reflectionLeast-squaresLeverageNormal equations