Generator

scaling-recovery

One function in the qepscale library, called 18 times across 8 essays. Below: what it draws at its defaults, what it draws at every value an essay asks for, the 17 claims it put to the test while drawing them, and where it stands against the rule this site is named for.

At its defaults it draws what two lines of scaling are worth: the same quadratic in nine systems of units. The forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 8 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 7.49·10⁻¹⁴ to 0.001258 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 1.26·10⁻¹³ to 8.23·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 2.01. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.

scaling-recovery is one function in lib/figures/qepscale.js — the units a polynomial is written in — two lines of scaling, a prediction that is half right, and a format's edge. Everything below came out of it during this build, at arguments taken from the essays rather than invented for this page. A figure here is the figure a reader meets in an essay, and if the generator changes, this page changes with it.

At its defaults

Drawn even though every essay passes arguments — which on this site is every essay, at 100% of placements since the standard pass. A default nothing exercises is a trap for the next essay to call this with none, and this is the page where a default that has drifted from the figures around it becomes visible.

What two lines of scaling are worth: the same quadratic in nine systems of unitsThe forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 8 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 7.49·10⁻¹⁴ to 0.001258 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 1.26·10⁻¹³ to 8.23·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 2.01. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.0246810⁻¹⁶10⁻¹³10⁻¹⁰10⁻⁷10⁻⁴10⁻¹log₁₀ γ, the change of unitsforward erroras writtenafter scalingone change of variableunscaled, worst0.0013scaled, worst1.7·10⁻¹³orders recovered10scaled coefficient spread4.5the answer was never the problemthe units were

The forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 8 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 7.49·10⁻¹⁴ to 0.001258 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 1.26·10⁻¹³ to 8.23·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 2.01. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.

n: 8

The arguments are the ones A backward-stable answer to a problem nobody asked passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

What two lines of scaling are worth: the same quadratic in nine systems of unitsThe forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 8 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 7.49·10⁻¹⁴ to 0.001258 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 1.26·10⁻¹³ to 8.23·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 2.01. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.0246810⁻¹⁶10⁻¹³10⁻¹⁰10⁻⁷10⁻⁴10⁻¹log₁₀ γ, the change of unitsforward erroras writtenafter scalingone change of variableunscaled, worst0.0013scaled, worst1.7·10⁻¹³orders recovered10scaled coefficient spread4.5the answer was never the problemthe units were

The forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 8 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 7.49·10⁻¹⁴ to 0.001258 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 1.26·10⁻¹³ to 8.23·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 2.01. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.

n: 12

The arguments are the ones A backward-stable answer to a problem nobody asked passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

What two lines of scaling are worth: the same quadratic in nine systems of unitsThe forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 12 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 3.72·10⁻¹⁴ to 0.3958 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 1.04·10⁻¹³ to 3.02·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 8.1. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.0246810⁻¹⁶10⁻¹³10⁻¹⁰10⁻⁷10⁻⁴10⁻¹log₁₀ γ, the change of unitsforward erroras writtenafter scalingone change of variableunscaled, worst0.4scaled, worst10⁻¹³orders recovered13scaled coefficient spread4.5the answer was never the problemthe units were

The forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 12 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 3.72·10⁻¹⁴ to 0.3958 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 1.04·10⁻¹³ to 3.02·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 8.1. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.

n: 4

The arguments are the ones Six routes to one spectrum passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

What two lines of scaling are worth: the same quadratic in nine systems of unitsThe forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 4 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 7.01·10⁻¹⁵ to 4.331·10⁻⁴ — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 7.67·10⁻¹⁵ to 4.77·10⁻¹⁵, flat to within a factor of 2.25. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.0246810⁻¹⁶10⁻¹³10⁻¹⁰10⁻⁷10⁻⁴10⁻¹log₁₀ γ, the change of unitsforward erroras writtenafter scalingone change of variableunscaled, worst4.3·10⁻⁴scaled, worst7.7·10⁻¹⁵orders recovered11scaled coefficient spread4.6the answer was never the problemthe units were

The forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 4 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 7.01·10⁻¹⁵ to 4.331·10⁻⁴ — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 7.67·10⁻¹⁵ to 4.77·10⁻¹⁵, flat to within a factor of 2.25. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.

n: 6

The arguments are the ones The scaling that buys ten orders passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

What two lines of scaling are worth: the same quadratic in nine systems of unitsThe forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 6 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 9.14·10⁻¹⁵ to 0.006738 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 2.59·10⁻¹⁴ to 1.02·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 7.39. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.0246810⁻¹⁶10⁻¹³10⁻¹⁰10⁻⁷10⁻⁴10⁻¹log₁₀ γ, the change of unitsforward erroras writtenafter scalingone change of variableunscaled, worst0.0067scaled, worst2.6·10⁻¹⁴orders recovered12scaled coefficient spread4.6the answer was never the problemthe units were

The forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 6 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 9.14·10⁻¹⁵ to 0.006738 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 2.59·10⁻¹⁴ to 1.02·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 7.39. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.

n: 10

The arguments are the ones The scaling that buys ten orders passes. A value drawn at the generator's defaults instead would be a picture no essay asked for and no assertion has been run against.

What two lines of scaling are worth: the same quadratic in nine systems of unitsThe forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 10 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 3.1·10⁻¹³ to 0.07412 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 6.09·10⁻¹⁴ to 2.72·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 5.65. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.0246810⁻¹⁶10⁻¹³10⁻¹⁰10⁻⁷10⁻⁴10⁻¹log₁₀ γ, the change of unitsforward erroras writtenafter scalingone change of variableunscaled, worst0.074scaled, worst6.1·10⁻¹⁴orders recovered11scaled coefficient spread4.5the answer was never the problemthe units were

The forward error against the closed form for an overdamped chain of 10 masses, before and after Fan–Lin–Van Dooren scaling. The unscaled curve runs 3.1·10⁻¹³ to 0.07412 — every digit gone by the far end — and the scaled one runs 6.09·10⁻¹⁴ to 2.72·10⁻¹⁴, flat to within a factor of 5.65. The scaling is γ = √(‖K‖/‖M‖) and δ = 2/(‖K‖ + γ‖C‖), computed from three norms and nothing else, and the map back is λ = γμ with no rounding in the statement. Flatness is the half that matters: after scaling every stop of the sweep IS the same problem, so there is nothing left for the change of units to do.

What it checked while drawing

Every figure above asserted its own claims on the way to being drawn, and a claim that failed would have failed the build rather than drawn a wrong picture. Those assertions used to leave no trace at all: a passing one returned true and the only evidence the figure had checked anything was that nothing crashed. The list below is what they actually said, collected by running this generator with an observer installed — not a description of what it is believed to check.

17 distinct claims across 6 sets of arguments, grouped below by shape — because most of them are one sentence with a different number in it, and how many separate times that sentence was put to the test is the informative part.

a chain long enough to have a spectrum and short enough to draw

a linearisation has as many eigenvalues as it has rows

a positive change of units

a positive mass

a quadratic with both outer coefficients present

a reduction this file knows

a size the sweep can afford

an inverse iterate that is a vector

an overdamped chain, whose spectrum is entirely real

and the scaled one does not

damping that removes energy rather than adding it

every computed eigenvalue is matched to an unused exact one

LU is for square matrices

matmul shapes agree

some real eigenpair to measure

the unscaled error grows across the sweep

two spectra of the same size

Against the rule

The rule does not apply to it. It factorises nothing, so there is no residual it could be withholding. That is worth stating rather than leaving blank: a site that reported the rule as satisfied by every generator would be counting mostly generators the rule never reached.

Across the library: the rule bites on 173 of 325 generators — 158 print a residual and 15 are exempt with a published reason; 152 factorise nothing. Read from lib/residual-rule.js, which is the same body the gate enforces from, and the gate's last check fails the build if this page and it disagree about any generator.

Where it is called

Changing this generator changes every figure on this list. That is what makes the list worth publishing rather than keeping in a check script.

The eigenvalue problem that is not linear

A backward-stable answer to a problem nobody asked

One quadratic eigenvalue problem, in nine systems of units, with a change of variable that is exact in both directions. The residual the solver prints stays at the rounding level at every stop. The answer loses eleven orders of magnitude, and the two facts are consistent.

Iterating, instead of factorising

A Krylov space for a problem that is not linear

A quadratic eigenvalue problem has no matrix to build a Krylov space out of. The recurrence that builds one anyway stores half as many numbers, returns twice as many Ritz values — and stops being a basis at twenty vectors while the answer it gives keeps improving.

The eigenvalue problem that is not linear

A matrix that depends on its own eigenvalue

A damped structure does not produce Ax = λx. It produces (λ²M + λC + K)x = 0, where the matrix whose null vector is wanted is a function of the number being solved for — so there is nothing to factorise, an n × n problem has 2n answers, and the eigenvectors cannot be a basis.

The eigenvalue problem that is not linear

A spectrum that comes in reciprocal pairs

A palindromic quadratic reads the same backwards, so λ is an eigenvalue exactly when 1/λ is. A general solver discards that, computes the large half of the spectrum perfectly and the small half to seven digits — and the small half is a division away from being perfect too.

The eigenvalue problem that is not linear

Every eigenvalue real, and a test that says so

A quadratic eigenvalue problem has no reason to have real eigenvalues. One class does, as a property rather than an outcome, and the proof is a Cholesky that completes. The boundary of the class has a closed form, and at the boundary the arithmetic loses half its digits with nothing ill conditioned anywhere.

The eigenvalue problem that is not linear

Six routes to one spectrum

Three linearisations of one quadratic, each reduced to a standard eigenvalue problem two ways. All six have exactly the same eigenvalues in exact arithmetic. On a well-scaled problem they differ by noise; on a badly scaled one by a factor of forty; and two of the six are the same matrix.

The eigenvalue problem that is not linear

The scaling that buys ten orders

Two lines computed from three norms, a change of variable that is exact in both directions, and the whole of the loss the previous essay measured comes back — flat, at every stop, because after scaling every stop is the same problem.

The arithmetic underneath

The units that overflow before the answer does

A change of variable that is exact in the algebra requires γ² times a matrix to be a number the format can hold. In binary64 that is a bound nobody meets by accident. In binary32 it arrives at 10¹⁹ and in fp16 at 256, and past it there is no answer rather than a poor one.

The whole library · All essays · What must fail