0

Hi: I'm reading a book on optimization and there is an interesting stated theorem but I don't know how to prove it.

Notation: Let $P_{c}(x)$ denote the projection of onto a convex set c which is a subspace of $R^{n}$.

Then, the theorem is the following:

If y and x are 2 points in $R^{n}$, then,

if $|| P_{c}(y) - P_{c}(x) ||= || y - x ||$, then

$x - P_{c}(x) = y - P_{c}(y)$

Thanks to anyone who could provide a reference or a proof. This is not homework. I'm just studying this material for fun.

mark leeds
  • 1,514

1 Answers1

0

Since $C$ is a subspace, we have $$ \langle x-P_C(x),P_C(x)-P_C(y)\rangle=0; $$ $$ \langle y-P_C(y),P_C(y)-P_C(x)\rangle=0. $$ Adding two equalities we obtain $$ \langle x-P_C(x)-(y-P_C(y)),P_C(x)-P_C(y)\rangle=0 $$ or equivalently, $$ \langle x-y, P_C(x)-P_C(y)\rangle=\|P_C(x)-P_C(y)\|^2. $$ We have \begin{eqnarray*} \|(x-P_C(x))-(y-P_C(y))\|^2&=&\|(x-y)-(P_C(x)-P_C(y))\|^2\\ &=&\|x-y\|^2-2\langle x-y, P_C(x)-P_C(y)\rangle+\|P_C(x)-P_C(y)\|^2\\ &=&\|P_C(x)-P_C(y)\|^2-2\|P_C(x)-P_C(y)\|^2+\|P_C(x)-P_C(y)\|^2\\ &=&0. \end{eqnarray*} Hence, $x-P_C(x)=y-P_C(y)$.

Remark. We explain why we have $$ \langle x-P_C(x),P_C(x)-P_C(y)\rangle=0, $$ where $C$ is a subspace.

Indeed, by the characterization of the metric projection $$ \langle x-P_C(x), u-P_C(x)\rangle\leq 0 \quad \forall u\in C. $$ Substituting $u=P_C(y)\in C$ into the equality we obtain $$ \langle x-P_C(x), P_C(y)-P_C(x)\rangle\leq 0. $$ Substituting $u=2P_C(x)-P_C(y)\in C$ into the equality we obtain $$ \langle x-P_C(x), P_C(x)-P_C(y)\rangle\leq 0. $$ It follows that $$ \langle x-P_C(x),P_C(x)-P_C(y)\rangle=0. $$

Blind
  • 1,116
  • Thank you. I will print out and go over carefully and then check the answer. It's appreciated. – mark leeds Apr 18 '15 at 01:17
  • Wait, $C$ isn't a halfspace, it's a subspace. – Michael Grant Apr 18 '15 at 02:26
  • @Michael Grant: Thank you. The assertion is also true for subspace. – Blind Apr 18 '15 at 03:50
  • @mark leeds: Please accept my solution if you find interesting. – Blind Apr 18 '15 at 04:03
  • @Blind: Thank you but I need to understand it first and then I will definitely accept it. But I don't follow all the steps yet. I'll get back to you if I can't figure them ( the ones I don't follow yet ) out myself. – mark leeds Apr 18 '15 at 09:59
  • @mark leeds: The above is the complete answer. If you have any question please do not hesitate to ask. – Blind Apr 18 '15 at 12:41
  • @Blind: That was an amazing answer. I don't know what else to say besides thanks. It took me a while to understand the algebra and the various relations but you explained it all beautfully. I'm going to ask another question ( more of a confirmation ) using a different thread. Feel free to read that one also. Thanks again. – mark leeds Apr 19 '15 at 04:42
  • @mark leeds: I am waiting for your question. If I can I will try my best to help you. – Blind Apr 19 '15 at 14:29