proof of Theorem 1: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
The above proof is the proof of Theorem 2.1 in <ref name="WTH2009">Daniela M. Witten, Robert Tibshirani, and Trevor Hastie. (2009) "A penalized matrix decomposition, with applications to sparse principal components and canonical correlation analysis". ''Biostatistics'', 10(3):515–534.</ref> | The above proof is the proof of Theorem 2.1 in <ref name="WTH2009">Daniela M. Witten, Robert Tibshirani, and Trevor Hastie. (2009) "A penalized matrix decomposition, with applications to sparse principal components and canonical correlation analysis". ''Biostatistics'', 10(3):515–534.</ref> | ||
==References== | |||
</references> |
Revision as of 19:58, 8 November 2010
Let [math]\displaystyle{ \textbf{u}_k }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \textbf{v}_k }[/math] denote column k of [math]\displaystyle{ \textbf{U} }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \textbf{V} }[/math] respectively, We prove the theorem by expanding out the squared Frobenius norm and rearranging terms:
The above proof is the proof of Theorem 2.1 in <ref name="WTH2009">Daniela M. Witten, Robert Tibshirani, and Trevor Hastie. (2009) "A penalized matrix decomposition, with applications to sparse principal components and canonical correlation analysis". Biostatistics, 10(3):515–534.</ref>
References
</references>