Information Services banner Edinburgh Research Archive The University of Edinburgh crest

Edinburgh Research Archive >
Mathematics, School of >
Mathematics thesis and dissertation collection >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1842/4734

This item has been viewed 117 times in the last year. View Statistics

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
Stothers2010.pdf550.46 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: On the complexity of matrix multiplication
Authors: Stothers, Andrew James
Supervisor(s): Davie, Alexander
Gyongy, Istvan
Issue Date: 2010
Publisher: The University of Edinburgh
Abstract: The evaluation of the product of two matrices can be very computationally expensive. The multiplication of two n×n matrices, using the “default” algorithm can take O(n3) field operations in the underlying field k. It is therefore desirable to find algorithms to reduce the “cost” of multiplying two matrices together. If multiplication of two n × n matrices can be obtained in O(nα) operations, the least upper bound for α is called the exponent of matrix multiplication and is denoted by ω. A bound for ω < 3 was found in 1968 by Strassen in his algorithm. He found that multiplication of two 2 × 2 matrices could be obtained in 7 multiplications in the underlying field k, as opposed to the 8 required to do the same multiplication previously. Using recursion, we are able to show that ω ≤ log2 7 < 2.8074, which is better than the value of 3 we had previously. In chapter 1, we look at various techniques that have been found for reducing ω. These include Pan’s Trilinear Aggregation, Bini’s Border Rank and Sch¨onhage’s Asymptotic Sum inequality. In chapter 2, we look in detail at the current best estimate of ω found by Coppersmith and Winograd. We also propose a different method of evaluating the “value” of trilinear forms. Chapters 3 and 4 build on the work of Coppersmith and Winograd and examine how cubing and raising to the fourth power of Coppersmith and Winograd’s “complicated” algorithm affect the value of ω, if at all. Finally, in chapter 5, we look at the Group-Theoretic context proposed by Cohn and Umans, and see how we can derive some of Coppersmith and Winograd’s values using this method, as well as showing how working in this context can perhaps be more conducive to showing ω = 2.
Sponsor(s): Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
School of Mathematics, University of Edinburgh
Keywords: algebra
complexity
maxtrix
rank
Coppersmith
Winograd
algorithm
Salem-Spencer
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1842/4734
Appears in Collections:Mathematics thesis and dissertation collection

Items in ERA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

Valid XHTML 1.0! DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2010  Duraspace - Feedback