1
0
mirror of https://github.com/kalmarek/PropertyT.jl.git synced 2024-11-13 14:00:27 +01:00
PropertyT.jl/README.md

225 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

# Property(T)
[![CI](https://github.com/kalmarek/PropertyT.jl/actions/workflows/ci.yml/badge.svg)](https://github.com/kalmarek/PropertyT.jl/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
[![codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/kalmarek/PropertyT.jl/branch/master/graph/badge.svg)](https://codecov.io/gh/kalmarek/PropertyT.jl)
This package is concerned with sum of squares decompositions in group rings of finitely presented groups.
Please have a look into e.g. this [test](https://github.com/kalmarek/PropertyT.jl/blob/master/test/1712.07167.jl#L87) to see how this package can be used to prove Kazdhan Property (T) for a finitely presented group. For an example applications have a look at our papers:
* M. Kaluba and P.W. Nowak _Certifying numerical estimates for spectral gaps_ [1703.09680](https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.09680)
* M. Kaluba, P.W. Nowak and N. Ozawa *$Aut(F₅)$ has property (T)* [1712.07167](https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.07167), and
* M. Kaluba, D. Kielak and P.W. Nowak *On property (T) for $Aut(Fₙ)$ and $SLₙ(Z)$* [1812.03456](https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.03456).
The package depends on
* [`Groups.jl`](https://github.com/kalmarek/Groups.jl) for computations with finitely presented groups,
* [`SymbolicWedderburn.jl`](https://github.com/kalmarek/SymbolicWedderburn.jl) for symmetrizing the sum of squares relaxations of positivity problems,
* [`JuMP.jl`](https://github.com/JuliaOpt/JuMP.jl) for formulating the optimization problems, and
* [`SCS.jl`](https://github.com/JuliaOpt/SCS.jl) wrapper for the [`scs` solver](https://github.com/cvxgrp/scs), or
* [`COSMO.jl`](https://github.com/oxfordcontrol/COSMO.jl) solver to solve the problems.
Certification of the results is done via `ℓ₁`-convexity of the sum-of-squares cone and our knowledge of its interior points. The certified computations use
* [`IntervalArithmetic.jl`](https://github.com/JuliaIntervals/IntervalArithmetic.jl)
# Example: $SL_3(\mathbb{Z})$ has property (T)
Lets prove that $SL_3(\mathbb{Z})$ has property (T). We start with
```julia
julia> using Groups
julia> SL = MatrixGroups.SpecialLinearGroup{3}(Int8)
special linear group of 3×3 matrices over Int8
```
To define the sum of squares problem we need a group algebra:
```julia
julia> using PropertyT
julia> RSL, S, sizes = PropertyT.group_algebra(SL, gens(SL), halfradius=2, twisted=true)
[ Info: generating wl-metric ball of radius 4
0.011135 seconds (279.78 k allocations: 9.858 MiB)
[ Info: sizes = [13, 121, 883, 5455]
[ Info: computing the *-algebra structure for G
0.049325 seconds (158.86 k allocations: 7.218 MiB, 92.13% compilation time)
(*-algebra of special linear group of 3×3 matrices over Int8, FPGroupElement{Groups.MatrixGroups.SpecialLinearGroup{3, Int8, DataType, Alphabet{Groups.MatrixGroups.ElementaryMatrix{3, Int8}}, Vector{Groups.MatrixGroups.ElementaryMatrix{3, Int8}}}, }[E₁₂, E₁₃, E₂₁, E₂₃, E₃₁, E₃₂, E₁₂^-1, E₁₃^-1, E₂₁^-1, E₂₃^-1, E₃₁^-1, E₃₂^-1], [13, 121, 883, 5455])
```
We supplied `halfradius=2` to be able to multiply in `RSL` algebra elements supported in the ball of radius `2` of `SL` (with the word-length metric).
## The Laplacian
We define the (symmetric) group Laplacian `Δ` using the familiar formula
```julia
julia> Δ = RSL(length(S)) - sum(RSL(s) for s in S)
12·(id) -1·E₁₂ -1·E₁₃ -1·E₂₁ -1·E₂₃ -1·E₃₁ -1·E₃₂ -1·E₁₂^-1 -1·E₁₃^-1 -1·E₂₁^-1 -1·E₂₃^-1 -1·E₃₁^-1 -1·E₃₂^-1
julia> Δ² = Δ^2
156·(id) -24·E₁₂ -24·E₁₃ -24·E₂₁ -24·E₂₃ -24·E₃₁ -24·E₃₂ -24·E₁₂^-1 -24·E₁₃^-1 -24·E₂₁^-1 -24·E₂₃^-1 -24·E₃₁^-1 -24·E₃₂^-1 +1·E₁₂^2 +2·E₁₂*E₁₃ +1·E₁₂*E₂₁ +1·E₁₂*E₂₃ +1·E₁₂*E₃₁ +2·E₁₂*E₃₂ +2·E₁₂*E₁₃^-1 +1·E₁₂*E₂₁^-1 +1·E₁₂*E₂₃^-1 +1·E₁₂*E₃₁^-1 +2·E₁₂*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₁₃^2 +1·E₁₃*E₂₁ +2·E₁₃*E₂₃ +1·E₁₃*E₃₁ +1·E₁₃*E₃₂ +2·E₁₃*E₁₂^-1 +1·E₁₃*E₂₁^-1 +2·E₁₃*E₂₃^-1 +1·E₁₃*E₃₁^-1 +1·E₁₃*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₂₁*E₁₂ +1·E₂₁*E₁₃ +1·E₂₁^2 +2·E₂₁*E₂₃ +2·E₂₁*E₃₁ +1·E₂₁*E₃₂ +1·E₂₁*E₁₂^-1 +1·E₂₁*E₁₃^-1 +2·E₂₁*E₂₃^-1 +2·E₂₁*E₃₁^-1 +1·E₂₁*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₂₃*E₁₂ +1·E₂₃^2 +1·E₂₃*E₃₁ +1·E₂₃*E₃₂ +1·E₂₃*E₁₂^-1 +2·E₂₃*E₁₃^-1 +2·E₂₃*E₂₁^-1 +1·E₂₃*E₃₁^-1 +1·E₂₃*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₃₁*E₁₂ +1·E₃₁*E₁₃ +1·E₃₁*E₂₃ +1·E₃₁^2 +2·E₃₁*E₃₂ +1·E₃₁*E₁₂^-1 +1·E₃₁*E₁₃^-1 +2·E₃₁*E₂₁^-1 +1·E₃₁*E₂₃^-1 +2·E₃₁*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₃₂*E₁₃ +1·E₃₂*E₂₁ +1·E₃₂*E₂₃ +1·E₃₂^2 +2·E₃₂*E₁₂^-1 +1·E₃₂*E₁₃^-1 +1·E₃₂*E₂₁^-1 +1·E₃₂*E₂₃^-1 +2·E₃₂*E₃₁^-1 +1·E₁₂^-1*E₂₁ +1·E₁₂^-1*E₂₃ +1·E₁₂^-1*E₃₁ +1·E₁₂^-2 +2·E₁₂^-1*E₁₃^-1 +1·E₁₂^-1*E₂₁^-1 +1·E₁₂^-1*E₂₃^-1 +1·E₁₂^-1*E₃₁^-1 +2·E₁₂^-1*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₁₃^-1*E₂₁ +1·E₁₃^-1*E₃₁ +1·E₁₃^-1*E₃₂ +1·E₁₃^-2 +1·E₁₃^-1*E₂₁^-1 +2·E₁₃^-1*E₂₃^-1 +1·E₁₃^-1*E₃₁^-1 +1·E₁₃^-1*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₂₁^-1*E₁₂ +1·E₂₁^-1*E₁₃ +1·E₂₁^-1*E₃₂ +1·E₂₁^-1*E₁₂^-1 +1·E₂₁^-1*E₁₃^-1 +1·E₂₁^-2 +2·E₂₁^-1*E₂₃^-1 +2·E₂₁^-1*E₃₁^-1 +1·E₂₁^-1*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₂₃^-1*E₁₂ +1·E₂₃^-1*E₃₁ +1·E₂₃^-1*E₃₂ +1·E₂₃^-1*E₁₂^-1 +1·E₂₃^-2 +1·E₂₃^-1*E₃₁^-1 +1·E₂₃^-1*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₃₁^-1*E₁₂ +1·E₃₁^-1*E₁₃ +1·E₃₁^-1*E₂₃ +1·E₃₁^-1*E₁₂^-1 +1·E₃₁^-1*E₁₃^-1 +1·E₃₁^-1*E₂₃^-1 +1·E₃₁^-2 +2·E₃₁^-1*E₃₂^-1 +1·E₃₂^-1*E₁₃ +1·E₃₂^-1*E₂₁ +1·E₃₂^-1*E₂₃ +1·E₃₂^-1*E₁₃^-1 +1·E₃₂^-1*E₂₁^-1 +1·E₃₂^-1*E₂₃^-1 +1·E₃₂^-2
```
## Formulating the optimization problem
As proven by N. Ozawa [here](https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.5431) (Main Theorem), property (T) for `SL` is equivalent to a sum of (hermitian) squares decomposition for $\Delta^2 - \lambda\Delta$ for some $\lambda > 0$. Let's find such decomposition using semi-definite optimization:
```julia
julia> opt_problem = PropertyT.sos_problem_primal(Δ², Δ)
A JuMP Model
Maximization problem with:
Variables: 7382
Objective function type: JuMP.VariableRef
`JuMP.AffExpr`-in-`MathOptInterface.EqualTo{Float64}`: 5455 constraints
`Vector{JuMP.VariableRef}`-in-`MathOptInterface.PositiveSemidefiniteConeTriangle`: 1 constraint
Model mode: AUTOMATIC
CachingOptimizer state: NO_OPTIMIZER
Solver name: No optimizer attached.
Names registered in the model: P, psd, λ
````
This problem tries to find maximal `λ` as long as an internal matrix `P` defines a sum of squares decomposition for `Δ² - λΔ` (you may consult the docstring of `sos_problem_primal` for more information).
## Solving the optimization problem
To solve the problem we need a solver/optimizer - a software to numerically find a solution using e.g. iterative procedures. There are two solvers predefined in `test/optimizers.jl`:
* `scs_optimizer` and
* `cosmo_optimizer`.
These are just thin wrappers around `JuMP` (or actually `MathOptInterface`) optimizers.
```julia
julia> include("test/optimizers.jl");
```
Now we have everything what we need to solve the problem!
```julia
julia> status, warmstart = PropertyT.solve(
opt_problem,
scs_optimizer(max_iters=5_000, accel=50, alpha=1.9),
);
------------------------------------------------------------------
SCS v3.2.1 - Splitting Conic Solver
(c) Brendan O'Donoghue, Stanford University, 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------
problem: variables n: 7382, constraints m: 12836
cones: z: primal zero / dual free vars: 5455
s: psd vars: 7381, ssize: 1
settings: eps_abs: 1.0e-09, eps_rel: 1.0e-09, eps_infeas: 1.0e-07
alpha: 1.90, scale: 1.00e-01, adaptive_scale: 1
max_iters: 5000, normalize: 1, rho_x: 1.00e-06
acceleration_lookback: 50, acceleration_interval: 10
lin-sys: sparse-direct-amd-qdldl
nnz(A): 57566, nnz(P): 0
------------------------------------------------------------------
iter | pri res | dua res | gap | obj | scale | time (s)
------------------------------------------------------------------
0| 1.57e+02 9.96e-01 2.61e+02 -1.69e+02 1.00e-01 6.54e-02
250| 1.08e-02 2.03e-04 1.69e-01 -1.02e+00 1.00e-01 8.05e-01
500| 2.94e-03 2.46e-04 5.78e-02 -5.24e-01 1.00e-01 1.55e+00
[...]
4500| 4.62e-06 4.05e-09 1.71e-06 -2.80e-01 6.45e-03 1.40e+01
4750| 3.74e-06 2.92e-09 1.72e-06 -2.80e-01 6.45e-03 1.48e+01
5000| 3.06e-06 2.03e-09 1.63e-06 -2.80e-01 6.45e-03 1.56e+01
------------------------------------------------------------------
status: solved (inaccurate - reached max_iters)
timings: total: 1.56e+01s = setup: 6.09e-02s + solve: 1.55e+01s
lin-sys: 1.90e+00s, cones: 1.26e+01s, accel: 1.87e-01s
------------------------------------------------------------------
objective = -0.280408 (inaccurate)
------------------------------------------------------------------
julia> status
ALMOST_OPTIMAL::TerminationStatusCode = 7
```
The solver didn't manage to solve the problem but it got quite close! (duality gap is ~`1.63e-6`). Let's try once again this time warmstarting the solver:
```julia
julia> status, warmstart = PropertyT.solve(
opt_problem,
scs_optimizer(max_iters=10_000, accel=50, alpha=1.9),
warmstart,
);
------------------------------------------------------------------
SCS v3.2.1 - Splitting Conic Solver
(c) Brendan O'Donoghue, Stanford University, 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------
problem: variables n: 7382, constraints m: 12836
cones: z: primal zero / dual free vars: 5455
s: psd vars: 7381, ssize: 1
settings: eps_abs: 1.0e-09, eps_rel: 1.0e-09, eps_infeas: 1.0e-07
alpha: 1.90, scale: 1.00e-01, adaptive_scale: 1
max_iters: 10000, normalize: 1, rho_x: 1.00e-06
acceleration_lookback: 50, acceleration_interval: 10
lin-sys: sparse-direct-amd-qdldl
nnz(A): 57566, nnz(P): 0
------------------------------------------------------------------
iter | pri res | dua res | gap | obj | scale | time (s)
------------------------------------------------------------------
0| 3.00e-06 2.96e-08 1.37e-05 -2.80e-01 1.00e-01 4.32e-02
250| 5.01e-07 6.75e-08 6.62e-06 -2.80e-01 1.00e-01 7.78e-01
500| 7.79e-07 1.92e-08 1.19e-06 -2.80e-01 3.10e-02 1.58e+00
750| 7.80e-07 7.20e-09 4.80e-07 -2.80e-01 3.10e-02 2.33e+00
1000| 7.74e-07 5.22e-10 2.06e-07 -2.80e-01 3.10e-02 3.15e+00
1250| 7.74e-07 3.84e-10 2.40e-07 -2.80e-01 3.10e-02 4.01e+00
1500| 7.71e-07 1.38e-10 2.48e-07 -2.80e-01 3.10e-02 4.88e+00
1750| 7.72e-07 2.63e-11 2.48e-07 -2.80e-01 3.10e-02 5.77e+00
2000| 7.60e-07 1.31e-11 2.48e-07 -2.80e-01 3.10e-02 6.68e+00
2200| 2.70e-09 1.46e-10 8.93e-10 -2.80e-01 5.37e-01 7.37e+00
------------------------------------------------------------------
status: solved
timings: total: 7.37e+00s = setup: 3.89e-02s + solve: 7.33e+00s
lin-sys: 8.18e-01s, cones: 6.07e+00s, accel: 6.05e-02s
------------------------------------------------------------------
objective = -0.280408
------------------------------------------------------------------
julia> status
OPTIMAL::TerminationStatusCode = 1
```
This time solver was successful in reaching the desired accuracy (`1e-9`). Lets query the solution:
```julia
julia> λ = JuMP.value(opt_problem[])
0.28040750495076683
julia> P = JuMP.value.(opt_problem[:P]); size(P)
(121, 121)
julia> Q = real.(sqrt(P));
julia> maximum(abs, Q'*Q - P)
7.951418690144152e-11
```
## Certifying the result
Thus we obtained a matrix `Q` which defines elements `ξᵢ ∈ SL` (coefficents read by columns of `Q`) whose sum of squares is close to `Δ²-λΔ` in `ℓ₁`-norm. Let's check it out.
```julia
julia> sos = PropertyT.compute_sos(RSL, Q, augmented=true);
julia> using LinearAlgebra
julia> norm(Δ²-λ*Δ - sos, 1)
2.948008083982383e-7
```
We'd like to conclude from this that since the norm of the residual is much larger than `λ` we obtain (by `ℓ₁`-convexity of sum of squares cone in `SL`) a proof of the existence of an **exact** sum of squares decomposition of `Δ² - λ₀Δ` for some `λ₀` not far from the numerical `λ` above. To be able to do so we'd need to provide a certified bound on the magnitude of the norm. Here's how to do it in an automated fashion:
```julia
julia> _, λ_cert = PropertyT.certify_solution(Δ², Δ, λ, Q, halfradius=2, augmented=true)
0.070032 seconds (4.11 k allocations: 400.047 KiB)
Info: Checking in Float64 arithmetic with
λ = 0.28040750495076683
Info: Numerical metrics of the obtained SOS:
ɛ(elt - λu - ∑ξᵢ*ξᵢ) -3.3119650146808302e-12
‖elt - λu - ∑ξᵢ*ξᵢ‖₁ 2.948008083982383e-7
λ 0.2804063257475332
5.393452 seconds (15.30 M allocations: 581.181 MiB, 3.08% gc time, 83.70% compilation time)
Info: Checking in IntervalArithmetic.Interval{Float64} arithmetic with
λ = 0.28040750495076683
Info: Numerical metrics of the obtained SOS:
ɛ(elt - λu - ∑ξᵢ*ξᵢ) [-1.92655e-10, 2.00372e-10]
‖elt - λu - ∑ξᵢ*ξᵢ‖₁ [2.94597e-07, 2.94991e-07]
λ [0.280406, 0.280407]
(true, 0.28040632499038354)
```
The true returned means that the result is certified to be correct and the value `0.28040632499038354` is the certified lower bound on the spectral gap of `Δ`.
### Lower bound on the Kazhdan constant
Together with estimate for the Kazhdan constant of $(G,S)$:
$$\sqrt{\frac{2\lambda(G,S)}{\vert S\vert}} \leqslant \kappa(G,S)$$
we obtain
```julia
julia> sqrt(2λ/length(S))
0.21618183124041931
```
hence $0.2161... \leqslant \kappa(SL_3(\mathbb{Z}), S_3)$, i.e. $SL_3(\mathbb{Z})$ has property (T).