Volume 2009, Article ID 239025,17pages doi:10.1155/2009/239025
Research Article
The Fr ´echet Derivative of an Analytic Function of a Bounded Operator with Some Applications
D. S. Gilliam,
1T. Hohage,
2X. Ji,
3and F. Ruymgaart
11Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA
2Institute for Numerical and Applied Mathematics, University of G¨ottingen, 37083 G¨ottingen, Germany
3Department of Mathematics, Utah Valley University, Orem, UT 84058, USA
Correspondence should be addressed to D. S. Gilliam,[email protected] Received 7 June 2008; Accepted 15 January 2009
Recommended by Petru Jebelean
The main result in this paper is the determination of the Fr´echet derivative of an analytic function of a bounded operator, tangentially to the space of all bounded operators. Some applied problems from statistics and numerical analysis are included as a motivation for this study. The perturbation operator increment is not of any special form and is not supposed to commute with the operator at which the derivative is evaluated. This generality is important for the applications.
In the Hermitian case, moreover, some results on perturbation of an isolated eigenvalue, its eigenprojection, and its eigenvector if the eigenvalue is simple, are also included. Although these results are known in principle, they are not in general formulated in terms of arbitrary perturbations as required for the applications. Moreover, these results are presented as corollaries to the main theorem, so that this paper also provides a short, essentially self-contained review of these aspects of perturbation theory.
Copyrightq2009 D. S. Gilliam et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Introduction
Motivated by certain applications in numerical analysis and, in particular, statistics, this paper deals with the Fr´echet derivative of an analytic functionϕof a bounded linear operator T on a separable Hilbert spaceHin the sense of the usual functional calculus, tangentially to the Banach spaceLof all bounded linear operators mappingHinto itself. More precisely, a first order approximation to the difference
ϕ T
−ϕT, TT Π, Π∈ L, 1.1
is obtained, including the order of magnitude of the remainder. An example of such a function ϕis a generalized or regularized inverse of the square root
ϕT
αIT−1/2
, α >0, 1.2
whereIis the identity operator. Once the Fr´echet derivative has been establishedSection 2, it yields the asymptotic distribution of functions of certain random operators via an ensuing delta method : a well-known statistical techniqueseeSection 4.
ClearlyT can be regarded as a perturbed version ofT, and it is not surprising that perturbation methods are employed to obtain the desired result. The authors are aware of the possibility that the rather straightforward result on the Fr´echet derivative might be hidden somewhere in the rich literature on perturbation theory1–3 . Yet they have not been successful in identifying a reference that states the result in its present form, tailored to the applications they have in mind. Some remarks are particularly in order.
aThe perturbationsΠare typically of small norm but otherwise arbitrary bounded or Hermitian. In literature, they are often of the form
Π T12T2· · · 1.3 for operators T1, T2, . . ., and a small number . In statistics, there is no point in representing the perturbation in such a form.
bThe perturbationΠand the operatorTare not assumed to commute, because in our applications such an assumption would not in general be fulfilled. If the operators do commute, however, the Fr´echet derivative would reduce toϕT, in the sense of functional calculus withϕthe derivative ofϕ. In the case considered here, the actual Fr´echet derivative andϕTmay differ considerably.
cA central theme in perturbation theory concerns the perturbation of an isolated eigenvalue and corresponding eigenprojectionsee, e.g, the references mentioned before. Some of the results are included, because they can be easily derived from the main result on the Fr´echet derivative by choosing a special function ϕ Section 3. In this way, the paper presents a concise and essentially self-contained review of some basic results in this area. They are again presented in terms of a generalHermitianperturbationΠ, as being required for statistical application, in the same vein as, but somewhat more general than, Dauxois et al.4 .
As has already been mentioned in the beginning,Hwill be a separable Hilbert space and Lthe Banach space of all bounded linear operators mapping Hinto itself. The inner product onHwill be denoted by·,·and the norm by · .The norm onLwill be written · L, and the notationLHandCHwill be used to denote the subspace of all Hermitian and all compact Hermitian operators, respectively.
We will exclusively deal with infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces and will not attempt to include the simpler finite dimensional case in our formulation. The Fr´echet derivative for arbitrary perturbations is well known in the finite dimensional matrix case. This result and further references can be found in the recent monograph by Bhatia 5 . In the finite dimensional case, this derivative is also implicitly present in Theorem 2.1 of Ruymgaart and Yang6 to obtain the asymptotic distribution of a function of a random matrix.
2. The Fr ´echet Derivative
Let us fix an arbitraryT ∈ Lwith spectrumσTand a bounded open regionΩ⊂ Cin the complex plane with smooth boundaryΓ ∂Ω, such that
σT⊂Ω, δΓdist
Γ, σT
>0. 2.1
Furthermore, let us consider functions of type
ϕ :D−→C, analytic, 2.2
whereD⊃Ωis an open neighborhood ofΩ. Let us write MΓ max
z∈Γϕz<∞, LΓlength ofΓ<∞. 2.3 The resolvent
Rz zI−T−1, z∈ρT, 2.4
is analytic on the resolvent setρT σTc
, and the operator
ϕT 1
2πi
ΓϕzRzdz 2.5
is well defined. This relation establishes an algebra homomorphism7, Section 17.2 which implies in particular that
ϕTψT ϕψT, 2.6
ifψ:D → Cis also analytic. In particular, we have
T 1 2πi
ΓzRzdz. 2.7
The operators
ϕTΠ 1 2πi
ΓϕzRzΠRzdz, 2.8
Sϕ,Π 1 2πi
ΓϕzRz
ΠRz2
I−ΠRz−1
dz 2.9
are well defined for everyΠ ∈ L sufficiently small. Note that according to Dunford and Schwartz8, Lemma VII.6.11 , there is a constant 0< K <∞, such that
Rz
L≤ K
δΓ, ∀z∈Ωc. 2.10
Theorem 2.1Fr´echet Derivative. LetT ∈ Land suppose thatϕsatisfies2.2. Thenϕmaps the neighborhood{TT Π:Π∈ L, ΠL≤cδΓ/K, for some 0< c <1}intoL, when defined in the usual way of functional calculus. This mapping is Fr´echet differentiable atT, tangentially toL, with bounded derivativeϕT :L → L,as defined by2.8. More specifically, we have
ϕT Π ϕT ϕTΠ Sϕ,Π, 2.11
whereSϕ,Πis defined in2.9and ϕTΠ
L≤ 1 2πMΓLΓ
K δΓ
2
ΠL, 2.12
Sϕ,ΠL≤ 1
21−cπMΓLΓ K
δΓ 3
Π2L. 2.13
Proof. Forϕto be well defined on the neighborhood, let us first show that σT⊂Ω, ∀Π∈ L withΠL≤cδΓ
K. 2.14
To verify this, note that by 2.10 we have ΠRzL < c for such Π. Consequently, the operator
RzI−ΠRz−1Rz{Rz−1−ΠRz}−1
zI−T−Π−1Rz 2.15
is bounded for eachz∈Ωc, which entails2.14. Hence, ϕT 1
2πi
ΓϕzRzdz 2.16
is well defined forΠwithΠL≤cδΓ/K.
Applying a Neumann series expansion 9, Section 5.2 to the inverse on the left in 2.15, we obtain
Rz Rz
I ΠRz
ΠRz2 · · ·
Rz RzΠRz Rz
ΠRz2
I−ΠRz−1 ,
2.17 just as in Watson10 for matrices. Term-wise integration yields2.11.
The upper bounds in2.12and2.13are immediate from2.8and2.9, respectively, by exploiting2.3and2.15. The boundedness ofϕT as a linear operator mappingLinto itself follows at once from2.12.
Remark 2.2. It will be seen inSection 4that for the applications we have in mind it is important that we do not require thatT andΠcommute. If they do, however, it is clear that the Fr´echet derivative in2.8reduces to
ϕTΠ 1
2πi
ΓϕzR2zdz
Π. 2.18
It has been shown in Dunford and Schwartz8, proof of Theorem VII.6.10 that 1
2πi
ΓϕzR2zdz 1 2πi
ΓϕzRzdz. 2.19
Combination of2.11with2.18and2.19yields ϕT Π ϕT ϕTΠ O
Π2L
, 2.20
writing, for anyr >0,
O ΠrL
, asΠL−→0, 2.21
to indicate any quantityoperator, vector, numberwhose norm or absolute value is of the given order. Note that in2.20the operator, ϕT is to be understood in the sense of the usual functional calculus as in2.5withϕreplaced by its derivativeϕ.
In this situation of commuting operators, Dunford and Schwartz8 obtain the Taylor expansion
ϕT Π ∞
n0
ϕnT
n! Πn, 2.22
which implies, of course,2.20.
Keeping the perturbation as before, we now restrict T to the class CH of compact Hermitian operators. The bounded and countable spectrum consists of the number 0, whether an eigenvalue or not, and all the nonzero eigenvaluesλ1, λ2, . . . ∈R. In this work, we avoid technical issues related toλ0 being an eigenvalue, and assume thatTis one-to-one, that is, Tf 0 implies thatf0. It is well known7 that such aTcan be represented as
T ∞
j1
λjPj, 2.23
where thePjare the corresponding orthogonal eigenprojections onto the mutually orthogonal finite dimensional eigenspaces. These projections provide a resolution of the identity inH, that is,
IH∞
j1
Pj. 2.24
The resolvent has the expansion
Rz ∞
j1
1 z−λj
Pj, z∈ρT. 2.25
Corollary 2.3. Let the conditions ofTheorem 2.1be fulfilled forT ∈ CHwith expansion2.23. In this case the Fr´echet derivativeϕT :L → Lis given by
ϕTΠ
j
ϕ λj
PjΠPj
j /k
ϕ λk
−ϕ λj
λk−λj PjΠPk, Π∈ L. 2.26
Proof. Let us substitute the expansion2.25 forRz into the expression forϕTΠ in2.8.
Application of the partial fraction method yields
ϕTΠ
j
k
1 2πi
Γ
ϕz z−λj
z−λkdz
PjΠPk
j
1 2πi
Γ
ϕz z−λj2dz
PjΠPj
j /k
1 λk−λj
1 2πi
Γ
ϕz
z−λk− ϕz z−λj
dz
PjΠPk.
2.27
The right-hand side of2.27reduces at once to the expression on the right in2.26by an application of Cauchy’s integral formula.
Example 2.4. The functionϕz z,z ∈ C, is analytic on the entire complex plane so that Corollary 2.3applies. The Fr´echet derivative in2.26now reduces to
ϕTΠ
j
k
PjΠPk Π, 2.28
Π ∈ L. Of course this result is immediate because in this simple caseϕT Π T Π ϕT Π.
Example 2.5. Next let us, forp >0, consider the function
ϕαz αz−p, α > δΓ>0, 2.29
forz / −α. Note that the choice of αensures that the pole at z −αremains outside the contourΓ. Clearly there exists an open regionΩof the type required, such thatϕis analytic on some open neighborhoodDofΩ. HenceCorollary 2.3applies again. The operatorϕαT αI T−p represents a regularized or generalized inverse of Tikhonov type, according to whetherTis injective or not. The Fr´echet derivative in2.26now equals
ϕα,TΠ −p
j
1
αλjp1PjΠPj
j /k
αλj
p
− αλk
p λk−λj
αλj
p αλk
pPjΠPk, 2.30
forΠ∈ L.
Remark 2.6. ForT ∈ CH,T andΠcommuting the double sum on the right in2.26cancels and we obtain
ϕTΠ
j
ϕ λj
PjΠ, 2.31
in accordance with2.20. Apparently, the double sum is a correction term needed whenT andΠdo not commute.
3. Perturbation of Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors
Throughout this section, bothTandΠare assumed to be Hermitian, so that alsoT Π∈ LH. In addition to this, we assume that
T ∈ LH has an isolated eigenvalueλ1, 3.1
with one-dimensional eigenspace. Consequently, the eigenprojection can be written
P1p1⊗p1, for somep1∈H with p1 1, 3.2 where fora, b∈Hthe operatora⊗bis defined bya⊗bxx, ba, x∈H.
The region Ω ⊃ σT will now be chosen in such a way that it has a connected componentΩ1with the properties
Ω1∩σT λ1, distΩ1,Ω\Ω1>0. 3.3
A special analytic functionϕ1:D → Csuch that
ϕ1z 1, z∈Ω1, ϕ1z 0, z∈Ω0 Ω\Ω1, 3.4 will play an important role in the sequel. Note, for instance, that
ϕ1T P1. 3.5
For the Fr´echet derivative ofϕ1T atT, a special expression can be obtained. Let us write
T λ1P1T0, 3.6
whereT0 is Hermitian with spectrumσT0 ⊂ Ω0. According to the spectral theorem, there exists a resolution of the identityEλ,λ∈σT0, such that
T0
σT0λ dEλ. 3.7
It should be noted that
P1Eλ EλP1O, ∀λ∈σT0, 3.8
whereOis the zero operator, and that
Rz 1
z−λ1
P1
σT0
1
z−λdEλ. 3.9
Let us define
Q1
σT0
1
λ1−λdEλ. 3.10
Lemma 3.1. The Fr´echet derivative ofϕ1TatTis given by
ϕ1,TΠ P1ΠQ1Q1ΠP1, Π∈ LH. 3.11
Proof. This follows by substitution of3.9in the expression on the right in ϕ1,TΠ 1
2πi
Γ1
RzΠRzdz, Γ1∂Ω1, 3.12
for this derivative; see also2.8. We thus obtain ϕ1,TΠ 1
2πi
Γ1
1 z−λ1
2P1ΠP1dz 1
2πi
Γ1
1 z−λ1P1Π
σT0
1
z−λdEλ
dz 1
2πi
Γ1
σT0
1
z−λdEλ
Π 1 z−λ1P1dz 1
2πi
Γ1
σT0
1
z−λdEλ
Π
σT0
1
z−μdEμ
.
3.13
By Cauchy’s integral formula 1 2πi
Γ1
1
z−λ12dzϕ1 λ1
0, 3.14
so that the first term on the right side in3.13is the zero operator. Regarding the second, note that
1 2πi
Γ1
1 z−λ1
z−λdz 1 λ1−λ
1 2πi
Γ1
1
z−λ1dz− 1 2πi
Γ1
1 z−λdz
1
λ1−λ, 3.15
because eachλ∈σT0lies outside the contourΓ1. Consequently, the second term equals
P1Π 1
2πi
σT0
1
λ1−λdEλ
P1ΠQ1. 3.16
Similarly, the third term equalsQ1ΠP1. The last term cancels, because 1
2πi
Γ1
1
z−λz−μdz0, 3.17
since bothλandμlie outsideΓ1.
Some results about the perturbation of λ1 and P1 in a given direction as in 1.3 that are well known in literature1,2 can be partly recovered for perturbations in some neighborhood, in an essentially self-contained manner, as simple consequences of the results inSection 2.
Corollary 3.2. Under the assumptions3.1,3.2, and forΠ∈ LHsufficiently small, the operatorT has an isolated eigenvalueλ1with eigenprojectionP1p1⊗p1for some unit vectorp1∈H, satisfying
P1P1P1ΠQ1Q1ΠP1O Π2L
, 3.18
whereQ1is defined in3.10.
Proof. In view of3.5and3.11, application of2.11withϕϕ1yieldsϕ1T P1P1ΠQ1 Q1ΠP1 OΠ2L. Clearly ϕ1Tis Hermitian, and because ϕ1T2 ϕ21T ϕ1Tby 2.6, it is also idempotent so that it is in fact some projectionP1, for example, it follows that P1−P1L<1 for allΠsufficiently small, and hence the range ofP1must also have dimension 111 so thatP1 p1⊗p1for somep1∈Hwithp11.
Next, letχz z,z ∈ C, be the identity function. By 2.6, again, on the one hand we haveχϕ1Tp1 TP1p1 Tp1, and on the otherϕ1χTp1 P1Tp1 p1⊗p1Tp1 Tp1,p1p1 λ1p1. Hencep1is an eigenvector ofTwith eigenvalueλ1.
Corollary 3.3. Under the assumptions ofCorollary 3.2, we have
p1p1Q1Πp1O Π2L
. 3.19
Proof. Let us first observe thatP1ΠQ1p1 0 because of 3.8. Hence3.18yieldsp1−p1 P1−P1p1r1r2Q1Πp1r1r2OΠ2L, where
r1P1 p1−p1
, r2 P1−P1 p1−p1
. 3.20
It sufficies to show thatrj OΠ2Lforj 1,2. The idea of the proof can be found in Dauxois et al.4 .
Regardingr1, note that 1− p1, p12p1, p1p1−p12 ≤ P1−P12LOΠ2L, once more using3.18. Hencep1, p1 → 1, asΠL → 0, and therefore 2≥1p1, p1 ≥1 for ΠLsufficiently small. This entails
r1 p1, p1
p1−p1 1− p1, p1
1− p1, p1
2 1
p1, p1 O Π2L
.
3.21
Forr2we have
r2 ≤ P1−P1
L p1−p1 O
ΠL 2 1−
p1, p1 O
ΠL 2 r1 O Π2L
,
3.22
as can be seen from3.21.
Corollary 3.4. Under the assumptions ofCorollary 3.2, we have λ1 λ1
Πp1, p1
O Π2L
. 3.23
Proof. With the help of 3.19, we see that λ1 Tp1,p1 T Πp1 Q1Πp1, p1 Q1Πp1OΠ2L. The result follows from a routine calculation combined with the equalities Tp1, p1 λ1, Tp1, Q1Πp1 λ1p1, Q1Πp1 λ1Q1p1,Πp1 0, and TQ1Πp1, p1 Q1Πp1, Tp1 λ1Q1Πp1, p1 λ1Πp1, Q1p1 0. For the last two equalities we assume thatTandQ1are Hermitian andQ1p10 by3.8.
Corollary 3.5. LetT ∈ CHbe given by2.23and satisfy3.2. Then3.18and3.19remain true with
Q1∞
j2
1
λ1−λjPj. 3.24
Proof. All nonzero eignvalues ofT are isolated, in particularλ1. It is immediate from2.23 thatT0∞
j2λjPj, and this leads to the special expression forQ1in3.24.
Remark 3.6. The assumption thatΠbe Hermitian is in fact not necessary. Of course, if we just requireΠto be bounded, the perturbed operatorTis not in general Hermitian anymore. In particular, a suitably modified version ofCorollary 3.3will now claim the existence of a pair of eigenvectors,p1forTandp∗1forT∗, with expansions
p1p1Q1Πp1O Π2L
, p∗1p1Q1Π∗p1O Π2L
, 3.25
asΠ → 0.
4. Applications
In this section, we will sketch three applications: two in statistics and one in numerical analysis.
4.1. Noisy Integral Equations
LetK : L20,1 → L20,1be a compact injective integral operator, with measurable real kernel denoted by the same symbol without confusion. More specifically, inputf ∈L20,1 and outputg∈L20,1are related according to
gs 1
0
Ks, tftdt. 4.1
In practice, only finitely many data regarding the output are available, usually blurred by random measurement error. If the data are collected according to a random design, we may think of the data set as of n independent copies X1, Y1, . . . ,Xn, Yn of a pair X, Y of random variables, where
Y gX KfX , 4.2 the design variableXhas a Uniform0,1distribution, the error variablehas finite variance and zero mean, and whereXandare stochastically independent.
It is the purpose to recoverf from these data. It is expedient to “precondition” with the adjoint operatorK∗and recoverffrom the equation
qK∗g K∗Kf Rf, 4.3
whereRis compact, Hermitian, and strictly positive. Under suitable conditions,
qt 1
n n
i1
YiK∗ t, Xi
1 n
n i1
YiK Xi, t
, t∈0,1 , 4.4
is an unbiased and√
n-consistent estimator ofq; see, for instance, van Rooij and Ruymgaart 12 . Since R−1 is unbounded, an estimator of the input f is obtained by applying a regularized inverse ofRtoq. Here we will use the Tikhonov type inverse
αIR−1ϕaR, α >0, 4.5
whereϕαz αz−1; see also2.29. This yields the input estimator
fαϕαRq, α >0. 4.6
To assess the quality of the estimator, one considers the mean integrated squared errorMISE E fα−f 2. 4.7 The behavior of the MISE is well studied in literature.
Recently, there is an interest in certain econometric models where the operatorK or Ris unknown but can be estimated from the data. LetRdenote an estimator ofRand assume thatRis also compact, Hermitian, and nonnegative. In this case, the input estimator
fα
αIR−1
qϕαR q, α >0, 4.8 will be employed. One expects that estimation ofRwill increase the MISE, and naturally the question arises how much bigger the MISE offαwill be than that offα.
An upper bound for this increase of the MISE can be easily found from the results in Section 2. For large sample sizen,Rwill be close toR, andΠ R−Rcan be considered as a small random perturbation ofR. Writingϕα,Rfor the Fr´echet derivative atR, we see from Theorem 2.1that
fα−f
ϕαR −ϕαR
qϕαRq−f
ϕα,RΠ
qfα−fO Π 2
.
4.9
Apparently,ϕα,RΠ qis an extra error term due to the estimation ofR.
To find an upper bound for its MISE, let us first observe that2.30simplifies forp1 and yields
ϕα,RΠ −
j
k
1 αλj
αλk
PjΠP k, 4.10
where now theλjand thePjare the spectral characteristics ofR. Let us write, for brevity, h
k
1 αλk
Pkq, 4.11
and note that
h2≤ 1
α2q 2. 4.12
We thus arrive at
E ϕα,RΠ q 2E
j
1 αλj
pjΠ h 2≤ 1
α2E Π 2
L h 2≤ 1
α4E Π 2
L q 2. 4.13
Hence, under suitable assumptions, estimation of the kernel yields an extra term in the MISE of the input estimator which is of orderα−4. In the Russian literature, sharper bounds can be found; see in particular Bakushinsky and Kokurin13, Section 2.2 . For results of this type in the statistical literature, obtained in a different manner, see, for instance, Hall and Horowitz14 and Florens15 .
4.2. Some Asymptotics for Functional Canonical Correlations
LetX be a real random element in the Hilbert spaceL20,1and assume thatEX4 < ∞.
Its meanμ∈L20,1and covariance operatorS:L20,1 → L20,1are well defined by the relationsEf, Xf, μ,Ef, X−μX−μ, gf, Sgfor allf, g∈L20,1. The operatorS is known to be of finite trace and hence Hilbert-Schmidt and compact. It is also nonnegative Hermitian. Without real loss of generality, we will assumeSto be injective, so that it will be strictly positive.
Next suppose that we are given a random sampleX1, . . . , Xnof independent copies of X. The usual estimators ofμandSareX 1/nn
i1XiandS 1/nn
i1Xi−X⊗Xi−X, respectively, whereSshares all the properties ofS, except that it cannot be injective because it has a finite dimensional kernel whose range has dimension at mostn−1.
BecauseS cannot be injective, the finite dimensional definition of sample canonical correlation has to be modified, and some kind of smoothing or regularization is recom- mended in literature 16 . Regularization might even be useful when the population is considered, although Sis injective 17 . This regularization yields Tikhonov type inverses in an expression for the canonical correlation .
For a precise definition, letH1and H2 be two closed subspaces ofL20,1andIj the orthogonal projection ontoHjj1,2. Let us writeSjkIjSIk, and note thatIjαISIk Sjkforj /k. Similar notation will be used forS. The regularized squared principal canonical correlation for the population is now defined as
ρ2 sup
f1,f2/0
f1, S12f22
f1,
αI1S11 f1
f2,
αI2S22
f2. 4.14
Its sample analogueρ2 is obtained by replacing theSjk with Sjk in 4.14. The supremum is actually a maximum, and pairs of maximizers will be denoted by f1∗, f2∗, and f1∗, f2∗,
respectively. The corresponding canonical variates then are X, fj∗
, X,fj∗
, j 1,2. 4.15
For an alternative description of these canonical correlations, let us introduce the operator
R1
αI1S11−1/2 S12
αI2S22−1 S21
αI1S11−1/2
. 4.16
Interchanging the indices 1 and 2 yieldsR2, and replacingSjkwithSjkyieldsR1andR2. It can be seen that all these operators are Hilbert-Schmidt and strictly positive Hermitian. It will be assumed thatRjhas the largest eigenvalue with one-dimensional eigenspace generated byfj∗ withfj∗1. Under this condition, it has been shown in Cupidon et al.18 that
ρ2largest eigenvalue ofRj
fj∗, Rjfj∗
, 4.17
forj1,2. A similar result holds true forρ2.
It is well known that the asymptotic distribution of the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of a random operator can be derived from the asymptotic distribution of this random operator itselfsee10 for Euclidean spaces and4 for Hilbert spaces. This technique is based on the results ofSection 3. In the present situation, this means that we have to show the convergence in distribution of the suitably standardized Rj. Because all operators are Hilbert-Schmidt, it can be shown that
Rj√
nRj−Rj
d
−→ G, as n−→ ∞, inL. 4.18 Result4.18follows easily if convergence in distribution can be established for each of the factors definingRj, for instance,
αISjj
−1/2
ϕα Sjj
, 4.19
where this timeϕαz αz−1/2, compare2.29. It is known4 that
√n Sjj−Sjj−→ Gd jj, as n−→ ∞, inLHS, 4.20
for some Gaussian random elementGjj, whereLHSis the Hilbert space of all Hilbert-Schmidt operators mapping H into itself. Writing ϕα,j for the Fr´echet derivative evaluated at Sjj Section 2and exploiting the fact that the imbedding ofLHSisLare continuous, we obtain via a kind of delta-method18,19
√n ϕα Sjj
−ϕα
Sjj
d
−→ϕα,jGjj, as n−→ ∞, inL 4.21
the desired result. A combination of results like this for each of the factors ofRjyields4.18.
4.3. Solution of a Nonlinear Operator Equation
In Bakushinsky and Kokurin 13 , the following problem is considered. Let H1 andH2 be Hilbert spaces andF:H1 → H2an operator, not necessarily linear. Thenonlinearequation
Fx 0, x∈H, 4.22
is studied. Letx∗be a solution of4.22and introduce a setΩ {x∈H1 :x−x∗1 ≤r}, for somer >0. It is assumed thatFis Fr´echet differentiable onΩ. IfFxis the derivative atx∈Ω it is, moreover, assumed that
Fx −Fy
LH1,H2≤Lx−y1, x, y∈Ω, 4.23 where 0 < L < ∞is a given number. Given an initial point x0 ∈ Ω and a sequence{αn}, αn>0, of regularization parameters, these authors show that, under some further conditions, the generalized Gauss-Newton method generates a sequence of points{xn}such that
xn−x∗ O αpn
, for somep≥ 1
2. 4.24
In their proof of this result, the authors need a crucial upper bound. Under some additional assumptions, we want to derive this upper bound as an immediate consequence ofTheorem 2.1. In order to relate the present problem to the setup of our paper, let us assume thatH1H2H, and note that
Fx∗∗ Fx∗
T ∈ LH. 4.25
Forxn, let
Fxn∗ Fxn
T∈ LH, 4.26
and set
TTT−T T Π, 4.27
where obviouslyΠ∈ LH. It is not hard to see that4.23entails
ΠL≤a x∗−xn , 4.28 for some 0 < a < ∞. LetΓbe the contour in2.1andD the corresponding domain. As in Bakushinsky and Kokurin13 , a functionΘz, α,z∈D, is employed in the iteration scheme, which is analytic onD.
Narrowing down the generality in Bakushinsky and Kokurin13 somewhat further, so that the current conditions are satisfied, their proof of the convergence of the iterations requires an upper bound for the expressionin our notation
1 2πi
Γ
1−Θ z, αn
{Rz−Rz}dz 1−Θ T, αn
−
1−Θ T, αn
Θ T, αn
−Θ T, αn
.
4.29
Keepingnfixed, let us briefly write this last expression asΘT −ΘT. NowTheorem 2.1 applies withϕ Θ, and application yields at once
ΘT−ΘTL≤ ΘTT−T
LO
T−T2L
≤bT−TLO
T−T2L
≤ab x∗−xn O x∗−xn 2 ,
4.30
for some 0< b <∞, by4.28.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the referee for some useful comments. For this research, D. S.
Gilliam was supported by AFOSR Grant no. FA9550-04-1027 and F. H. Ruymgaart by NSF Grant no. DMS-0605167.
References
1 T. Kato, Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1966.
2 F. Rellich, Perturbation Theory of Eigenvalue Problems, Gordon and Breach, New York, NY, USA, 1969.
3 F. Chatelin, Spectral Approximation of Linear Operators, Computer Science and Applied Mathematics, Academic Press, New York, NY, USA, 1983.
4 J. Dauxois, A. Pousse, and Y. Romain, “Asymptotic theory for the principal component analysis of a vector random function: some applications to statistical inference,” Journal of Multivariate Analysis, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 136–154, 1982.
5 R. Bhatia, Positive Definite Matrices, Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 2007.
6 F. Ruymgaart and S. Yang, “Some applications of Watson’s perturbation approach to random matrices,” Journal of Multivariate Analysis, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 48–60, 1997.
7 P. D. Lax, Functional Analysis, Pure and Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 2002.
8 N. Dunford and J. T. Schwartz, Linear Operators. Part I: General Theory, Wiley Classics Library, Wiley- Interscience, New York, NY, USA, 1988.
9 L. Debnath and P. Mikusi ´nski, Introduction to Hilbert Spaces with Applications, Academic Press, San Diego, Calif, USA, 2nd edition, 1999.
10 G. S. Watson, Statistics on Spheres, vol. 6 of University of Arkansas Lecture Notes in the Mathematical Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1983.
11 F. Riesz and B. Sz.-Nagy, Functional Analysis, Dover Books on Advanced Mathematics, Dover, New York, NY, USA, 1990.
12 A. C. M. van Rooij and F. Ruymgaart, “Asymptotic minimax rates for abstract linear estimators,”
Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 389–402, 1996.
13 A. B. Bakushinsky and M. Yu. Kokurin, Iterative Methods for Approximate Solution of Inverse Problems, vol. 577 of Mathematics and Its Applications, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2004.
14 P. Hall and J. L. Horowitz, “Nonparametric methods for inference in the presence of instrumental variables,” The Annals of Statistics, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 2904–2929, 2005.
15 J.-P. Florens, “Inverse problems and structural econometrics: the example of instrumental variables,”
in Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications Dewatripont, M. Hanson and S. J.
Turnovsky, Eds., vol. 2, pp. 284–311, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2003.
16 S. E. Leurgans, R. A. Moyeed, and B. W. Silverman, “Canonical correlation analysis when the data are curves,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 725–740, 1993.
17 J. Cupidon, R. Eubank, D. S. Gilliam, and F. Ruymgaart, “Some properties of canonical correlations and variates in infinite dimensions,” Journal of Multivariate Analysis, vol. 99, no. 6, pp. 1083–1104, 2008.
18 J. Cupidon, D. S. Gilliam, R. Eubank, and F. Ruymgaart, “The delta method for analytic functions of random operators with application to functional data,” Bernoulli, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 1179–1194, 2007.
19 A. W. van der Vaart, Asymptotic Statistics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998.