theorem 3
- North America > United States > California > Alameda County > Berkeley (0.04)
- North America > Canada (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > San Francisco County > San Francisco (0.14)
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.04)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- (3 more...)
- North America > United States > California > San Francisco County > San Francisco (0.14)
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.05)
- North America > United States > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- (3 more...)
A Organization of the Appendix 482 The appendix includes the missing proofs, detailed discussions of some argument in the main body
The proof of infeasibility condition (Theorem 3.2) is provided in Section B. Explanations on conditions derived in Theorem 3.2 are included in Section C. The proof of properties of the proposed model (r)LogSpecT (Proposition 3.4 The truncated Hausdorff distance based proof details of Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.4 are Details of L-ADMM and its convergence analysis are in Section F. Additional experiments and discussions on synthetic data are included in Section G. ( m 1) Again, from Farkas' lemma, this implies that the following linear system does not have a solution: Example 3.1 we know δ = 2|h Since the constraint set S is a cone, it follows that for all γ > 0, γ S = S . Opt(C, α) = α Opt(C, 1), which completes the proof. The proof will be conducted by constructing a feasible solution for rLogSpecT. Since the LogSpecT is a convex problem and Slater's condition holds, the KKT conditions We show that it is feasible for rLogSpecT. R, its epigraph is defined as epi f: = {( x, y) | y f ( x) }. Before presenting the proof, we first introduce the following lemma.
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Europe > Netherlands > South Holland > Dordrecht (0.04)
- Europe > Netherlands > North Holland > Amsterdam (0.04)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Europe > Netherlands > South Holland > Dordrecht (0.04)
- Europe > Netherlands > North Holland > Amsterdam (0.04)
- Asia > Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Asia > China > Hong Kong (0.04)
- Research Report (0.67)
- Overview (0.45)
- North America > United States > California > Alameda County > Berkeley (0.04)
- Europe > United Kingdom > England > Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Alameda County > Berkeley (0.14)
- Oceania > Australia > New South Wales > Sydney (0.04)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Allegheny County > Pittsburgh (0.04)
- North America > United States > California > Santa Clara County > Palo Alto (0.04)