Tropical Dynamic Programming
Tropical Dynamic Programming
IHP
1 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 =
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
2 3 =
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
2 3 =5
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
2 3 =5
5/2 =
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
2 3 =5
5/2 =3
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
2 3 =5
5/2 =3
23 =
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
2 3 =5
5/2 =3
23 =2 2 2 = 6
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
2 3 =5
5/2 =3
23 =2 2 2 = 6
1 =
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
7 0
2
=
3
1
2 3 =5
5/2 =3
23 =2 2 2 = 6
1 =0.5
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
2 / 85
a b = a + b
So
2 + 3 = 3
7 0
2
9
=
3
1
4
2 3 =5
5/2 =3
23 =2 2 2 = 6
1 =0.5
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
2 / 85
IHP
3 / 85
a + b = min(a, b)
a b = a + b
2 + 3 = 2
2 3 = 5
IHP
4 / 85
IHP
5 / 85
IHP
6 / 85
IHP
7 / 85
tropical convexity
dynamic programming / zero-sum games
Perron-Frobenius theory
metric geometry
IHP
8 / 85
IHP
9 / 85
IHP
9 / 85
IHP
10 / 85
IHP
10 / 85
IHP
10 / 85
IHP
10 / 85
Tropical segments:
f
g
[f , g ] := {f + g | , R {}, + = 1}.
IHP
11 / 85
Tropical segments:
f
g
[f , g ] := { sup( + f , + g ) | ,
R {}, max(, ) = 0}.
IHP
11 / 85
IHP
12 / 85
IHP
12 / 85
A max-plus tetrahedron?
IHP
13 / 85
IHP
14 / 85
Why?
IHP
15 / 85
y +x +1=0
attained twice
IHP
16 / 85
y +x +1=0
attained twice
IHP
16 / 85
y +x +1=0
attained twice
IHP
16 / 85
IHP
16 / 85
max(X , Y ) = 0
log(e X + e Y ) = 1
IHP
16 / 85
IHP
16 / 85
h 0+
attained twice
IHP
17 / 85
IHP
18 / 85
IHP
19 / 85
IHP
20 / 85
This talk
Tropical convexity is equivalent to dynamic programming
(zero-sum games).
IHP
21 / 85
This talk
Tropical convexity is equivalent to dynamic programming
(zero-sum games).
finite dimensional convex sets (cones) stochastic
games with finite state spaces
IHP
21 / 85
This talk
Tropical convexity is equivalent to dynamic programming
(zero-sum games).
finite dimensional convex sets (cones) stochastic
games with finite state spaces
infinite dimensional convex cones, spaces of functions
stationnary solutions of Hamilton-Jacobi(-Bellman)
equations (1-player: Fathis weak KAM solutions)
IHP
21 / 85
This talk
Tropical convexity is equivalent to dynamic programming
(zero-sum games).
finite dimensional convex sets (cones) stochastic
games with finite state spaces
infinite dimensional convex cones, spaces of functions
stationnary solutions of Hamilton-Jacobi(-Bellman)
equations (1-player: Fathis weak KAM solutions)
leads to: equivalence (computational complexity)
results, algorithms, approximation methods, . . .
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
21 / 85
Shapley operators
X = C (K ), even X = Rn ; Shapley operator T ,
X
Ti (x) = max min riab +
Pijab xj ,
i [n]
aAi bBi,a
1jn
IHP
22 / 85
Shapley operators
X = C (K ), even X = Rn ; Shapley operator T ,
X
Ti (x) = max min riab +
Pijab xj ,
i [n]
aAi bBi,a
1jn
IHP
22 / 85
Shapley operators
X = C (K ), even X = Rn ; Shapley operator T ,
X
Ti (x) = max min riab +
Pijab xj ,
i [n]
aAi bBi,a
1jn
1in
IHP
22 / 85
IHP
23 / 85
t(z) := max zi .
i
IHP
23 / 85
t+ (z) := max(max zi , 0) .
IHP
23 / 85
Repeated games
IHP
24 / 85
Max and Min flip a coin to decide who makes the move.
Min always pay.
3
2
2
1
8
3
IHP
25 / 85
Max and Min flip a coin to decide who makes the move.
Min always pay.
3
2
2
1
8
3
1
vik+1 = (max(cij + vjk ) + min (cij + vjk )) .
j: ij
2 j: ij
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
25 / 85
3
2
2
1
8
3
v1 = 12 (max(2 + v1 , 3 + v2 , 1 + v3 ) + min(2 + v1 , 3 + v2 , 1 + v3 )
5
0 v2 = 1 (max(1 + v1 , 2 + v2 , 8 + v3 ) + min(1 + v1 , 2 + v2 , 8 + v3 )
2
4
v3 = 12 (max(2 + v1 , 1 + v2 ) + min(2 + v1 , 1 + v2 )
IHP
26 / 85
1
v = (max vjk + min vjk ) ,
j: ij
2 j: ij
vi , i boundary prescribed:
discrete variant of Laplacian infinity (Oberman), or
Richman games (Tug of war).
IHP
27 / 85
Optimality certificates
More generally, for u Rn and R,
T (u) u = (T ) 0
T (u) u = (T ) 0
T (u) = + u = (T ) = (, . . . , ) .
IHP
28 / 85
Optimality certificates
More generally, for u Rn and R,
T (u) u = (T ) 0
T (u) u = (T ) 0
T (u) = + u = (T ) = (, . . . , ) .
Sufficient condition SG+Gunawardena, TAMS 2004: if G (T ) is
strongly connected, then the additive eigenproblem
T (u) = + u with R is solvable
G (T ): arc i j if lims Ti (sej ) = +.
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
28 / 85
IHP
29 / 85
IHP
29 / 85
IHP
29 / 85
However. . .
IHP
29 / 85
However. . .
If the graph of T is semi-algebraic, then (T ) does
exists. Neyman 04, extending Bewley and Kohlberg 76.
IHP
29 / 85
t(T k (x) x)
t(T k (x) x)
= inf
(T ) := lim
k1
k
k
k
b(T k (x) x)
b(T k (x) x)
(T ) := lim
= sup
k
k
k
k1
t(z) := max zi ,
i
b(z) := min zi .
IHP
30 / 85
Rn+ Rn+
x Int Rn+
= max{ R+ | F (v ) = v , v Rn+ , v =
6 0}
= max{ R+ | F (v ) v , v Rn+ , v =
6 0}
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
31 / 85
j, [T k (x)]j k(T ) + xj ,
x Int Rn+
= max{ R+ | F (v ) = v , v Rn+ , v =
6 0}
= max{ R+ | F (v ) v , v Rn+ , v =
6 0}
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
31 / 85
IHP
32 / 85
IHP
33 / 85
IHP
33 / 85
IHP
34 / 85
1kn
1kn
IHP
34 / 85
1kn
1kn
1kn
IHP
34 / 85
x3
x3
2x1 x2 3x3
V
b
x1
x2
x1
x2
2 + x1 max(x2 , 3 + x3 )
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
35 / 85
x3
b
x1
x2
c
2 + x1 max(x2 , 3 + x3 )
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
35 / 85
1kn
1kn
IHP
36 / 85
IHP
37 / 85
Polyhedral case
IHP
38 / 85
x1 a + max(x2 2, x3 1)
2 + x2 a + max(x1 , x3 1)
max(x2 2, x3 a) x1 + 2
(H1 )
(H2 )
(H3 )
a2
a
2
a1
2
a1
2
a1
2
a1
2
3
IHP
39 / 85
x3
x3
H3
H1
x1
H3
H2
H2
x1
x2
x2
H1
IHP
40 / 85
x3
x3
H3
H1
x1
H3
H2
x1
H2
x2
x2
H1
IHP
40 / 85
Corollary
Feasibiliby in tropical linear programming, i.e.,
?u (R{})n , max aij +uj max bij +uj , 1 i p
j
IHP
41 / 85
IHP
42 / 85
1 4
A = 0 2 ,
2 0
IHP
43 / 85
1 4
A = 0 2 ,
2 0
IHP
43 / 85
IHP
44 / 85
IHP
45 / 85
1 4
A = 0 2 ,
2 0
1 0 4
A = 1 2 .
1 2
Eigenvalues:
L1 1/3 , L2 j1/3 , L3 j 2 1/3 .
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
46 / 85
IHP
47 / 85
Allamigeon,SG, Goubault,
STACS 10
IHP
48 / 85
Allamigeon,SG, Goubault,
STACS 10
IHP
48 / 85
IHP
49 / 85
Bubble sort
Variables : i , j , k , x , y , z
Program :
local t {
i := x ;
j := y ;
k := z ;
i f x > y then
i := y ;
j := x ;
fi ;
i f j > z then
k := j ;
j := z ;
fi ;
i f i > j then
t := j ;
j := i ;
i := t ;
fi ;
};
Can prove
automatically that
k = max(x, y, z)?
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
50 / 85
IHP
51 / 85
IHP
52 / 85
IHP
53 / 85
L(x(s), x(s))ds
+ (x(t))
sup
x(0)=x, x()
IHP
54 / 85
L(x(s), x(s))ds
+ (x(t))
sup
x(0)=x, x()
IHP
54 / 85
v (0, ) =
x y
) + (y ) .
t
IHP
55 / 85
v (0, ) =
IHP
55 / 85
i (t)wi
i[p]
IHP
56 / 85
IHP
56 / 85
hyi , xi
adapted if v is convex
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
57 / 85
xi
adapted if v is C -Lip
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
57 / 85
i (t)wi
i[p]
t+h
'
i (t + h)wi
i[p]
IHP
58 / 85
i (t)S h wi
i[p]
t+h
'
i (t + h)wi
i[p]
IHP
58 / 85
IHP
58 / 85
k (t)hS h wk , zj i
k[p]
IHP
59 / 85
= sup k (t) + hS h wk , zj i
k[p]
IHP
59 / 85
IHP
60 / 85
IHP
61 / 85
IHP
62 / 85
IHP
62 / 85
IHP
62 / 85
sup
i1 , ,ik [r ]
Sih1 Sihk .
IHP
62 / 85
0.2
0.1
0
2
0.1
0.2
2
0
2
2
0
0
2 2
2
0
0
2 2
IHP
63 / 85
1
N 2/d
IHP
64 / 85
IHP
65 / 85
IHP
66 / 85
(X , d) metric space, T : X X ,
d(T (x), T (y )) d(x, y ) .
IHP
67 / 85
IHP
67 / 85
y X
IHP
68 / 85
T k (x)
k
T k (x)
k
R = (T )
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
69 / 85
Compare Collatz-Wielandt
(F ) = max{ R+ | F (v ) v , v Rn+ , v 6= 0}
= inf{ > 0 | F (w ) w , w int Rn+ }
= lim kF k (x)k1/k ,
k
x int Rn+
and so
(F (w ))i
(F (v ))i
=
(F
)
=
max
min
.
w int Rn+ 1in
v Rn+ 1in
wi
vi
inf
max
v 6=0
vi 6=0
IHP
70 / 85
IHP
71 / 85
(T ) := lim
Moreover,
(T ) = inf d(y , T (y )) .
y X
IHP
72 / 85
IHP
73 / 85
Hemi-metric
is an hemi-metric on X if
(x, z) (x, y ) + (y , z)
(x, y ) = (y , x) = 0 if and only if x = y .
Variant: weak metric of Papadoupoulos, Troyanov.
(X , ) is complete if X is complete for the metric
d(x, y ) := max((x, y ), (y , x)).
IHP
74 / 85
x, y int C .
IHP
75 / 85
(y , z) X 2 ,
s [0, 1] .
y
s (y )
x?
s (z)
z
IHP
76 / 85
x X
IHP
77 / 85
IHP
78 / 85
IHP
79 / 85
Collatz-Wielandt revisited
Let F : C C , where C is a symmetric cone (self-dual cone with a
group of automorphisms acting transitively on it), say C = Rn+ or
C = Sn+ .
Recall F is nonexpansive in RFunk iff it is order preserving and
homogeneous of degree one.
Walsh (Adv. Geom. 08): the horoboundary of C in the (reverse)
Funk metric is the Euclidean boundary: any Martin function h
corresponds to some u C \ {0}:
h(x) = RFunk(x, u) + RFunk(x , u) , x int C ,
h is a horofunction iff u C \ {0}.
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
80 / 85
x int C
y int C
IHP
81 / 85
T
T
IHP
82 / 85
Pijab xj ,
1i n
1jn
(T k (x))j
k 1jn
k
(T ) = (T ) = lim max
IHP
83 / 85
Conclusion
Nonexpansive maps/Perron-Frobenius techniques: tools to prove
combinatorial results.
Symmetric cones have a tropical flavor (log glasses, nonpositive
curvature)
Order preserving homogeneous maps should be thought of as
nonexpansive maps in RFunk(x, y ) := log inf{ > 0|x y }.
this leads to Denjoy-Wolff type results (nested invariant
horoballs)
Collatz-Wielandt and Kohlberg-Neyman recovered as special
cases.
Generalization of Edmondss good characterizations (NP
coNP membership of mean payoff games is a special case).
Current work SG+Zheng Qu: application to various Riccati-type
equations.
Stephane Gaubert (INRIA and CMAP)
IHP
84 / 85