BANDWIDTH REDUCTION ON SPARSE MATRICES BY INTRODUCING NEW VARIABLES

A sparse matrix bandwidth reduction method is analyzed. It consists of equation splitting, substitution and introducing new variables, similar to the substructure decomposition in the finite element method (FEM). It is especially useful when the bandwidth cannot be reduced by strategically interchanging columns and rows. In such cases, equation splitting and successive reordering can further reduce the bandwidth, at cost of introducing new variables. While the substructure decomposition is carried out before the system matrix is built, the given approach is applied afterwards, independently on the origin of the linear system. It is successfully applied to a sparse matrix, the bandwidth of which cannot be reduced by reordering. For the exemplary FEM simulation, an increase of performance of the direct solver is obtaine.


INTRODUCTION
A linear system, conveniently denoted in a matrix-vector notation is invariant under the simultaneous interchange of x i and x j and the columns i and j of the matrix, and the simultaneous interchange of y i and i j and the rows i and j of the matrix.Depending on the solution algorithm that should be applied, different matrix characteristics may be advantageous.If, for example, Gaussian elimination is used, the creation of non-zero entries (fill in) during the process can be reduced either by reordering the system such that the non-zero entries concentrate on the main diagonal and columns that range upwards from it, or by concentrating the non-zero entries in a band around the main diagonal.The latter case corresponds to a reduction of the bandwidth of the matrix.The bandwidth of a matrix is related to the maximum distance of non-zero matrix entries from the main diagonal.One distinguishes the left and the right half bandwidth, which coincide for symmetric matrices.The bandwidth b is given by b=k 1 +k 2 .Especially direct solution algorithms can take advantage of a band structure, which is moreover helpful in reducing the memory requirements.For direct solvers, t cpu ≈ cb 2 holds.Consequently, one is interested in reordering the linear system such that the system matrix bandwidth is reduced.Sloans ordering [14], Gibbs-Poole-Stockmeyer ordering [10], minimum degree ordering and nested dissection, which is also referred to as nested substructure method in the context of the FEM [7].A survey is given by [2].However, there are cases in which the bandwidth cannot be reduced by reordering.If the linear system consists mostly of equations with a small number of terms but at least one equation has a considerably larger number of terms, the matrix contains dominant non-zero rows, while the matrix contains dominant non-zero columns if at least one variable appears much more often in the equations than the other variables.Such linear systems are not encountered very often, but they can arise, e.g., if a large number of nodes of a finite element mesh is constrained by few equations.Here, an approach which permits a further reduction of the bandwidth at the cost of the overall system size is presented, and tested in conjunction with the FE system ABAQUS.

Row-Dominant matrices Consider the linear system
i.e. a matrix with the first row and the diagonal entirely filled with non-zero entries, while all other matrix elements are equal to zero.The bandwidth of the matrix is equal to n, and one can see that the interchanging of columns and rows can reduce the bandwidth maximally to approximately n/2, by putting the dominant row in a more central position.Let us introduce the substitution and treat x * as unknown.Hence, we add the latter equation to the list of equations and rewrite the system as The matrix bandwidth can now be reduced by interchanging row and columns to approximately n/4.The new system has one more degree of freedom, but its minimal bandwidth is halved.The procedure can be applied to the remaining dominant rows to reduce the bandwidth to a certain value, or one can directly split the first equation into p equations, reducing the bandwidth to approximately n/(2p).

Column-Dominant matrices
A similar strategy can be employed for column-dominant linear systems.Consider the linear system The first column can be split up by introducing x * 1 =x 1 , and distributing the coefficients that are connected to x 1 equally on x 1 and x 1 * .Adding the equation and the new variable to the system, one obtains Again, the bandwidth of the latter system can be reduced by column and row permutation.

PRESERVATION OF SYMMETRY
The latter substitutions can be carried out such that the symmetry is preserved, which is demonstrated on a symbolically filled matrix.The vector reordering is disregarded for convenience.Being given a matrix of the form we firstly split the dominant column and append the newly formed column and row, and then split the dominant row and append the newly formed column and row, followed by interchanging the newly added columns or rows (rows here) For large systems, the increase in variables may have no practical effect at all, converse to the bandwidth reduction.
For the preceding examples, the equation splitting is more costly than applying Gaussian elimination, after reordering the matrices such that the fill in is avoided.However, in some cases, the splitting of dominant rows and columns can significantly reduce the solution effort.
In the following section an example for the profitable application of the equation splitting is given.

EXAMPLE
The finite element method is used to approximate the solution of a partial differential (PDE) equation by discretizing the domain by finite elements, which are connected at nodes.The solution is approximated by piecewise steady functions inside the elements, the parameters of which are determined by exploiting the weak form of the PDE (see, e.g., [1]).The smallest possible bandwidth of the symmetric system matrix depends on the number of elements to which the node with the most connections is connected.The actual bandwidth depends on the specific structure of the finite element mesh.Reordering the nodes corresponds to column and row interchanging.There are geometries for which even an optimized mesh structure has a large bandwidth.But even in such cases the bandwidth is usually considerably smaller than the system size.However, the FEM permits a connection of nodes not only by the elements, but by other constraint equations.
Note that in the context of the FEM, the algorithm demonstrated here is similar to the decomposition of the FE model into hyper-and substructures.Referring to the substitution (3), one would say that the nodes belonging to the x i that are summarized to x * form a substructure.The procedure discussed here does not operate on nodes but on degrees of freedom.The most important difference is that the method presented here is independent on the problem, i.e. it can be applied algorithmically to any linear system, while the substructure decomposition is part of the specific FE modelling.In the substructure decomposition, the structure is divided into independent substructures, while the substitution (3) must not be a reasonable division into independent parts from the engineering point of view.
We encountered the problem when we prescribed the average displacement u on an entire face of a structure in a continuum mechanics problem, which results in a large constraint equation In our case, the constraints emerge in a homogenization procedure.Homogenization bridges the gap from one scale to a larger scale.If one knows the constituents of a microstructure and their material properties, one can approximate the behaviour on a larger scale by averaging over the volume on the lower scale (see, e.g., [4] and the references within).Here, we present a numerical example.We want to apply an average deformation gradient to a cubic representative volume element (RVE).Ω denotes the domain occupied by the body in the reference placement.F and H are called the deformation and the displacement gradient, respectively, x and X are the position vectors of material points in the reference and the current placement, and u=x-X denotes the displacement vector.For an account to continuum mechanics see for example [12,3].
F is commonly enforced by homogeneous or periodic boundary conditions.These have the drawback that they stiffen the RVE artificially, as, e.g., shear bands cannot arrange freely.Here we focus on applying F without further constraints, which is referred to as the kinematic minimal boundary conditions [13], natural boundary conditions [8] or weakly enforced kinematic boundary conditions [9].By Gauss theorem we convert the volume integral into a surface integral, In the FE implementation, the latter integral converts into a sum over the weighted displacements of the surface nodes, the weight of which depends on the fraction of the surface that is assigned to each node.E.g., for hexahedral elements, which result in quadrilateral surfaces, a fourth of the surface of each element to which the node is connected is added.The FE system ABAQUS has been used for the following example.The FE model consists of a regular meshed cube (20 elements per edge), linear eight node bricks (element type C3D8) are used.The corner node at (0,0,0) is tied, which is the only direct displacement boundary condition.The deformation is enforced by prescribing the H as described above.For this purpose, 3 artificial nodes have been created, the 3 degrees of freedom of which represent the components of H .In any case, 9 large constrained equations have to be taken into account.It remains open whether the artificial nodes are constrained by a displacement (average straining) or by a force (average stress).For the comparison between not splitting and splitting of the equations and for checking of the implementation, a homogeneous linear elastic isotropic material behaviour is assumed (St.Venant-Kirchhoff).For illustration purposes of the boundary conditions, a central hard spherical inclusion of diameter 0.4*edge length and G sphere = 5G matrix = G sphere = 5G matrix = 10.000MPa(shear and compression modulus, respectively) is included by the Gauss-point method (multiphase elements, see [11]).Table 1 gives an overview on the difference between the FE simulations if carried out with and without equation splitting.Both simulation give exactly the same results and convergence behaviour, since the modifications of the linear system presented here do not affect the results.However, one can see in Table 1 that the equation splitting results in a considerable reduction of linear system solver effort.In Figure 1, the deformed RVE with the spherical inclusion is depicted.For a review of the FE simulations, supplementary files are provided at http://www.ovgu.de/ifme/l-festigkeit/ Rev_chilena_de_eng_supplement_ gluege_2010.zip,including the ABAQUS input files, the user material subroutine, the iteration log files and the output databases.

CONCLUSIONS
The present work points out problems that may emerge when row-and column-dominant linear systems are treated by direct solution methods.An efficient treatment is exemplified on a continuum mechanics problem, namely a numerical homogenization by the representative volume element technique, where kinematic minimal boundary conditions have been employed.Further research may focus on how the modifications affect the properties of the linear system.Moreover, it should not be concealed that the kinematic minimal boundary conditions are not as commonly employed as the periodic displacement and the homogeneous displacement boundary conditions, and have received therefore less attention.In particular, the question under which circumstances the kinematic minimal boundary conditions satisfy the Hill condition [15] is not answered conclusively.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Cross sections of two deformed RVE with a central spherical inclusion.For the tension test (top), the displacement is scaled uniformly by a factor of 10 in order to amplify the deformation.The greyscaling (12 bands) corresponds to the equivalent Mises stress, from 400MPa (white) to 1.200MPa (black).For the shear test (bottom), the displacement is scaled by a factor of 2 in the shear direction (d) and the shear plane normal (n), and by a factor of 20 in the direction normal to d and n.The greyscaling (12 bands) corresponds to the equivalent Mises stress, from 1.000MPa (white) to 2.400MPa (black).One can see the non-periodicity of the deformation.
The efficient reordering of linear systems is an important topic discussed in the literature since sparse linear systems emerged routinely in engineering applications, i.e. since the development of the finite difference and the finite element method and the availability of computers.The reordering such that b is minimized is a combinatorial problem.
Different algorithms that base on a graph representation of the non-zero connections of columns and rows have been proposed.The most common methods are the Cuthill-McKee and the Reverse Cuthill-McKee algorithm [6-5], With this RVE, a uniaxial tension and a shear test have been carried out.For the uniaxial tension, H 11 = 0.1 and H 12 = H 13 = H 23 = H 21 = H 31 = H 32 = 0 have been prescribed, i.e. seven large constraining equations are included.The components H 22 and H 33 are not constrained in order to permit an average lateral straining.For the shear test, H 22 and H 13 = H 23 = H 21 = H 31 = H 32 = 0 haven been prescribed, while the average normal straining can freely adjust, i.e.H 11 , H 22 and H 33 are not prescribed.

Table 1 .
Long constraining equations vs. equation splitting with a direct solver in ABAQUS.