Recap: SVD and Low-Rank Approximation

DS701 Session 14 — Wed Oct 21, 2026

Today’s plan

  • 5 min — knowledge-check review
  • 20 min — highlights and Q&A (answer or pass — answering always earns credit)
  • 60 min — in-class activity (small groups)
  • wrap-up and cold-call check-ins

Knowledge-Check Review

KC 1: The three factors, and the sum of rank-1 pieces

Write down the singular value decomposition of a matrix \(A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}\) (with \(m > n\)) and say, for each of the three factors, what it contains and what its shape is. Then write the same decomposition as a sum of rank-1 matrices, and say what a singular value \(\sigma_i\) tells you in that form.

KC 2: Full rank, low effective rank

The Abilene traffic matrix is \(1008 \times 121\) and has rank 121 — it is full rank — yet the lecture says it has low effective rank and that a rank-20 approximation is within 9% of it. Explain what “low effective rank” means, how the plot of singular values* reveals it, and how the formula \(\lVert A - A^{(k)}\rVert_F^2 = \sum_{i>k}\sigma_i^2\) lets you read the approximation error off that plot without ever forming \(A^{(k)}\).*

KC 3: Twenty numbers per person

In the Netflix example the ratings matrix is \(500{,}000\) users \(\times\) \(18{,}000\) movies, and the winning approach modelled it as having rank 20–40. Using the factorization \(A^{(k)} \approx \tilde U \tilde V\) with \(\tilde U \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times k}\) and \(\tilde V \in \mathbb{R}^{k\times n}\), explain what a row of \(\tilde U\) and a column of \(\tilde V\) represent, how a single rating is computed from them, and why this is a simplification* of the data in Occam’s sense — one that could predict a rating the user never gave.*

Highlights

One factorization, three ways to read it

\[A = U\Sigma V^T, \qquad A\mathbf{v}_i = \sigma_i \mathbf{u}_i\]

  • As matrices — orthonormal \(U\) (left singular vectors), diagonal \(\Sigma\) (singular values, sorted, \(\ge 0\)), orthonormal \(V\) (right singular vectors).
  • As a map — \(A\) sends each \(\mathbf{v}_i\) to \(\mathbf{u}_i\), stretched by \(\sigma_i\); the \(\mathbf{v}_i\) beyond the rank go to zero.
  • As a sum — \(A = \sum_i \sigma_i \mathbf{u}_i\mathbf{v}_i^T\): rank-1 layers, weighted by \(\sigma_i\), heaviest first.

Always exists; the \(\sigma_i\) are unique, the vectors unique up to sign. np.linalg.svd(A, full_matrices=False) returns U, s, Vt — note the transpose and that s is a vector.

Rank, eigenvalues, singular values

The refresher woven into this session — three facts you will verify numerically today:

  • Rank = number of linearly independent columns = number of non-zero singular values. Full rank means \(\min(m,n)\) of them; on a computer, count those above a small tolerance.
  • Eigen ↔︎ singular. \(A^TA = V\Sigma^T\Sigma V^T\) is symmetric, so its eigenvectors are the \(\mathbf{v}_i\) and its eigenvalues are \(\sigma_i^2\) (likewise \(AA^T\) with the \(\mathbf{u}_i\)). Singular values are the square roots of the eigenvalues of \(A^TA\) — never negative, and defined for rectangular \(A\), which eigenvalues are not.
  • Storage. A rank-\(k\) matrix factors as \(A = CR\) with \(C\) being \(m\times k\) and \(R\) being \(k \times n\): \(k(m+n)\) numbers instead of \(mn\). Worth it when \(k < mn/(m+n)\).

Next lecture uses exactly this: PCA is the eigendecomposition of the covariance \(X^TX\) — i.e. the SVD of the centred data.

The spectrum is an importance ranking

Traffic matrix, \(1008\times121\), rank 121.

Boat photo, \(512\times512\), rank 512.

Both are full rank; both have a sharp elbow. Everything after the elbow is a rank-1 layer with a tiny weight — the matrix is close to rank 5, or 40: low effective rank. Occam’s razor, measured: a few hidden patterns carry most of the data.

Eckart–Young: the best rank-\(k\) approximation

Distance between matrices: Frobenius, \(\lVert A - B\rVert_F = \sqrt{\sum_{ij}(a_{ij}-b_{ij})^2}\) — Euclidean distance in \(\mathbb{R}^{mn}\).

  • \(A^{(k)} = \arg\min_{\operatorname{rank} B = k} \lVert A - B\rVert_F\) is the truncated SVD: first \(k\) columns of \(U\) and \(V\), top-left \(k\times k\) of \(\Sigma\).
  • Its error is exactly the tail: \(\lVert A - A^{(k)}\rVert_F^2 = \sum_{i=k+1}^{n}\sigma_i^2\).
  • Best among all rank-\(k\) matrices — however cleverly built — and for every \(k\) from one decomposition.

Relative error read straight off the singular values: 9% at \(k=20\).

Layers of a photograph

Top row: individual rank-1 layers \(\sigma_i\mathbf{u}_i\mathbf{v}_i^T\) — each is a row profile times a column profile. Bottom row: partial sums. Ten layers already give the boats; the remaining 502 add texture. Today you rebuild a photo at \(k = 1, 5, 20, 50\) and put numbers on this.

Compression: what you keep, what you pay

Rank 40 of 512:

  • store \(U'\), \(\Sigma'\), \(V'\): \(40\,(512 + 512 + 1) = 41{,}000\) numbers vs \(262{,}144\) — a 6.4× compression;
  • relative Frobenius error \(\approx 8\%\);
  • what is lost: the layers with the smallest weights — fine texture, low-contrast detail.

Same arithmetic for the traffic matrix: \(20\,(1008+121)\) vs \(1008\cdot121\) — 81% smaller, 9% error.

Two readings of a low-rank matrix

Common patterns — columns of \(U\).

\(\mathbf{a}_j \approx \sum_{i\le k} v_{ji}\sigma_i \mathbf{u}_i\): every column of the data is a mix of the same \(k\) patterns; \(\mathbf{u}_1\) is the strongest one (traffic: the daily rhythm shared by all 121 traces).

Latent factors — rows of \(U\Sigma\) and columns of \(V^T\).

\(a_{ij} = \tilde U_{i,:}\cdot \tilde V_{:,j}\): user \(i\) and item \(j\) are both points in \(\mathbb{R}^k\), and the entry is their inner product. Netflix: \(k \approx 20\).

Movies placed by their two strongest latent factors — nobody typed in genres. Source: Koren et al., IEEE Computer, 2009.

Where the SVD goes from here

matrix what the SVD gives session
compression / denoising image, traffic \(A^{(k)}\): fewest numbers for a given error today
PCA centred data \(X\) (\(n\) samples \(\times\) \(d\) features) \(\mathbf{v}_i\) = principal directions, \(\sigma_i^2/(n-1)\) = variance explained 15
recommenders users \(\times\) items, mostly missing rows of \(U\Sigma\) / columns of \(V^T\) = latent tastes; fill the blanks 22

Same decomposition, three questions. Today’s stretch section is a preview of row three: a small ratings matrix with planted taste factors — you take its SVD, plot users and items in the top-2 latent dimensions, and check whether rank 2 or rank 30 predicts a rating you hid.

In-Class Activity

Activity: compress a photo, then find the hidden factors

Goal: take a grayscale image apart with np.linalg.svd, rebuild it at rank 1, 5, 20 and 50, measure Frobenius error, energy and compression, and check Eckart–Young against two rank-20 competitors; verify \(\Sigma^2 = \operatorname{eig}(A^TA)\) and rank = number of non-zero singular values; then take the SVD of a synthetic user × item ratings matrix with planted taste factors, see the factors in the top-2 latent dimensions, and predict held-out ratings at rank 2 versus full rank.

  • Work in groups of 2–3. Open your section’s notebook — the image and the ratings data differ.
  • Parts marked (autograded) are submitted to Gradescope; the rest is participation.
  • Staff will circulate — be ready to explain any part of your work.
  • Dependencies: numpy, pandas, matplotlib, scikit-learn.

Section A1

Section B1

The activity notebook goes live on the day of the lecture. Colab is optional — you can also open it on GitHub and run it locally.

Going deeper

Full lecture notes: SVD — Low Rank Approximations

Back to top