Recent posts
https://software.intel.com/en-us/recent/176071
en'Driver Routines' vs. 'Computational Routines' - Eigenvalue Problem
https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-math-kernel-library/topic/308061
<p>
I am interested in applying LAPACK to the eigenvalue problem for arbitrary complex-valued matrices (non-symmetric, non-Hermitian). In the past, I have written my own algorithms for this (involving transformations to Hessenberg, then to Schur form, etc.) and I have used other incarnations of LAPACK for this task as well. For various reasons, I'm heading to IMKL now.</p>
<p>Looking over the description of routines included in IMKL for the nonsymmetric eigenproblem, I noticed a 'driver routines' geev and geevx, which consist of a series of calls to several functions which should output eigenvalues and eigenvectors.I also note several 'computational routines' which perform various transformations on complex-valued matrices. All of this leads to some questions:</p>
<p>1) Generically, what is the difference between a computational routine and a driver rountine? Does a driver routine consist of a single function call which activates the various functions listed under it, or do I have to implement the sequence myself? (Other commercializations of LAPACK I have used have sort of an umbrella function, where one call does it all, when you want to perform a sequence of functions that could also be called individually).</p>
<p>2) When I see the term 'arbitrary matrix', does that generally imply arbitrary complex-valued matrix?</p>
<p>Any comments from users about using IMKL for arbitrary matrix eigenproblems are also appreciated.</p>
<p>--Algodude</p>
Thu, 13 Oct 05 14:35:35 -0700algodude308061