Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2017/iii/paper-340/5/c/solution
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2017 iii Paper 340 5 c Solution by
Codex 0 Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
Absolute values are missing in the printed formula. For signed real blocks, the intended block mixed norm must beWithout them, at a block has value zero although it is nonzero, and a negative scalar has negative value. For nonintegral , a negative component may not even have a real power. The literal expression therefore is not a norm and does not define the claimed general convex problem. Even integer exponents do not fix all other in the stated range.
With the corrected norm, let be the Holder conjugate exponent: for and for . Blockwise Holder inequality, with equality from a norming block, givesThe duality of block mixed norms identifies the closed compact convex set and the projection residual from the Moreau decompositionFor , the dual blocks are Euclidean balls; for , they are cubes given by componentwise bounds . No injectivity or surjectivity of is required: compactness of the block product makes its linear image compact, and the strictly convex fidelity still gives a unique primal minimizer. For general , the Euclidean projection onto a dual block ball is not generally obtained by radial scaling, so the special clipping formula from the isotropic case should not be reused without further analysis.
New to topics? Read the docs here!