Developing Efficient Numerical Methods for Solving Large Linear Systems Using Spectroscopic Analysis Techniques

This research is aimed at efficient numerical methods to solve large linear systems with spectroscopic analysis techniques. Jacobi method, Gauss–Seidel method, Conjugate Gradient method, GMRES and preconditioned iterative methods are compared by choosing various test systems, such as sparse, ill-conditioned, discredited systems, and symmetric positive definite systems. The criterion is based on the residual error, relative error, convergence rate, number of iterations, condition number, spectral radius, CPU time and memory usage. Results are presented, indicating that the preconditioned iterative methods can provide the most successful method, improving convergence, decreasing error, and increasing numerical stability. Based on the findings of the study, it is concluded that the spectroscopic analysis is proven to be a useful technique in understanding the behavior of the matrices involved, and also to increase the efficiency of the numerical solver.

Large Linear Systems; Numerical Methods; Spectroscopic Analysis; Iterative Methods; Preconditioning; Condition Number; GMRES.

1. J. Scott and M. Tůma, Algorithms for Sparse Linear Systems. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. T. Sogabe, Krylov Subspace Methods for Linear Systems: Principles of Algorithms. Singapore: Springer, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. J. W. Pearson and J. Pestana, “Preconditioners for Krylov subspace methods: An overview,” GAMM-Mitteilungen, vol. 43, no. 4, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Y. Nakatsukasa and J. A. Tropp, “Fast and accurate randomized algorithms for linear systems and eigenvalue problems,” SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 1183–1214, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. M. Benzi and C. Faccio, “Solving linear systems of the form (A+γUU^T)x=bby preconditioned iterative methods,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.10444, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. J.-Q. Tang, X.-P. Guo, and R.-P. Wen, “NRSAI: An adaptive and efficient preconditioner for large sparse linear systems,” Mathematics, vol. 13, no. 23, Art. no. 3781, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. J. Chen, “Graph neural preconditioners for iterative solutions of sparse linear systems,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. V. Simoncini, “Stabilized Krylov subspace recurrences via randomized techniques,” Numerical Linear Algebra with Applications, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. N. Rai, “A Technical Survey of Sparse Linear Solvers in Electronic Design Automation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.11716, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. E. Carson, J. Liesen, and Z. Strakoš, “Solving Linear Algebraic Equations with Krylov Subspace Methods is Still Interesting!,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.00953, revised 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. E. Carson and N. Khan, “Mixed Precision Iterative Refinement with Sparse Approximate Inverse Preconditioning,” SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. C131–C153, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. N. Spillane and D. B. Szyld, “New Convergence Analysis of GMRES with Weighted Norms, Preconditioning, and Deflation, Leading to a New Deflation Space,” SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, vol. 45, no. 4, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. J. Pusok, M. Popov, and T. V. Gerya, “A Comparison of Sparse Solvers for Severely Ill-Conditioned Linear Systems in Geophysical Marker-In-Cell Simulations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.11515, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. N. Khan and E. Carson, “Mixed Precision Iterative Refinement with Adaptive Precision Sparse Approximate Inverse Preconditioning,” Engineering with Computers, vol. 41, pp. 3833–3846, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. P. Häusner, A. Nieto Juscafresa, and J. Sjölund, “Learning Incomplete Factorization Preconditioners for GMRES,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.08262, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Brown, Kenneth H., Spectroscopic Analysis, Department of Nutrition, University of California Davis, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Sarah Lee, Mastering Spectral Theory: A Matrix Theory Guide, Number Analysis, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Z. Frangella, J. A. Tropp, and M. Udell, “Randomized Nyström Preconditioning,” SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 718–752, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. J. Scott and M. Tůma, “Developing robust incomplete Cholesky factorizations in half precision arithmetic,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.13123, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. E. N. Epperly, M. Meier, and Y. Nakatsukasa, “Fast randomized least-squares solvers can be just as accurate and stable as classical direct solvers,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.03468, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. T. Hong, Z. Xu, J. Hu, and J. A. Fessler, “Using Randomized Nyström Preconditioners to Accelerate Variational Image Reconstruction,” SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. N. Dimola, A. Coclite, and P. Zunino, “Neural Preconditioning via Krylov Subspace Geometry,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.15452, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Y. Sun, H.-D. Qi, D. Han, and J. Xie, “On subspace-constrained preconditioning for randomized iterative methods,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.29304, 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. T. Chen, C. Huber, E. Lin, and H. Zaid, “Preconditioning without a preconditioner using randomized block Krylov subspace methods,” Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis, vol. 65, pp. 63–92, 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Utilization of Rapid Mathematics Assessment (Rma): A Developmental-Based Education Strategies of Deped
• Attitudes Towards Mathematics, Motivational Persistence, and AI-Based ChatGPT usage: A Structural Model on Critical Thinking Disposition of Private Senior High Schools in Davao Region
• Influence of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use of the Khan Academy Platform as Determinants of Teachers Attitude Toward Technology