Generalizations of Determinants: Permanents, Immanants, etc.

In summary, the determinant of a matrix is given by the well-known formula det(A) = sump parity(p) * producti = 1...n Ai,p(i), where the p's are all permutations of 1...n and A is a n*n matrix. Parity is +1 for an even permutation and -1 for an odd one. For a permanent, replace parity(p) with 1. For an immanant, replace parity(p) with X(q, p), a character of the symmetric group for irreducible representation q. The function gdt(A) = sump X(p) * producti = 1...n Ai,p(i) satisfies the same multiplication law as determinants, det(A.B
  • #1
lpetrich
988
178
The determinant of a matrix is given by the well-known formula

det(A) = sump parity(p) * producti = 1...n Ai,p(i)

where the p's are all permutations of 1...n and A is a n*n matrix. Parity is +1 for an even permutation and -1 for an odd one.

For a permanent, replace parity(p) with 1. For an immanant, replace parity(p) with X(q,p), a character of the symmetric group for irreducible representation q.

Determinants show up in many places that matrices do. Permanents are the bosonic counterpart of the fermionic Slater determinant of multiplarticle wavefunctions. Immanants appear in the theory of Schur functions. But I've seen much less of permanents and immanants than determinants. Could that be due to not having certain nice properties that determinants have?

In particular, determinants satisfy the multiplication law det(A.B) = det(A)*det(B) For permanents or immanants, however, one can find counterexamples. Is that law true for any generalization other than determinants themselves?


Let's define a generalized determinant gdt(A) = sump X(p) * producti = 1...n Ai,p(i)

and let's set gdt(A.B) = gdt(A)*gdt(B) for all possible A and B. What constraints can one find on the X(p)'s? Can one show that only X(p) = parity(p) will yield that multiplication law?

So far, I've found that all p's where X(p) is nonzero must form a group, and that these nonzero X(p)'s with multiplication form an abelian quotient group of the group of p's. That includes determinants and permanents, and gdt's for various other groups of p's.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you look only at nxn matrices A that represent permumutations of n things (so each row and each column is zero except for a single 1 in it somewhere) then gdt(A) (as I understand your definition) is a sum with only a single non-zero term in it that corresponds to the permutation represented by the matrix. So the rule gdt(AB) = gdt(A)gdt(B) implies, in the case of permutation matrices, that [itex] \chi(p_A p_B) = \chi(p_A) \chi(p_B) [/itex] where [itex] p_A [/itex] is the permutation represented by the matrix [itex] A [/itex] etc.

I'd think that gdt( identity matrix) = 1, so [itex] \chi[/itex](identity permutation) = 1. Does this make the function [itex] \chi [/itex] itself a homomorphism from the symmetric group on n things to the real numbers? (Or am I just confusing myself by attempting to dabble in representation theory?)
 
  • #3
You've got it right. That's also true for matrices that are
(permutation matrix) . (diagonal matrix from vector v)

gdt(that matrix) = X(permutation) * product(v)

If A and B have that form, then A.B also has that form, and from gdt(A.B) = gdt(A)*gdt(B), we find

X(permutation 1)*X(permutation 2) = X(permutation 1 * permutation 2)

For the identity permutation e, X(e)*X(e) = X(e*e) = X(e) meaning that X(e) is either 0 or 1.

For all permutations p, X(p)*X(e) = X(p*e) = X(p). If X(e) = 0, then all X(p) is zero, a trivial solution. To get nontrivial ones, we must set X(e) = 1.

Likewise, for all permutations p, X(p)*X(inverse(p)) = X(e) = 1
This means that all X(p) must be nonzero, with |X(p)| = 1

gdt(A) is summed over all permutations p with length n from A being a n*n matrix. These permutations form n-symbol symmetric group Sym(n), and we can now ask what homomorphisms to an abelian group that Sym(n) can possibly have. Homomorphisms are quotient groups of normal subgroups; the normal subgroup's elements map onto the homomorphism's identity.

Every group G has two trivial normal subgroups, itself, G, and the identity group {e}. Their quotient groups are, respectively, {e} and G. This gives possible solution X(p) = 1.

It can be shown that Sym(n) always has normal subgroup Alt(n), the alternating group for n symbols, the group of even permutations for n symbols. For n > 2, Alt(n) is a nontrivial normal subgroup of Sym(n), and all the Sym(n)'s have only one additional one:

The Klein 4-group of all (2,2) permutations in Sym(4), isomorphic to Z(2)*Z(2).

Its quotient group is, however, Sym(3), which is nonabelian.

So Sym(n) has only two possible quotient groups, the identity group, and the quotient group of Alt(n), which is the group of permutation parities. Even = 1, odd = -1

-

So I've shown that gdt(A.B) = gdt(A)*gdt(B) implies that X(p) = 1 (permanent) or X(p) = parity(p) (determinant)

Since one can show that det(A.B) = det(A)*det(B) and find counterexamples to permament(A.B) = permanent(A)*permanent(B), one concludes that the only possible X(p) that makes that identity possible is the determinant one, X(p) = parity(p)
 

1. What is the main difference between determinants and permanents?

The main difference between determinants and permanents is that determinants are calculated using the elements in a square matrix, while permanents are calculated using the elements in a non-square matrix. Additionally, the calculation of a determinant involves multiplying elements and adding them together, while the calculation of a permanent involves multiplying elements and taking their sum without any sign changes.

2. What are immanants and how do they differ from both determinants and permanents?

Immanants are a generalization of both determinants and permanents. Similar to permanents, they are calculated using the elements in a non-square matrix. However, they also involve the use of a weight function, which assigns a weight to each element in the matrix. Immanants can also be thought of as a multilinear function that generalizes both the determinant and the permanent.

3. How do immanants relate to symmetric polynomials?

Immanants are closely related to symmetric polynomials, as they can be expressed as a linear combination of symmetric polynomials of the matrix elements. This means that immanants can be calculated using symmetric polynomials, making them a useful tool in combinatorics and representation theory.

4. What are some applications of generalizations of determinants?

Generalizations of determinants, such as permanents and immanants, have various applications in mathematics and other fields. They are often used in combinatorics, algebraic geometry, and representation theory. They also have applications in physics, particularly in the study of quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics.

5. Are there any other generalizations of determinants?

Yes, there are other generalizations of determinants, such as hyperdeterminants and superdeterminants. Hyperdeterminants are defined for tensors of higher order than matrices, while superdeterminants are defined for matrices with elements from a non-commutative ring. These generalizations have their own unique properties and applications in different areas of mathematics.

Similar threads

  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
2
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
2
Replies
42
Views
6K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
3
Replies
80
Views
4K
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
3
Replies
102
Views
7K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top