Can You Use Non-Pivot Rows to Scale a Matrix?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Metame
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Scale
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the use of non-pivot rows in the Gaussian elimination process for scaling matrices. The original poster argues that they can successfully scale a matrix using any row, not just the designated pivot row, while still achieving correct solutions. They provide an example matrix and demonstrate their method, which contradicts their teacher's assertion that only the pivot line should be used. The conversation highlights the flexibility in applying the Gauss algorithm, emphasizing that while using the largest pivot can enhance accuracy, it is not strictly necessary for obtaining valid results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gaussian elimination and its purpose in solving systems of equations.
  • Familiarity with matrix operations, including row reduction and scaling.
  • Knowledge of pivot elements and their role in matrix manipulation.
  • Basic linear algebra concepts, particularly related to triangular matrices.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research advanced techniques in Gaussian elimination, including partial pivoting.
  • Explore the implications of using non-pivot rows in matrix scaling.
  • Learn about numerical stability and accuracy in matrix computations.
  • Study alternative methods for solving systems of equations, such as LU decomposition.
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in linear algebra, mathematicians interested in matrix theory, and anyone looking to optimize their understanding of Gaussian elimination techniques.

Metame
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello, here's my problem : I was introduced the Gauss algorithm used to scale a matrix (to obtain a triangular matrix in order to solve a system of equations), but my teacher says that we can only use the pivot line to null the rest of the numbers of the column.

The fact is I have done quite a lot of exercises where I have to scale a matrix, but I don't necessaryly null with the pivot line, but any line (and often, by doing the right operations, I save a lot lot of time). She says I can't do that, even if I have the right solutions, and I don't see why. So why? I'm trying to demonstrate I can.

(Here's a very simple example to show what I'm talking about:

We have the matrix :
2 1 0 1 L1 first pivot line here
-1 2 0 1 L2
1 0 1 1 L3

Following carefully the Gauss algorithm :
2 1 0 1 L1
0 5 0 3 L2'=2*L2+L1 (forced to use L1, the pivot line)
0 -1 2 1 L3'=2*L3-L1 (forced to use L1 too)

Then L2' is the new pivot line, so I must do :
2 1 0 1 L1
0 5 0 3 L2
0 0 10 8 L3''=5*L3'+L2 (forced to use L2, pivot line)

and I have S={(1/5,3/5,4/5)})
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If I remember correctly, the "pivot" is the largest number on the diagonal. You don't have to use that but, under some circumstances, using the largest number will increase the accuracy.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K