Determinant of a Block Lower Triangular Matrix

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the determinant of a block lower triangular matrix, specifically the theorem stating that for a k by k matrix A, an n by n matrix D, and an n by k matrix C, the determinant is given by det(A) * det(D). The proof involves demonstrating that the product of two specific block matrices results in the original matrix structure and applying a lemma regarding determinants. Participants express challenges in writing concise solutions and utilizing sigma notation effectively.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of block matrices and their properties
  • Familiarity with determinants and their calculation
  • Knowledge of sigma notation and matrix multiplication
  • Basic concepts of linear algebra, particularly regarding matrix operations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of block matrices in linear algebra
  • Learn about the application of the determinant lemma in various contexts
  • Explore sigma notation and its use in mathematical proofs
  • Review advanced topics in linear algebra, such as eigenvalues and eigenvectors
USEFUL FOR

Students of linear algebra, mathematicians working with matrix theory, and anyone involved in computational mathematics or theoretical proofs will benefit from this discussion.

Vespero
Messages
26
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Theorem. Let A be a k by k matrix, let D have size n by n and let C have size n by k. Then

det \left(\begin{array}{cc}A&0\\C&D\end{array}\right) = (det A)\cdot (det D).

Proof. First show that
\left(\begin{array}{cc}A&0\\0&I_{n}\end{array}\right) \cdot \left(\begin{array}{cc}I_{k}&0\\C&D\end{array}\right) = \left(\begin{array}{cc}A&0\\C&D\end{array}\right)

Then use the following lemma:

Let A be an n by n matrix; let b denote its entry in row i and column j.
(a) If all the entries in row i other than b vanish, then
det A = b(-1)^{i+j}det A_{ij}

(b) The same equation holds if all the entries in column j other than the entry b vanish.



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I am attempting to show the first part of the problem, where our initial matrix is broken into two further matrices. Given the dimensions of the block matrices, or even writing out the entire matrices with individual entries and multiplying (since all multiplications are in essence the rows and columns of the block matrices multiplied either by standard base matrices or by zero matrices), it is readily apparent that the equation holds true. However, I am not sure how to write this out in a way that is concise, possibly utilizing sigma notation. (I haven't taken a "higher level" math class in a while, so even when things make sense intuitively or computationally, I'm not sure how to notate them.)

On the second part, (using the lemma), it is again apparent that the determinants of the two matrices simplify down to det A and det D by recursively using the lemma on the diagonal of the identity matrix until one is left with the determinant of the other matrix on the diagonal, but I'm not sure how to write this concisely.

In essence, I suppose my problem is less one of how to understand or solve the problem, but how to write my solution in a manner that isn't rambling and unelegant.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Vespero said:

Homework Statement



Theorem. Let A be a k by k matrix, let D have size n by n and let C have size n by k. Then

det \left(\begin{array}{cc}A&0\\C&D\end{array}\right) = (det A)\cdot (det D).

Proof. First show that
\left(\begin{array}{cc}A&0\\0&I_{n}\end{array}\right) \cdot \left(\begin{array}{cc}I_{k}&0\\C&D\end{array}\right) = \left(\begin{array}{cc}A&0\\C&D\end{array}\right)

Then use the following lemma:

Let A be an n by n matrix; let b denote its entry in row i and column j.
(a) If all the entries in row i other than b vanish, then
det A = b(-1)^{i+j}det A_{ij}

(b) The same equation holds if all the entries in column j other than the entry b vanish.



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I am attempting to show the first part of the problem, where our initial matrix is broken into two further matrices. Given the dimensions of the block matrices, or even writing out the entire matrices with individual entries and multiplying (since all multiplications are in essence the rows and columns of the block matrices multiplied either by standard base matrices or by zero matrices), it is readily apparent that the equation holds true. However, I am not sure how to write this out in a way that is concise, possibly utilizing sigma notation. (I haven't taken a "higher level" math class in a while, so even when things make sense intuitively or computationally, I'm not sure how to notate them.)
I'd try writing it like this, though there might be a more elegant way to notate everything.

Write the product as M=QP where
$$Q_{ij} =
\begin{cases}
A_{ij} & \text{if } i\le k \text{ and } j \le k \\
0 & \text{if } i\gt k \text{ and } j \le k \\
0 & \text{if } i\le k \text{ and } j \gt k \\
\delta_{ij} & \text{if } i \gt k \text{ and } j \gt k
\end{cases}$$ where ##\delta_{ij}## is the Kronecker delta. P is defined similarly (I'll leave it to you to do that). Then calculate ##M_{ij}## for the four cases separately. For example, when ##i\le k## and ##j \le k##, you have
$$M_{ij} = \sum_{l=1}^{n+k} Q_{il}P_{lj} = \sum_{l=1}^{k} Q_{il}P_{lj} + \sum_{l=k+1}^{n+k} Q_{il}P_{lj} = \sum_{l=1}^{k} A_{il}\delta_{lj} + \sum_{l=k+1}^{n+k} 0\times C_{(l-k)j} = A_{ij}$$
 
It might be neater to prove the more general result, that
$$\begin{pmatrix} A & B \\ C & D\end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} P & Q \\ R & S\end{pmatrix}
= \begin{pmatrix} AP + BR & AQ + BS \\ CP + DR & CQ + DS \end{pmatrix}$$
where the number of rows and columns in the partitioned matrices match up. Just write down the expression for a term in the product and split it into two parts.

That result is not restricted to square matrices, or some of the partitions being square.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
993
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K