Factoring Matrices with Elementary Row Operations

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the process of factoring the matrix A = [[4, -1], [3, -1]] using elementary row operations. The user details their steps involving matrices E1, E2, E3, and E4, ultimately arriving at A = E1-1E2-1E3-1E4-1. However, the book's answer suggests A = E2-1E3-1E4-1, leading to confusion regarding the uniqueness of the sequence of operations. The discussion highlights the importance of method selection in row reduction and confirms that both sequences can yield the same resultant matrix.

PREREQUISITES
  • Elementary row operations in linear algebra
  • Matrix inversion techniques
  • Understanding of matrix multiplication
  • Linear Algebra concepts related to row reduction
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the process of matrix inversion in detail
  • Learn about different methods of row reduction in linear algebra
  • Explore the implications of non-uniqueness in matrix factorization
  • Practice problems involving elementary matrices and their applications
USEFUL FOR

Students of linear algebra, educators teaching matrix operations, and anyone interested in understanding matrix factorization techniques through elementary row operations.

cbarker1
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
345
Reaction score
23
TL;DR
I am working on reviewing some Linear Algebra for a Graduate course in the Spring. I thought I did it correctly when I finished. But I looked in the book a different answer. I used my calculator to check the book answer and gives the correct matrix.
Dear Everybody,

I have some trouble with this problem: Finding a sequence of elementary matrix for this matrix A.

Let ##A=\begin{bmatrix} 4 & -1 \\ 3& -1\end{bmatrix}##. I first used the ##\frac{1}{4}R1##-> ##R1##. So the ##E_1=\begin{bmatrix} \frac{1}{4} & 0 \\ 0& 1\end{bmatrix}##. So the matrix ##A= \begin{bmatrix}1 & \frac{-1}{4} \\ 3& -1\end{bmatrix}## we can use ##-3R1+R2->R2##. ##A''= \begin{bmatrix}1 & \frac{-1}{4} \\ 0& \frac{-1}{4}\end{bmatrix}## and ##E_2=\begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ -3& 1\end{bmatrix}##. We multiply ##4R2->R2##,##A'''= \begin{bmatrix} 1 & \frac{-1}{4} \\ 0& 1\end{bmatrix}## and ##E_3=\begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0& 4\end{bmatrix}##. Then we multiply 1/4 to row 2 and add to row 1,##A''''= \begin{bmatrix}1 & 0 \\ 0& 1\end{bmatrix}## and ##E_4=\begin{bmatrix} 1 & \frac{1}{4} \\ 0& 1\end{bmatrix}##. So ##A={E_1}^{-1}{E_2}^{-1}{E_3}^{-1}{E_4}^{-1}##. But in the book's answer key, it said that ##A={E_2}^{-1}{E_3}^{-1}{E_4}^{-1}##.

I am confused as to why the book's answer is different from mine. I understand that the sequence is not unique. Here is the study guide's answer as well.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
The pdf shows that row 1 doesn’t have a 4. Are you looking at the right solution?

When we did row reduction in Linear Algebra, we were taught to avoid adding/ subtracting fractions if at all possible so the notion of dividing by 4 to get a 1 in that row would not be considered. Instead we would add / subtract the rows to get a 1 meaning we’d go for the -1 column.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cbarker1
jedishrfu said:
The pdf shows that row 1 doesn’t have a 4. Are you looking at the right solution?
The PDF shows the resulting matrix after the row operation has been performed. The steps shown in the PDF are correct.

cbarker1 said:
So ##A={E_1}^{-1}{E_2}^{-1}{E_3}^{-1}{E_4}^{-1}##. But in the book's answer key, it said that ##A={E_2}^{-1}{E_3}^{-1}{E_4}^{-1}##.
I haven't taken the time to calculate all of the above inverses. Does the product you show come out to A? If so, then your work is correct, albeit slightly longer than what is shown in the PDF.
cbarker1 said:
I am confused as to why the book's answer is different from mine. I understand that the sequence is not unique. Here is the study guide's answer as well.
They used some different steps. You could have shortened your work a bit in step 3 by -1/4R2 + R1 --> R1, instead of what you did.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sysprog and cbarker1
Mark44 said:
The PDF shows the resulting matrix after the row operation has been performed. The steps shown in the PDF are correct.I haven't taken the time to calculate all of the above inverses. Does the product you show come out to A? If so, then your work is correct, albeit slightly longer than what is shown in the PDF.

They used some different steps. You could have shortened your work a bit in step 3 by -1/4R2 + R1 --> R1, instead of what you did.
I checked with my calculator. My sequence is the same as the matrix given.
 
cbarker1 said:
I checked with my calculator. My sequence is the same as the matrix given.
Then the difference is just that you used some different steps.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu and cbarker1

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K