Find Inverse of Matrix Homework Statement

  • Thread starter Thread starter Telemachus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse Matrix
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
12 replies · 2K views
Telemachus
Messages
820
Reaction score
30
Member warned about posting homework with no effort shown

Homework Statement



I have to find the inverse for this generic matrix (the dimensions are not specified, but I assume its a square matrix, I don't know if that is necessary).

##A=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & -1 & -1 & -1 & \dots & -1 & -1 \\
0 & 1 & -1 & -1 & \dots & -1 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & -1 & \dots & -1 & -1 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

I think there must be a clever and fast way for calculating ##A^{-1}##, but I don't know how to do it.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is necessary that matrix A be square for an inverse to exist.

It's not clear why you need to calculate the inverse. Are you trying to solve a system of linear equations?

In any event, the matrix A is a special kind of triangular matrix called an atomic triangular matrix, and there is a simple and easy method of calculating its inverse.
See this article for the details:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_matrix
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Telemachus
No, it's just an exercise. It asks explicitly to give the inverse Matrix.

Thank you verymuch :)

One detail, it's not an atomic matrix, is just upper triangular.
 
Last edited:
No problem. I did it my way, I think its okey. I've assumed an ##n \times n## matrix, and found:

##A^{-1}=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 3 & \dots & n-2 & n-1 \\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 & \dots & n-3 & n-2 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & \dots & n-4 & n-3 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

This is not right, I get trouble after the third column.
 
Last edited:
Telemachus said:
No problem. I did it my way, I think its okey. I've assumed an ##n \times n## matrix, and found:

##A^{-1}=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 3 & \dots & n-2 & n-1 \\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 & \dots & n-3 & n-2 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & \dots & n-4 & n-3 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

This is not right, I get trouble after the third column.
Instead of jumping right into n x n matrices, start with smaller matrices. I looked at the case with a 3 x 3 matrix, and then with a 4 x 4 matrix. There's a definite pattern that develops.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Telemachus
Yes, I've tried that way, but wasn't that clear to me. The case for the ##3\times3## is contained in the first 3 rows and columns.

##A_{3\times3}^{-1}
=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 \\
0 & 1 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

Then for the ##4\times 4##:
##A_{4\times4}^{-1}=
=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 4\\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

And for ##5\times5##

##A_{5\times5}^{-1}=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 4 & 8\\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 & 4 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 2 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

Then:

##A_{n\times n}^{-1}=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 3 & \dots & 2^{n-3} & 2^{n-2} \\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 & \dots & 2^{n-4} & 2^{n-3} \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & \dots & 2^{n-5} & 2^{n-4} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##
 
Last edited:
Telemachus said:
Yes, I've tried that way, but wasn't that clear to me. The case for the ##3\times3## is contained in the first 3 rows and columns.

##A_{3\times3}^{-1}
=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 \\
0 & 1 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

Then for the ##4\times 4##:
##A_{4\times4}^{-1}=
=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 4\\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

And for ##5\times5##

##A_{5\times5}^{-1}=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 4 & 8\\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 & 4 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 2 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

Then:

##A_{n\times n}^{-1}=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 3 & \dots & 2^{n-3} & 2^{n-2} \\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 & \dots & 2^{n-4} & 2^{n-3} \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & \dots & 2^{n-5} & 2^{n-4} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

So, was your original matrix
[tex]\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & -1 & -1 & -1 \\<br /> 0 & 1 & -1 & -1 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 1<br /> \end{matrix} \right][/tex]
not what was intended? When did the switch occur?
 
Ray Vickson said:
So, was your original matrix
[tex]\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & -1 & -1 & -1 \\<br /> 0 & 1 & -1 & -1 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 \\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 1<br /> \end{matrix} \right][/tex]
not what was intended? When did the switch occur?
The original matrix was n X n, not 4 X 4.
 
Telemachus said:
And for ##5\times5##

##A_{5\times5}^{-1}=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 4 & 8\\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 & 4 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 2 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##

Then:

##A_{n\times n}^{-1}=\left [
\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 2 & 3 & \dots & 2^{n-3} & 2^{n-2} \\
0 & 1 & 1 & 2 & \dots & 2^{n-4} & 2^{n-3} \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & \dots & 2^{n-5} & 2^{n-4} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 1 \\
\end{matrix}
\right]##
Your last matrix isn't following the pattern of the previous ones. Check the first row in the matrix just above.
 
Mark44 said:
The original matrix was n X n, not 4 X 4.

Yes, I know. But the OP did some 3x3 and 4x4 examples, and I was just looking at the 4x4 case.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Telemachus
Its done. I did as Mark said, by trying some tractable dimensions, and then generalized it. Thanks.
 
Mark44 said:
Your last matrix isn't following the pattern of the previous ones. Check the first row in the matrix just above.
That 3 was just a typo. Sorry.