Finding Max Determinant of 6x6 matrix

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding the maximum determinant of 6x6 matrices constructed using only the values 1 and -1. The participant explores determinant properties, concluding that the maximum determinant for a matrix of size n is n^(n/2) when n is divisible by four, as exemplified by Hadamard matrices. The participant also highlights the challenges in constructing these matrices and suggests that for odd n or n divisible by 2 but not 4, achieving the maximum determinant is not always feasible. The maximum determinant for a 3x3 matrix is determined to be 4.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of matrix determinants and properties
  • Familiarity with Hadamard matrices
  • Knowledge of linear algebra concepts such as orthogonality
  • Basic combinatorial principles related to matrix construction
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the construction methods for Hadamard matrices
  • Learn about the properties of orthogonal vectors in linear algebra
  • Explore algorithms for efficiently calculating determinants of larger matrices
  • Investigate computational techniques for generating matrices with specific determinant properties
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, and students studying linear algebra or matrix theory, particularly those interested in optimization problems related to matrix determinants.

shiranian
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
1. Construct 6x6, 5x5, 4x4 and 3x3 matrices that has the largest determinant possible using only 1 and -1

I have attempted to reduce this problem by applying determinant properties, here is an example of my work for a 3x3 matrix.

If we have 3x3 and fill it with 1's and -1's the total possible matrices are
512
However, property two says and row exchange or column exchange does not change the absolute values
Thus, there are
8*7*6 = 336
Property three says if we multiply a matrix its determinant stays the same (in this case by -1)
Thus there are
336/2 = 168
Property 5 says that two rows or columns that are equal (linear dep)
Since we already applied that no rows are the same with P2. Not sure..
Property 10 says the det of the transpose is equal to the original matrix
Thus
168/2 = 84


Where my true problem lies is not in only in simplifying the problem, but what to do afterwards? Once I have a reasonable number, how do I construct those matrices? Will I have to construct all 512 and then cut down...there must be a simple way to do this.


Thanks for the help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Finding the determinant of an n by n matrix involves sums and differences of n! terms, each a product of n of the entries. If all entries in the matrix are 1s, then each of these terms is [itex]\pm 1[/itex]. If we could arrange the sums and differences so that the "-" signs canceled we would have a total of n!. The determinant cannot be larger than that.
 
There's an upper bound for the determinant.
Suppose your matrix is a set of row vectors v_1..v_n (columns works too).
The determinant is the volume of the n-dimensional parallelepiped formed by the set: c_1*v_1 + c_2*v_2 + ... c_n *v_n with 0 <= c_i <= 1.
This volume is maximal if all the v_i are orthogonal.
Since the length of the v_i is [itex]\sqrt {n}[/itex] and there are n of them, the maximum volume, and therefore the maximum determinant is [itex]{\sqrt {n}}^n = n^{\frac {n} {2}}[/itex]

Now it's not always possible to get the maximum determinant. If n is odd, you can't get 2 vectors that are orthogonal, and if n is divisible by 2 but not 4, you can't get 3 orthogonal vectors. (if n>2)


It appears that it's always possible to find the maximum determinant of n^(n/2) when n is divisible by four. This is called a Hadamard matrix

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/HadamardMatrix.html
It is an open conjecture, wether an Hadamard matrix existes for all multiples of 4.

If you would try a computer search if n is not a multiple of 4, you could limit yourself to a matrix whose rows are nearly orthogonal.

n = 3 is easy. The limit is 5.19..., but the determinant has to be an even number, because it's the sum of 6 odd numbers, so the maximum is 4, which you'll find with a few tries.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
11K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K