Finding the Inverse of a Matrix Mapping on a Linear Subspace

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the inverse of a matrix mapping defined on a linear subspace spanned by two vectors in \(\mathbb{R}^4\). The original poster presents a matrix \(G\) constructed from these vectors and seeks to determine its restriction \(G'\) on the subspace \(W\). Participants explore the implications of linear independence, the existence of an inverse, and the dimensionality of the mapping.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss expressing the outputs of the matrix \(G\) in terms of the original vectors, questioning the process of extracting the restriction of \(G\) to the subspace \(W\). There are attempts to compute the inverse of the restricted matrix and concerns about how to extend this to a four-dimensional space. Some participants express uncertainty about the implications of choosing additional vectors to complete a basis for \(\mathbb{R}^4\).

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the relationships between the vectors and the matrix \(G\). There is recognition that while the inverse of \(G\) does not exist in the full space, the restriction to \(W\) may have a valid inverse. Multiple interpretations of how to extend the mapping to a four-dimensional space are being explored, with no explicit consensus reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original matrix \(G\) is not invertible in \(\mathbb{R}^4\), which raises questions about the uniqueness of the extension of the inverse mapping. There are discussions about the choice of additional vectors to form a basis and the potential loss of information in the process.

Kreizhn
Messages
714
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Let's say I'm given two vectors
[tex]v_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 1 \\ 0 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}, v_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \in \mathbb R^4[/tex].
Let W be subspace spanned by these vectors, and define [itex]G = v_1 v_1^T + v_2 v_2^T[/itex] a matrix mapping [itex]\mathbb R^4 \to \mathbb R^4[/itex]. Find [itex]G'[/itex] such that [itex]\left. G' = G^{-1} \right|_{W}[/itex].

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution



Since [itex]v_1, v_2[/itex] are linearly independent, the dimension of W is 2. Furthermore, since G is composed of these vectors, we can be guaranteed that that an inverse exists on W. Let W' be the image of W under G. That is, since [itex]v_1, v_2[/itex] generate W, then [itex]G v_1, Gv_2[/itex] should generate W'.

I've computed that
[tex]G = \begin{pmatrix}1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 2 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}, Gv_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 2\\ 3\\ 1 \\0 \end{pmatrix}, Gv_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 3 \\ 2 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}[/tex].

Now maybe it's because it's been so long since I did any linear algebra, but I can't for the life of me figure out how to "extract" the restriction of G to W. Given this information, it should then be simple to construct the inverse and hence make G'.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Just express Gv1 and Gv2 as linear combinations of v1 and v2. At some point you should figure out you really are doing this the long way around. Gv1=v1(v1)^Tv1+v2(v2)^Tv1. I see dot products in there.
 
So what I think you're saying is that I have

[tex]v_1' = G v_1 = 2 v_1 + v_2[/tex]
[tex]v_2' = G v_2 = v_1 + 2v_2[/tex]

So I should associate [itex]v_1' = (2,1), v_2' = (1,2)[/itex]. In this case then, if G is determined by its action on the basis states [itex]v_1, v_2[/itex] then G acting on W can be written as

[tex]G_W = \begin{pmatrix} 2 & 1 \\ 1 & 2 \end{pmatrix}[/tex]

Which in turn has inverse

[tex]G_W^{-1} = \frac13 \begin{pmatrix} 2 & -1 \\ -1 & 2 \end{pmatrix}[/tex]

But then how do I make this four-dimensional again?
 
You can make it four dimensional any way you want. You know how (G_W)^(-1) acts on v1 and v2. You'll have to pick v3 and v4 so that {v1,v2,v3,v4} is a basis for R^4. Now you can define (G_W)^(-1)(v3) and (G_W)^(-1)(v4) to be anything you want. You know you can't extend it to be G^(-1) on R^4, since G isn't invertible, right?
 
Is there no loss of information or structure defined by the original G by choosing v3 and v4 as such?
 
Okay, let me see if I understand this then:

[tex]G_W^{-1} v_1 = \frac13 \begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ -1 \end{pmatrix} = 2 v_1 -v_2[/tex]
[tex]G_W^{-1} v_2 = \frac13 \begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix} = -v_1 + 2 v_2[/tex]

Thus we use our original definitions of
[tex]v_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 1\\ 0 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}, v_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}[/tex]
To find that the first two columns of G' should be

[tex]\frac13 \begin{pmatrix} 2 & - 1 \\ 1 & 1 \\ -1 & 2 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}[/tex]

But now you say that [itex]\{ v_1, v_2, v_3, v_4 \}[/itex] must form a basis for [itex]\mathbb R^4[/itex], but that I can choose [itex]G_W^{-1} v_3 , G_W^{-1} v_4[/itex] to be anything I want. This seems contradictory, since I could certainly choose these such that [itex]v_3, v_4[/itex] did not help form a basis. So should I choose them such that they form a basis? Or choose them arbitrarily?
 
I'm not really sure what you are trying to do. [itex]\left. G' = G^{-1} \right|_{W}[/itex], doesn't make much sense because [itex]G^{-1}[/itex] doesn't exist. G maps R^4->W. [itex]{G \right|_W}^{-1}[/itex] exists, but it doesn't have any unique extension to R^4.
 
Sorry, I wrote that backwards. It should be

[tex]\left. G_W^{-1} = G' \right|_{W}[/tex]
 
Kreizhn said:
Sorry, I wrote that backwards. It should be

[tex]\left. G_W^{-1} = G' \right|_{W}[/tex]

I still don't see how that would be unique if you want G' to be 4x4.
 
  • #10
Perhaps some perspective will help. I have a series of density matrices [itex]\{ \rho_i \}[/itex] and my goal is to construct a positive operator valued measure from these states to form a measure on [itex](\mathbb C^3)^{\otimes 3} = \mathbb C^9[/itex]. This is done by defining [itex]M = \sum_i p_i \rho_i[/itex] where [itex]p_i[/itex] are the associated density matrix probabilities. Then the positive operator valued measure is defined as

[tex]E_i = p_i M^{-\frac12} \rho_i M^{-\frac12}[/tex]

where [itex]\left( M^{-\frac12} \right)^2 M[/itex] is the projection operator onto the image of M.
 
  • #11
Sorry, I really don't know that formalism.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
895
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K