Gauss-Jordan Elimination algorithm steps

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the steps of the Gauss-Jordan Elimination algorithm, with a specific inquiry about the order of operations for eliminating coefficients in a matrix. It is clarified that while multiple sequences of row operations can yield the correct Reduced Row Echelon Form (RREF), the problem may require following a specific method as demonstrated in the model answer. The algorithm involves first establishing pivots from the top down and then ensuring zeros above these pivots from the bottom up. The importance of adhering to the prescribed approach is emphasized, especially in educational contexts like computer science. Understanding the flexibility of row operations while recognizing the need for a structured method is crucial for solving such problems effectively.
member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Row operations
For this problem,
1681622151988.png

1681622233243.png

For (i) the solution is,
1681622408027.png

However, I am somewhat confused how to follow the steps of the Gauss-Jordan Elimination algorithm from there. Do I have to eliminate the coefficients from ##x_2## and ##x_3## respectively from row 1 and the -5 coefficient from row 2 in the exact order that they did?

For example, could I do for the First row ##R_1 - R_2## which would transform the first row to ##(1~0~7~:~17)## then do row operations to make the top two values in the third column to become zero?

Thank you for any help.

Many thanks!
Many thanks!
 

Attachments

  • 1681622261283.png
    1681622261283.png
    18.8 KB · Views: 124
  • 1681622361039.png
    1681622361039.png
    19.2 KB · Views: 130
Physics news on Phys.org
ChiralSuperfields said:
For this problem,
View attachment 324955
View attachment 324956
For (i) the solution is,
View attachment 324959
However, I am somewhat confused how to follow the steps of the Gauss-Jordan Elimination algorithm from there. Do I have to eliminate the coefficients from ##x_2## and ##x_3## respectively from row 1 and the -5 coefficient from row 2 in the exact order that they did?
Yes (I guess).

ChiralSuperfields said:
For example, could I do for the First row ##R_1 - R_2## which would transform the first row to ##(1~0~7~:~17)## then do row operations to make the top two values in the third column to become zero?
It will lead to the correct answer but (I guess) it is probably not what is required.

There are many possible sequences of row operations which would give the correct RREF. But from the wording in the question, it appears you are required to use the specific approach as shown in the model answer.

This would make sense if, for example, it’s part of a computer-science course where you might be required to write some code for this.

The algorithm used in the model answer is, in essence, this:

1. From the top down, repeat for each Row:

a) if needed, multiply the Row so that its left-most non-zero entry is set to 1; this is the Pivot for this Row;

b) add/subtract multiples of the Row from the rows beneath it, to make all values below the Pivot equal to zero.

You end up with 1s in the pivot positions and all zeroes to the left of the pivots.

2. From the bottom up, repeat for each Row:

add/subtract multiples of the Row from the rows above it, to make all values above the Row’s pivot equal to zero.

You end up with RREF.

That's a non-rigorous description.

Note, in this question, no rows initially have leading zeroes. If they did, the initial step would have been to re-order the rows so that the rows with most leading zeroes are nearest the bottom.

Edit - typo's.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016 and DrClaude
I picked up this problem from the Schaum's series book titled "College Mathematics" by Ayres/Schmidt. It is a solved problem in the book. But what surprised me was that the solution to this problem was given in one line without any explanation. I could, therefore, not understand how the given one-line solution was reached. The one-line solution in the book says: The equation is ##x \cos{\omega} +y \sin{\omega} - 5 = 0##, ##\omega## being the parameter. From my side, the only thing I could...

Similar threads

Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
9K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
8K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Back
Top