Solving Gaussian Elimination Algorithm Problems (Matrices)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on solving Gaussian elimination algorithm problems involving matrices. The user encountered issues with the Gaussian elimination process, specifically with scaling and backward substitution, while attempting to solve a system of equations represented by matrices. Key points include the importance of correctly manipulating rows to achieve zeros below pivots and understanding the implications of having a row of zeros equating to a non-zero number, which indicates an inconsistent system. Additionally, the discussion touches on the concept of precision in numerical solutions, specifically using a precision of 10^-3.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gaussian elimination algorithm
  • Familiarity with matrix operations and row reduction
  • Knowledge of backward substitution techniques
  • Concept of system consistency in linear algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Gaussian elimination algorithm in-depth, focusing on row operations
  • Learn about numerical precision and its impact on algorithm results
  • Explore the concept of inconsistent systems in linear algebra
  • Practice solving systems of equations with varying parameters to identify consistency
USEFUL FOR

Students studying linear algebra, educators teaching Gaussian elimination, and anyone looking to improve their problem-solving skills in matrix operations.

adc85
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
I tried to solve this Gaussian elimination algorithm problem (matrices) but for some reason when I plug in the x variables it doesn't work. The problem is:

[ 3 10 4 : 7 ]
[ 2 7 3 : 5 ]
[ 1 3 2 : 2 ]

Alright so the first thing I did was divide the 1st row by 1/3 (scaling). Then I made the entries below the first pivot equal to 0 using:

Row2 = Row2 - Second Row, First Column * Row 1
Row3 = Row3 = Third Row, First Column * Row 1

Then I repeat this algorithm for the submatrix created afterwards (ignoring the first row and first column). Afterwards, I used backwards substitution (even tried using reduced echelon form). But I am not getting quite the right answers (very close for row 3 and the other two rows are fine though). Any input appreciated.

Also, I am having trouble understanding what my professor is saying when he says to solve a certain problem like this using 10^-3 precision for example. Do you just use the same method except placing decimal places at the end of each number or whatever?

Then he has this other weird problem that goes like:

[1 1 1 : 0]
[3 4 8 : 1]
[4 5 c^2 : c - 2]

What value of c would make this inconsistent (in other words, no solution)? I'm thinking that x3 could equal anything by making the last row full of zeros. Not sure though.

Thanks for any help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
As to your first question, can't tell you where you're going wrong if you don't show your work. Just a thought though: rather than starting off dividing (and immediately dealing with fractions) why not just swap the 1st & 3rd rows?

As to the second, I don't understand what you're asking.

As to the third, if you end up with all zeroes in the last row (i.e. by making c=3), you end up with a free variable, NOT an inconsistent system. So keep thinking about what value you can give to c, so you end up with zeroes in the first 3 columns but a non-zero value in the last column. THAT will be a system with no solution.
 
Thank you gnome.

So if any row has this set-up:

[ 0 0 0 : Non-Zero Number ]

Then it means that it has no solution? Even if it's the second row?
 
That's right.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K