Handling Singular matrices in Algorithms

beanz
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi All

I'm new to this forum so please be kind :)

I am doing a project on handling singular matrices in algorithms.

Basically what i have to do is to find out how to solve the system Ax=B when A is not square or det(A)=0. Because it does not have an inverse, I don't know what to do or how to approach this problem. Any help would be appreciated


P.S I tried the Guassian Elimination Method, but I have to find another way
 
Physics news on Phys.org
beanz said:
P.S I tried the Guassian Elimination Method, but I have to find another way

What was wrong with gaussian elimination? I had a similar problem a while back (specifically, I needed to do it numerically) and I finally settled on writing a gaussian elimination routine.
 
You could apply some sort of regularization. e.g. instead solve:

<br /> (A^T A + \lambda I) x = A^T b<br />

(for your favorite &lambda; > 0)

The system is no longer singular, but the answers you get will be biased away from the actual solutions. In particular, the answer will be unique, instead of getting a bunch of solutions.


I don't think this would help with Gaussian elimination, though. I share SpaceTiger's question -- what's wrong with it?
 
Thanx Guys,

I really appreciated your help. Nothings wrong with the gaussian elimination method. I just have to find out "various" ways of solving the system and tha Gaussian Elimination is just another method.

I have another question. Consider A , an n*n matrix which is invertible, and A^-1, its inverse. If A is transposed, how would it affect A^-1. (in other words how can i find the inverse of the Transpose of A without solving [A|I])

Thanx in advence
 
Look up Rank-Deficient Least Squares methods.
 
Thread 'Determine whether ##125## is a unit in ##\mathbb{Z_471}##'
This is the question, I understand the concept, in ##\mathbb{Z_n}## an element is a is a unit if and only if gcd( a,n) =1. My understanding of backwards substitution, ... i have using Euclidean algorithm, ##471 = 3⋅121 + 108## ##121 = 1⋅108 + 13## ##108 =8⋅13+4## ##13=3⋅4+1## ##4=4⋅1+0## using back-substitution, ##1=13-3⋅4## ##=(121-1⋅108)-3(108-8⋅13)## ... ##= 121-(471-3⋅121)-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24(471-3⋅121## ##=121-471+3⋅121-3⋅471+9⋅121+24⋅121-24⋅471+72⋅121##...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
Back
Top