Is a Latin Square always invertible?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Sudharaka
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Inverse Square
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

A Latin Square of integers or real numbers treated as a matrix is not always invertible. A counterexample is the $6\times6$ circulant matrix with elements $\begin{bmatrix} 12&4&8&13&3&9 \\4&8&13&3&9&12 \\ 8&13&3&9&12&4 \\ 13&3&9&12&4&8 \\ 3&9&12&4&8&13 \\ 9&12&4&8&13&3 \end{bmatrix}$, which has a determinant of zero. Additionally, any Latin square matrix with elements summing to zero is guaranteed to be non-invertible due to the properties of determinants. This is particularly evident in circulant matrices where the sum of the elements multiplied by a primitive root of unity can yield a zero determinant.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Latin Squares and their properties
  • Knowledge of matrix theory, specifically determinants
  • Familiarity with circulant matrices
  • Concept of primitive roots of unity in linear algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of circulant matrices and their determinants
  • Explore the concept of Latin Squares in combinatorial design
  • Learn about determinants and their implications for matrix invertibility
  • Investigate the role of primitive roots of unity in linear algebra
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of linear algebra, and anyone interested in combinatorial design and matrix theory.

Sudharaka
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
1,558
Reaction score
1
Hi everyone, :)

An interesting question I thought about recently. Is it true that a Latin Square of integers (or real numbers) treated as a matrix is always invertible? If not can anybody give a counterexample. I think latin squares are invertible but I am unable to prove it. Hope you can help me out. :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sudharaka said:
Hi everyone, :)

An interesting question I thought about recently. Is it true that a Latin Square of integers (or real numbers) treated as a matrix is always invertible? If not can anybody give a counterexample. I think latin squares are invertible but I am unable to prove it. Hope you can help me out. :)
The smallest counterexample I can come up with is the $6\times6$ circulant matrix $$\begin{bmatrix} 12&4&8&13&3&9 \\4&8&13&3&9&12 \\ 8&13&3&9&12&4 \\ 13&3&9&12&4&8 \\ 3&9&12&4&8&13 \\ 9&12&4&8&13&3 \end{bmatrix}\ .$$ This has determinant zero and is therefore not invertible.
If negative numbers are allowed, the problem is much easier, and the smallest counterexample would be $\begin{bmatrix}1&-1 \\ -1&1\end{bmatrix}.$ In fact, a Latin square matrix whose elements have sum zero is never invertible. Reason: if you add all the other rows of the matrix to the top row then each element of the top row becomes the sum of the elements. If that is zero then the determinant is zero.

More generally, if $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n$ are the elements in a circulant matrix, and $\omega$ is a primitive $n$th root of unity, then $x_1 + \omega x_2 + \omega^2x_3 + \ldots + \omega^{n-1}x_n$ is a factor of the determinant of the matrix. If that sum is zero then the matrix will not be invertible. The smallest example I could find where that happens with distinct positive integers for $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n$ was when $n=6$, using the numbers $12,4,8,13,3,9$ as in the above matrix.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
11K