Is My Approach to Matrix Exponentiation Valid?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DuckAmuck
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exponential Matrix
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of an approach to matrix exponentiation, specifically the expression of one matrix raised to the power of another using matrix logarithms. Participants explore the implications of this method, including the conditions under which matrix logarithms are defined and techniques for computing them, particularly in cases involving non-diagonalizable matrices.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that for square matrices P and Q, the expression M = P^Q can be represented as M = e^{ln(P)Q}, but notes that ln(P) may yield multiple results R.
  • Another participant clarifies that ln(P) is only well-defined when P is invertible, suggesting that if P is not invertible, the logarithm does not exist.
  • Several participants mention the use of MATLAB's logm function for numerical calculations of matrix logarithms.
  • A participant describes a method for simplifying matrix power series when the powers of a specific matrix repeat, using the example of the generator of the 2D special orthogonal group.
  • There is a request for more information on the specific logarithms the original poster is interested in, indicating a desire for clarification on the limitations of their approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions under which matrix logarithms can be computed, particularly regarding invertibility. There is no consensus on the validity of the original approach to matrix exponentiation, and multiple perspectives on the computation of matrix logarithms are presented.

Contextual Notes

Limitations discussed include the dependence of the logarithm on the invertibility of the matrix and the challenges posed by non-diagonalizable matrices. The discussion also touches on the complexity of recursive and nilpotent matrices.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for those interested in advanced matrix operations, particularly in the context of linear algebra, numerical methods, and theoretical applications in physics and engineering.

DuckAmuck
Messages
238
Reaction score
40
If we have two square matrices of the same size P and Q, we can put one in the exponent of the other by:
[tex]M = P^Q = e^{ln(P)Q}[/tex]
ln(P) may give multiple results R, which are square matrices the same size as P.
So then we have:
[tex]M = e^{RQ}[/tex]
which can be Taylor expanded to arrive at a final square matrix (matrices) M.

I've been wondering about this, and want to know if my approach is valid. Thank you.

Also, does anyone know any tricks in computing the log of a matrix?
If P is not diagonalizable, it seems you'd have to use the Taylor series expansion. So you'd have an expansion within an expansion for M.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
DuckAmuck said:
If we have two square matrices of the same size P and Q, we can put one in the exponent of the other by:
[tex]M = P^Q = e^{ln(P)Q}[/tex]
##\ln(P)## is only well-defined when P is invertible; otherwise P does not have a logarithm.

The wikipedia article on matrix logarithms has some discussion on computing the logarithm in the non-diagonalizable case.
 
MATLAB has a logm function to take matrix logs for numerical calculations.

If you're doing symbolic work, there's one trick I remember from doing exponentials by hand. I don't know the fancy/correct term for it, but often times when evaluating a matrix power series the powers of the matrix will repeat after a certain number of powers. For example, the generator of the 2D special orthogonal group is [0, -1; 1, 0]. Square that and you get [-1, 0; 0, -1]. Cube it and you get [0, 1; -1, 0]. Fourth power gives you [1, 0; 0, 1]. Since that's just the identity you the fifth power is [0, -1; 1, 0] and the cycle repeats. The fifth power equals the first, the sixth equals the second, and so on. I suppose you could say that in such cases the sequence of all powers of [0, -1; 1, 0] is homomorphic to Z4 under matrix multiplication, or I could be just making a fool outta myself. That way the power series reduces to a sum over four terms. It should apply to any convergent Taylor series if the powers of the generating matrix repeat.

Can you give us a little more info on what logs you want to take?
 
Twigg said:
MATLAB has a logm function to take matrix logs for numerical calculations.

If you're doing symbolic work, there's one trick I remember from doing exponentials by hand. I don't know the fancy/correct term for it, but often times when evaluating a matrix power series the powers of the matrix will repeat after a certain number of powers. For example, the generator of the 2D special orthogonal group is [0, -1; 1, 0]. Square that and you get [-1, 0; 0, -1]. Cube it and you get [0, 1; -1, 0]. Fourth power gives you [1, 0; 0, 1]. Since that's just the identity you the fifth power is [0, -1; 1, 0] and the cycle repeats. The fifth power equals the first, the sixth equals the second, and so on. I suppose you could say that in such cases the sequence of all powers of [0, -1; 1, 0] is homomorphic to Z4 under matrix multiplication, or I could be just making a fool outta myself. That way the power series reduces to a sum over four terms. It should apply to any convergent Taylor series if the powers of the generating matrix repeat.

Can you give us a little more info on what logs you want to take?

I just recently discovered logm and expm, which are quite handy for this sort of thing.
I'm not trying to take any particular logs. I am more curious about what the limitations of this operation are.
Obviously recursive and idempotent/nilpotent matrices would be nice here. :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K