Proving 2-Norm of A: Understanding the Relationship Between u and v

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter GridironCPJ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Confusing Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving that the 2-norm of the matrix A, defined as A = uvT (where u ∈ RM and v ∈ RN), equals the product of the 2-norms of vectors u and v. Participants clarify that u and v should be treated as column vectors, leading to the formation of an m-by-n matrix. The confusion arises from the distinction between the 2-norm of a matrix and the Frobenius norm, with emphasis on the need for understanding eigenvalues to compute the 2-norm accurately.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector and matrix operations, specifically matrix multiplication.
  • Familiarity with the definitions of 2-norm and Frobenius norm.
  • Knowledge of linear algebra concepts, including eigenvalues and matrix rank.
  • Ability to work with mathematical notation and proofs in linear algebra.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the 2-norm of matrices, particularly for rank 1 matrices.
  • Learn about the relationship between the 2-norm and eigenvalues of matrices.
  • Explore the differences between the 2-norm and Frobenius norm in detail.
  • Practice proving properties of norms in linear algebra with various examples.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those studying linear algebra, matrix theory, and numerical analysis, will benefit from this discussion. It is also valuable for anyone looking to deepen their understanding of matrix norms and their applications.

GridironCPJ
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
I don't understand how you're supposed to prove this:

Let A=uvT (vT = v transpose) where u is in R^M and v is in R^N. Prove 2-norm of A = 2 norm of v * 2 norm of u.

I'm not sure if I'm supposed to look at v and u as vectors or what. If they are just vectors, this does not make any sense. I'm assuming the only way this is even possible is if v is a collection of m different vectors each of length n, which would just make v a matrix. Am I missing something here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It does make sense if u and v are vectors. The product
$$\begin{bmatrix} u_1 \\ u_2 \\ \cdots \\ u_m \end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix} v_1 & v_2 & \cdots & u_n \end{bmatrix}$$ is an m-by-n matrix.

Since there is nothing special about u and v, the only thing you have to work with here is the definition of the 2-norm. Start by multiplying out the matrix, and writing down the values of the three 2-norms.
 
AlephZero said:
It does make sense if u and v are vectors. The product
$$\begin{bmatrix} u_1 \\ u_2 \\ \cdots \\ u_m \end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix} v_1 & v_2 & \cdots & u_n \end{bmatrix}$$ is an m-by-n matrix.

Since there is nothing special about u and v, the only thing you have to work with here is the definition of the 2-norm. Start by multiplying out the matrix, and writing down the values of the three 2-norms.

I see what you mean, I was looking at u as a row vector rather than a column vector, which makes multiplication impossible. I multiplied out the matrix, but I'm stuck from here. I can't really use the 2-norm of a matrix since I don't know any of the eigenvalues. What is your tip from here? I didn't quite know what you meant by the "three 2-norms."
 
Last edited:
Ahh ... there are too many different definitions of "norm"!

I took the question as meaning the 2-norm of a matrix is
$$\sqrt{\sum_i \sum_j |a_{ij}|^2 }$$
and the 2-norm of a vector is
$$\sqrt{\sum_i |a_{i}|^2 }$$
(i.e. the Frobenius norm). By "the three 2-norms" I just meant the 2-norms of the two vector, and the matrix.
 
AlephZero said:
Ahh ... there are too many different definitions of "norm"!

I took the question as meaning the 2-norm of a matrix is
$$\sqrt{\sum_i \sum_j |a_{ij}|^2 }$$
and the 2-norm of a vector is
$$\sqrt{\sum_i |a_{i}|^2 }$$
(i.e. the Frobenius norm). By "the three 2-norms" I just meant the 2-norms of the two vector, and the matrix.

The 2-norm of a matrix is different from the Frobenius norm of a matrix and the proof involves the 2-norm of A, which is a matrix. If the proof were to show equality of the Frobenius norm and the product of the two vector norms, this would make more sense. However, it's for the 2-norm of A.
 
GridironCPJ said:
I can't really use the 2-norm of a matrix since I don't know any of the eigenvalues."

You have a rank 1 matrix and you don't know any of the eigenvalues?
 
GridironCPJ said:
The 2-norm of a matrix is different from the Frobenius norm of a matrix and the proof involves the 2-norm of A, which is a matrix.

I can think of several definitions of a norm that could be reasonably be called "the 2-norm of a matrix". I can only say what I think the question means, because I don't know what terminology your course is using.
 

Similar threads

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