MHB Reducing Quadratic Form to Principle Axes

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on finding an orthogonal transformation to reduce a given quadratic form to its principal axes. The proposed solution involves eliminating cross terms and deriving a transformation matrix. Confirmation of the correctness of the method is provided, noting that the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the associated matrix align with the transformation matrix. It is clarified that the transformation matrix can be derived from the eigenvectors, even if the principal axes formula is not explicitly found. The conversation concludes with an affirmation of the method's validity and its connection to the properties of the quadratic form.
Sudharaka
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
1,558
Reaction score
1
Hi everyone, :)

Here's a question with the summary of my method of how to solve it. I would really appreciate if you could go through it and let me know if there are any mistakes with my approach. Also are there any easier methods?

Problem:

Find an orthogonal transformation that reduces the following quadratic form to the principal axes.

\[q(x_1,\,x_2,\,x_3)=6x_{1}^{2}+5x_{2}^{2}+7x_{3}^{2}-4x_1 x_2+4x_1 x_3\]

Solution:

We reduce this to get rid of the cross terms as explained >>here<<.

\[q(x_1,\,x_2,\,x_3)=3\left(\frac{2x_1+2x_2-x_3}{3}\right)^2+9\left(\frac{-2x_1+x_2-2x_3}{3}\right)^2+6\left(\frac{-x_1+2x_2+2x_3}{3}\right)^2\]

So the matrix of the orthogonal transformation will be,

\[\begin{pmatrix}\frac{2}{3}&\frac{2}{3}&-\frac{1}{3}\\-\frac{2}{3}&\frac{1}{3}&-\frac{2}{3}\\-\frac{1}{3}&\frac{2}{3}&\frac{2}{3}\end{pmatrix}\]

Am I correct? :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sudharaka said:
Hi everyone, :)

Here's a question with the summary of my method of how to solve it. I would really appreciate if you could go through it and let me know if there are any mistakes with my approach. Also are there any easier methods?

Problem:

Find an orthogonal transformation that reduces the following quadratic form to the principal axes.

\[q(x_1,\,x_2,\,x_3)=6x_{1}^{2}+5x_{2}^{2}+7x_{3}^{2}-4x_1 x_2+4x_1 x_3\]

Solution:

We reduce this to get rid of the cross terms as explained >>here<<.

\[q(x_1,\,x_2,\,x_3)=3\left(\frac{2x_1+2x_2-x_3}{3}\right)^2+9\left(\frac{-2x_1+x_2-2x_3}{3}\right)^2+6\left(\frac{-x_1+2x_2+2x_3}{3}\right)^2\]

So the matrix of the orthogonal transformation will be,

\[\begin{pmatrix}\frac{2}{3}&\frac{2}{3}&-\frac{1}{3}\\-\frac{2}{3}&\frac{1}{3}&-\frac{2}{3}\\-\frac{1}{3}&\frac{2}{3}&\frac{2}{3}\end{pmatrix}\]

Am I correct? :)

Yes, it is correct! :cool:

The eigenvalues of the matrix A (from your reference) are 3, 6, and 9, with corresponding eigenvectors (-2,-2,1), (-1,2,2), (2,-1,2).
As expected these are orthogonal (since the spectral theorem for real symmetric matrices applies).

So the orthogonal transformation matrix must contain these 3 vectors (normalized to unit length and possible negative) in an arbitrary order.
Your matrix does not contain them as column vectors.

Of course it's also possible you have specified the other orthogonal transformation matrix, which is the inverse, and since it's orthogonal, the transpose.
And yes, they do correspond! :D
 
Last edited:
I like Serena said:
I think it is almost correct. :o
The eigenvalues of the matrix A (from your reference) are 3, 6, and 9, with corresponding eigenvectors (-2,-2,1), (-1,2,2), (2,-1,2).
As expected these are orthogonal (since the spectral theorem for real symmetric matrices applies).

So the orthogonal transformation matrix must contain these 3 vectors (normalized to unit length and possible negative) in an arbitrary order.
However, your matrix does not seem to contain them as column vectors.

Of course it's also possible you have specified the other orthogonal transformation matrix, which is the inverse, and since it's orthogonal, the transpose.
Then I would expect the rows to match with the eigenvectors.
But that is also not the case...

I think the rows do match with your eigenvectors aren't they? But note that I have taken the eigenvectors as, (2,2,-1), (-2,1,-2) and (-1,2,2) which is essentially the same thing. Isn't? :)
 
Sudharaka said:
I think the rows do match with your eigenvectors aren't they? But note that I have taken the eigenvectors as, (2,2,-1), (-2,1,-2) and (-1,2,2) which is essentially the same thing. Isn't? :)

I had just noticed my mistake, and I had already edited my previous post.
So yes, it is correct!
 
I like Serena said:
I had just noticed my mistake, and I had already edited my previous post.
So yes, it is correct!

Thanks very much for the confirmation. :) That means even if I didn't find the principle axes formula I would have still obtained the orthogonal transformation matrix by considering the eigenvectors of the matrix \(A\) where \(q=z^t A z\). Isn't?
 
Sudharaka said:
Thanks very much for the confirmation. :) That means even if I didn't find the principle axes formula I would have still obtained the orthogonal transformation matrix by considering the eigenvectors of the matrix \(A\) where \(q=z^t A z\). Isn't?

Which formula did you want to find?

You've ascertained that $q(\mathbf x)=1$ is an ellipsoid centered at the origin, with axes that are aligned with the eigenvectors, and that have half-axis-lengths of respectively $1/\sqrt 3$, $1/\sqrt 6$, and $1/3$.
See the wiki article Quadric.

What more did you want to find?
 
I like Serena said:
Which formula did you want to find?

You've ascertained that $q(\mathbf x)=1$ is an ellipsoid centered at the origin, with axes that are aligned with the eigenvectors, and that have half-axis-lengths of respectively $1/\sqrt 3$, $1/\sqrt 6$, and $1/3$.
See the wiki article Quadric.

What more did you want to find?

I am sorry, what I meant was, I used,

\[q(x_1,\,x_2,\,x_3)=3\left(\frac{2x_1+2x_2-x_3}{3}\right)^2+9\left(\frac{-2x_1+x_2-2x_3}{3}\right)^2+6\left(\frac{-x_1+2x_2+2x_3}{3}\right)^2\]

to get the orthogonal transformation. Since,

\[\begin{pmatrix}y_1\\y_2\\y_3\end{pmatrix}= \begin{pmatrix}\frac{2}{3}&\frac{2}{3}&-\frac{1}{3}\\-\frac{2}{3}&\frac{1}{3}&-\frac{2}{3}\\-\frac{1}{3}&\frac{2}{3}&\frac{2}{3}\end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}x_1\\x_2\\x_3\end{pmatrix}\]

I knew that the orthogonal transformation should be,

\[\begin{pmatrix}\frac{2}{3}&\frac{2}{3}&-\frac{1}{3}\\-\frac{2}{3}&\frac{1}{3}&-\frac{2}{3}\\-\frac{1}{3}&\frac{2}{3}&\frac{2}{3}\end{pmatrix}\]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K