7.8  Special Determinants

A determinant of size n has n! terms, so a general formula for a large matrix is hopeless. Some matrices, though, have so much structure that their determinants collapse to a short product or a recurrence. This section computes the most useful of them: the Vandermonde determinant, which governs polynomial interpolation; tridiagonal determinants, which satisfy a three-term recurrence; block triangular determinants, which split into smaller ones; and the determinant of a rank-one update of the identity. The proofs share one idea: find the structure first (a polynomial with known roots, a row with two nonzero entries, a pattern of zeros) and let the defining properties of the determinant do the rest.

7.8.1. The Vandermonde determinant

Chapter 3 proved that there is exactly one polynomial of degree at most n through n+1 points with distinct first coordinates (Theorem 3.7.3). Behind it sat a square matrix of powers of the nodes. Its determinant turns out to be a product of all the differences of the nodes, and that product explains at a glance why distinct nodes are exactly what is needed.

For x1,…,xn∈F, the Vandermonde matrix is V(x1,…,xn):=(1x1x12⋯x1n−11x2x22⋯x2n−1⋮⋮⋮⋮1xnxn2⋯xnn−1)∈Mn(F), whose (i,j)-entry is xij−1. Row i lists the powers 1,xi,…,xin−1 of the i-th node. For n=1 it is the 1×1 matrix (1), and for n=2 its determinant is x2−x1.

Theorem 7.8.1 (Vandermonde Determinant)

Let n≥1 and x1,…,xn∈F. Then detV(x1,…,xn)=∏1≤i<j≤n(xj−xi), where the empty product (for n=1) is 1.

Idea. Induction on n. Replace the last node xn by a variable t. Expanding along the last row shows the determinant is a polynomial f(t) of degree at most n−1, with leading coefficient the smaller Vandermonde determinant. Setting t=xi for i<n makes two rows equal, so x1,…,xn−1 are roots of f. A polynomial of degree at most n−1 with these n−1 roots is its leading coefficient times ∏i<n(t−xi). Now put t=xn back. The roots argument needs the xi distinct; if they are not, both sides are 0 anyway.

Proof. We use induction on n (Theorem 0.2.7). For n=1, det(1)=1, the empty product.

Let n≥2, assume the formula for n−1 nodes, and write V=V(x1,…,xn). Let Cn1,…,Cnn be the cofactors of V along row n (Definition 7.6.1). Each Cnj is computed after deleting row n, so it does not involve xn. Define f(t):=∑j=1nCnjtj−1∈F[t]. For c∈F, let Vc be V with row n replaced by (1,c,…,cn−1). Then Vc has the same cofactors along row n as V, so by Theorem 7.6.1 along row n, (∗)detVc=∑j=1ncj−1Cnj=f(c). In particular detV=f(xn). The coefficient of tn−1 in f is Cnn=(−1)2ndetV(x1,…,xn−1), since deleting row n and column n of V leaves the Vandermonde matrix of the first n−1 nodes.

Case 1: two of x1,…,xn−1 are equal, say xp=xq with p<q<n. Then rows p and q of V are equal. By Theorem 7.4.5, detV=detV⊤, and V⊤ has two equal columns, so detV=0 because the determinant is alternating (Definition 7.2.2). The product also vanishes, since it contains the factor xq−xp=0.

Case 2: x1,…,xn−1 are distinct. For i<n, the matrix Vxi has rows i and n equal, so f(xi)=detVxi=0 by (∗) and the argument of Case 1. Hence x1,…,xn−1 are n−1 distinct roots of f, and by Corollary 6.1.4, g(t):=(t−x1)(t−x2)⋯(t−xn−1)  divides  f. Write f=hg with h∈F[t]. If h≠0, then deg⁡h=deg⁡f−(n−1)≤0 by Theorem 0.8.3, since deg⁡f≤n−1; so in every case h is a constant h∈F. As g is monic of degree n−1, the coefficient of tn−1 in hg is h, so h=Cnn=detV(x1,…,xn−1). Evaluating at xn (Theorem 0.8.5) and using the induction hypothesis, detV=f(xn)=detV(x1,…,xn−1)∏i=1n−1(xn−xi)=∏1≤i<j≤n−1(xj−xi)∏i=1n−1(xn−xi). The two products together run over all pairs i<j≤n, the second one collecting exactly the pairs with j=n. This proves the formula for n, and the theorem follows by induction.

Example (A 3×3 Vandermonde Determinant)

Compute detV(1,2,4) from the formula and by cofactor expansion.

Solution. The formula gives (2−1)(4−1)(4−2)=1⋅3⋅2=6. Directly, expanding V(1,2,4)=(1111241416) along the first row gives 1⋅(32−16)−1⋅(16−4)+1⋅(4−2)=16−12+2=6.

The product vanishes exactly when a factor does, because a field has no zero divisors. So:

Corollary 7.8.2 (Distinct Nodes Give an Invertible Vandermonde Matrix)

V(x1,…,xn) is invertible if and only if x1,…,xn are distinct.

Proof. In a field, a product is nonzero if and only if every factor is nonzero (Theorem 0.7.1 (f), applied repeatedly). So by Theorem 7.8.1, detV(x1,…,xn)≠0 if and only if xj≠xi for all i<j. By Theorem 7.5.2, this is equivalent to invertibility.

Now the promised two-line proof of Theorem 3.7.3. Given distinct x0,…,xn and values y0,…,yn, a polynomial p=c0+c1x+⋯+cnxn satisfies p(xi)=yi for all i if and only if V(x0,…,xn)c=y, since row i of this system reads c0+c1xi+⋯+cnxin=yi. By Corollary 7.8.2 the matrix is invertible, so the system has exactly one solution c=V(x0,…,xn)−1y (Theorem 3.4.4), and the interpolating polynomial exists and is unique.

Remark. This is not a proof from nothing. The root bound of Chapter 6 (Corollary 6.1.4) did the real work inside Theorem 7.8.1, exactly as the root bound did in Chapter 3 (Lemma 3.7.2). What the determinant adds is an explicit number: it says how close to singular the interpolation problem is, since nodes that nearly coincide make the product small.

Warning. Watch the shape and the order. The formula is for rows (1,xi,…,xin−1) starting at the power 0, and for the factors xj−xi with i<j, “later node minus earlier node”. Dropping the column of ones changes the answer: det(x1x12x2x22)=x1x2(x2−x1), not x2−x1. Writing the factors as xi−xj instead flips the sign of each of the (n2) factors, so it multiplies the answer by (−1)(n2): already for n=2 and n=3 this is −1, a wrong sign.

Quick check. Without expanding, find detV(1,2,3,5).

Solution. The pairs i<j give (2−1)(3−1)(5−1)(3−2)(5−2)(5−3)=1⋅2⋅4⋅1⋅3⋅2=48.

7.8.2. Tridiagonal determinants

Many matrices in applications have nonzero entries only on the diagonal and next to it: discretized differential equations, chains of springs, the recurrences of orthogonal polynomials. Such a matrix is tridiagonal. Its determinant is not a closed formula in general, but it obeys a recurrence in the size, because the last row has only two nonzero entries.

Let Tn∈Mn(F) have diagonal entries a1,…,an, entries b1,…,bn−1 just above the diagonal ((i,i+1)-entry bi), entries c1,…,cn−1 just below it ((i+1,i)-entry ci), and zeros elsewhere: Tn=(a1b1c1a2b2c2⋱⋱⋱an−1bn−1cn−1an). For 1≤k≤n, the top-left k×k block of Tn is the tridiagonal matrix Tk built from a1,…,ak, b1,…,bk−1, c1,…,ck−1. Write Dk=detTk, and set D0=1.

Theorem 7.8.3 (Tridiagonal Recurrence)

With this notation, D1=a1, and for 2≤k≤n, Dk=akDk−1−bk−1ck−1Dk−2.

Proof. D1=det(a1)=a1. For k=2, D2=a1a2−b1c1=a2D1−b1c1D0. Let k≥3. Row k of Tk has only two possibly nonzero entries, ck−1 in column k−1 and ak in column k. By Theorem 7.6.1 along row k, Dk=ck−1(−1)2k−1Mk,k−1+ak(−1)2kMkk=akMkk−ck−1Mk,k−1, where Mkk=detTk−1=Dk−1. The minor Mk,k−1 is the determinant of the (k−1)×(k−1) matrix obtained by deleting row k and column k−1. Its last column consists of rows 1,…,k−1 of column k of Tk, which is bk−1 in the last position and 0 elsewhere. Expanding along this last column (Theorem 7.6.1), with sign (−1)(k−1)+(k−1)=1, gives Mk,k−1=bk−1detTk−2=bk−1Dk−2, because deleting the last row and column leaves rows and columns 1,…,k−2 of Tk. Substituting proves the recurrence.

Example (Fibonacci Numbers as Determinants)

Let Tn have 1 on the diagonal, 1 above it, and −1 below it. Find Dn=detTn.

Solution. Here ak=1 and bk−1ck−1=1⋅(−1)=−1, so Theorem 7.8.3 gives Dk=Dk−1+Dk−2 for k≥2, with D0=1 and D1=1. Hence D1,D2,D3,⋯=1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,…, the Fibonacci numbers: Dn=Fn+1, where F1=F2=1 and Fk=Fk−1+Fk−2. For instance D3=det(110−1110−11)=1⋅(1+1)−1⋅(−1−0)+0=3.

Only the products bk−1ck−1 enter the recurrence, never bk−1 and ck−1 separately. For example, for a real number t, putting 2t on the diagonal and 1 on both neighboring lines gives Dk=2tDk−1−Dk−2, so D1=2t, D2=4t2−1, D3=8t3−4t. These are the Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind.

7.8.3. Block triangular matrices

A matrix can be cut into blocks by a horizontal and a vertical line. When the block in the lower left is zero, the determinant should see only the two square blocks on the diagonal, just as a triangular determinant sees only diagonal entries. This result is used constantly, for instance in Chapter 8 for Schur complements.

Theorem 7.8.4 (Block Triangular Determinant)

Let A∈Mk(F), D∈Ml(F) and B∈Mk×l(F), with k,l≥1. Then det(ABOD)=detA⋅detD, where O is the l×k zero matrix. The same holds for (AOCD) with C∈Ml×k(F).

Idea. In the Leibniz formula for the whole matrix, a term picks one entry from each column. The first k columns have zeros below row k, so a nonzero term must pick rows 1,…,k for the first k columns, and is then forced to pick rows k+1,…,n for the last l columns. Such a permutation is a permutation of each block, its inversions are the inversions inside the blocks, and the Leibniz sum factors into two Leibniz sums.

Proof. Let n=k+l and M=(ABOD)=(mij). By Definition 7.4.1, detM=∑σ∈Snsgn(σ)∏j=1nmσ(j)j. Since mij=0 for i>k≥j, the term of σ is 0 unless σ(j)≤k for every j≤k. For such σ, the injective map σ sends {1,…,k} into itself, hence onto itself (a finite set), and so it sends {k+1,…,n} onto itself. Therefore σ determines α∈Sk and β∈Sl by α(j)=σ(j)(j≤k),β(q)=σ(k+q)−k(q≤l), and every pair (α,β) arises from exactly one such σ.

We compare signs through inversions (Definition 7.3.1). A pair i<j with i,j≤k is an inversion of σ exactly when it is one of α; a pair k+p<k+q is an inversion of σ exactly when p<q is one of β; and a pair i≤k<j is never an inversion, since σ(i)≤k<σ(j). By Definition 7.3.2, sgn(σ)=sgn(α)sgn(β). Also mσ(j)j=aα(j)j for j≤k and mσ(k+q),k+q=dβ(q)q. Hence detM=∑α∈Sk∑β∈Slsgn(α)sgn(β)∏j=1kaα(j)j∏q=1ldβ(q)q=detA⋅detD, using Definition 7.4.1 twice. For the lower block triangular case, the transpose of (AOCD) is (A⊤C⊤OD⊤), so by Theorem 7.4.5 and the first case its determinant is detA⊤detD⊤=detAdetD.

The proof uses only sums and products of entries, so, like the results flagged in §4–§6, it holds for matrices over any commutative ring; §10 uses this over F[x]. By induction on the number of blocks, a matrix with square blocks A1,…,Ar on the diagonal and zeros below them has determinant detA1⋯detAr; Theorem 7.4.6 is the case where every block is 1×1.

For example, det(215−3110700310042)=det(2111)det(3142)=1⋅2=2, and the entries 5,−3,0,7 of the upper right block play no role.

Warning. There is no “block ad−bc” rule. For a general block matrix, det(ABCD)≠detAdetD−detBdetC. Take A=D=O and B=C=I2: the 4×4 matrix (OI2I2O) is the permutation matrix of (1 3)(2 4), a product of two transpositions, so its determinant is +1; the rule would give 0⋅0−1⋅1=−1. The zero block in the corner is what the theorem needs. The correct formulas for general blocks use Schur complements, in Chapter 8.

Quick check. Is det(ABOD)=detAdetD meaningful when A is 2×3 and D is 3×2 (so the whole matrix is 5×5)?

Solution. No. The theorem requires A and D square; here detA and detD are undefined. In fact the whole determinant is 0 whatever the entries: the first 3 columns have their nonzero entries only in the first 2 rows, so they are linearly dependent in a 2-dimensional space, and a determinant with dependent columns is 0 (Theorem 7.2.1).

7.8.4. Rank-one updates

Changing a matrix by a rank-one matrix uv⊤ is the smallest possible change in the sense of rank, and it happens often: updating one observation in statistics, modifying one row of a system, or adding the same number to every entry. The determinant of the updated identity turns out to be a single dot product.

Theorem 7.8.5 (Matrix Determinant Lemma)

Let u,v∈Fn. Then det(In+uv⊤)=1+v⊤u.

Idea. Border In+uv⊤ by an extra column u and an extra row (0⊤,1), giving a block triangular matrix M with the same determinant. Then clear the update by elimination with blocks. Rows: add v⊤ times the top n rows to the new bottom row (multiply by L on the left). Columns: subtract the last column times v⊤ from the first n columns (multiply by L′ on the right). The factors L, L′ have determinant 1, and the result is block triangular with In and the 1×1 block 1+v⊤u on the diagonal.

Proof. Consider the (n+1)×(n+1) block matrices L=(In0v⊤1),M=(In+uv⊤u0⊤1),L′=(In0−v⊤1). Splitting the sum ∑j in Theorem 0.9.2 (1) into the indices j≤n and j=n+1 shows that matrices partitioned in this way multiply block by block, like 2×2 matrices whose entries are blocks. Hence LM=(In+uv⊤uv⊤+(v⊤u)v⊤v⊤u+1), where we used v⊤(uv⊤)=(v⊤u)v⊤ by associativity, v⊤u being a 1×1 matrix, that is, a scalar. Multiplying on the right by L′, LML′=(In+uv⊤−uv⊤uv⊤+(v⊤u)v⊤−(1+v⊤u)v⊤1+v⊤u)=(Inu0⊤1+v⊤u). By Theorem 7.8.4, detL=detIn⋅1=1, detL′=1, detM=det(In+uv⊤)⋅1, and det(LML′)=detIn(1+v⊤u)=1+v⊤u. By Theorem 7.5.4, det(LML′)=detLdetMdetL′=det(In+uv⊤). This proves the lemma.

Example (a on the Diagonal, 1 Elsewhere)

Let a∈R and n≥1, and let An∈Mn(R) have every diagonal entry a and every other entry 1. Find detAn.

Solution. Let 1=(1,…,1)∈Rn. Every entry of 11⊤ is 1, so An=(a−1)In+11⊤.

Case a≠1. Then An=(a−1)(In+u1⊤) with u=1a−11. Scaling an n×n matrix by c multiplies its determinant by cn (multilinearity in each of the n columns), so by Theorem 7.8.5 detAn=(a−1)n(1+na−1)=(a−1)n−1(a−1+n), since 1⊤u=na−1.

Case a=1. For n≥2, all columns are equal, so detAn=0, which the formula also gives. For n=1, detA1=1, and the formula gives (a−1)0⋅1=1.

So detAn=(a−1)n−1(a+n−1) for every a. For n=3 this is (a−1)2(a+2); with a=3 it gives 4⋅5=20.

Warning. The lemma is about In+uv⊤, not uv⊤ or u⊤v. The rank-one matrix uv⊤ is n×n and, for n≥2, has determinant 0; the scalar v⊤u is its trace. Do not confuse det(In+uv⊤)=1+v⊤u with det(In)+det(uv⊤)=1 (for n≥2), which is false whenever v⊤u≠0: for u=v=e1, In+e1e1⊤=diag(2,1,…,1) has determinant 2.

7.8.5. Exercises

A. Check your understanding

Exercise (A1)
  • (a) State the Vandermonde determinant formula, including the order of the factors.
  • (b) True or false: V(x1,…,xn) is invertible whenever x1,…,xn are nonzero. Justify your answer.
  • (c) Write down the recurrence for the determinant of a tridiagonal matrix, and say which row the proof expands along.
  • (d) True or false: det(ABCD)=detAdetD whenever A and D are square and B=O. Justify your answer.
  • (e) True or false: det(In+uv⊤)=det(In+vu⊤) for all u,v∈Fn. Justify your answer.

Solution.

  • (a) detV(x1,…,xn)=∏1≤i<j≤n(xj−xi), where V has (i,j)-entry xij−1 (Theorem 7.8.1).

  • (b) False. V(1,1)=(1111) has nonzero nodes and determinant 0. The condition is that the nodes are distinct (Corollary 7.8.2); 0 is allowed as a node.

  • (c) Dk=akDk−1−bk−1ck−1Dk−2, with D0=1, D1=a1 (Theorem 7.8.3). The proof expands along the last row, which has only two nonzero entries.

  • (d) True. With B=O the matrix is lower block triangular, and Theorem 7.8.4 applies.

  • (e) True. Both equal 1+v⊤u=1+u⊤v by Theorem 7.8.5, since v⊤u=∑iviui=u⊤v.

B. Practice

Exercise (B1: A 4×4 Vandermonde determinant)

Compute det(1−11−1100011111248). Hence decide whether there is exactly one polynomial p∈R[x]≤3 with p(−1)=3, p(0)=1, p(1)=0, p(2)=5.

Solution. Row i is (1,xi,xi2,xi3) with nodes −1,0,1,2, so this is V(−1,0,1,2). By Theorem 7.8.1 its determinant is (0−(−1))(1−(−1))(2−(−1))(1−0)(2−0)(2−1)=1⋅2⋅3⋅1⋅2⋅1=12. (Expand along row 2, which is (1,0,0,0): the determinant is (−1)2+1det(−11−1111248), that is −(−1(8−4)−1(8−2)−1(4−2))=−(−4−6−2)=12.) Hence the coefficient matrix of the interpolation system is invertible, and there is exactly one p∈R[x]≤3 with the given values.

Exercise (B2: The second-difference matrix)

Let Kn∈Mn(R) have 2 on the diagonal, −1 directly above and below it, and 0 elsewhere. Prove that detKn=n+1. Hence show that Kn is invertible for every n.

Solution. Here ak=2 and bk−1ck−1=(−1)(−1)=1. By Theorem 7.8.3, Dk=2Dk−1−Dk−2 for k≥2, with D0=1, D1=2. We show Dk=k+1 by strong induction on k (Theorem 0.2.10). It holds for k=0,1. If it holds for k−1 and k−2, then Dk=2k−(k−1)=k+1. Hence detKn=Dn=n+1≠0, and Kn is invertible by Theorem 7.5.2.

Exercise (B3: A rank-one update)

Let u=(1,2,3) and v=(1,−1,2) in Q3.

  • (a) Use Theorem 7.8.5 to find det(I3+uv⊤).
  • (b) Write out I3+uv⊤ and check your answer by elimination.
  • (c) Find all t∈Q for which I3+tuv⊤ is not invertible.

Solution.

  • (a) v⊤u=1−2+6=5, so det(I3+uv⊤)=6.

  • (b) uv⊤=(1−122−243−36), so I3+uv⊤=(2−122−143−37). Subtract row 1 from row 2, which does not change the determinant (Theorem 7.5.1), to get row 2 equal to (0,0,2). Expanding along that row, det=2⋅(−1)2+3det(2−13−3)=−2(−6+3)=6.

  • (c) I3+tuv⊤=I3+(tu)v⊤, whose determinant is 1+tv⊤u=1+5t. It is zero exactly for t=−15, and by Theorem 7.5.2 that is the only t for which the matrix is not invertible.

C. Going deeper

Exercise (C1: The Cauchy determinant)

Let x1,…,xn,y1,…,yn∈F with xi+yj≠0 for all i,j, and let Qn∈Mn(F) have (i,j)-entry 1xi+yj. The goal is detQn=∏1≤i<j≤n(xj−xi)(yj−yi)∏i=1n∏j=1n(xi+yj).

  • (a) For i<n, subtract row n from row i. Show that the new (i,j)-entry is xn−xi(xi+yj)(xn+yj), and deduce that detQn=∏i<n(xn−xi)∏j(xn+yj)detQ′, where Q′ agrees with Qn in rows 1,…,n−1 and has last row (1,…,1).
  • (b) In Q′, for j<n, subtract column n from column j. Deduce that detQ′=∏j<n(yn−yj)∏i<n(xi+yn)detQn−1, where Qn−1 is built from x1,…,xn−1 and y1,…,yn−1.
  • (c) Prove the formula by induction on n.
  • (d) The Hilbert matrix Hn has (i,j)-entry 1i+j−1. Show that it is a Cauchy matrix, and use (c) to compute detH3.

Hint: in (a) and (b), factor scalars out of whole rows and columns using multilinearity.

Solution.

  • (a) For i<n, 1xi+yj−1xn+yj=(xn+yj)−(xi+yj)(xi+yj)(xn+yj)=xn−xi(xi+yj)(xn+yj). These row operations do not change the determinant (Theorem 7.5.1). In the new matrix, row i<n has the factor xn−xi in every entry, and column j has the factor 1xn+yj in every entry (in row n, 1xn+yj=1xn+yj⋅1). Pulling these scalars out of each row and column by multilinearity (Theorem 7.5.1, in its row and column forms) leaves the matrix Q′ with entries 1xi+yj in rows i<n and 1 in row n. This gives the stated formula.

  • (b) For j<n, subtracting column n from column j leaves the determinant unchanged, makes the last row (0,…,0,1), and for i<n gives 1xi+yj−1xi+yn=yn−yj(xi+yj)(xi+yn). Pull yn−yj out of column j (j<n) and 1xi+yn out of row i (i<n); the last row (0,…,0,1) is unaffected by the column factors because its first n−1 entries are 0, and row factors do not touch row n. What remains has 1xi+yj in positions i,j<n, entries (xi+yn)⋅1xi+yn=1 in column n above the corner, and last row (0,…,0,1). Expanding along the last row (Theorem 7.6.1) gives detQn−1, with sign (−1)2n=1.

  • (c) For n=1, detQ1=1x1+y1, which is the formula with empty products upstairs. For n≥2, combining (a) and (b), detQn=∏i<n(xn−xi)(yn−yi)∏j≤n(xn+yj)∏i<n(xi+yn)detQn−1. The numerator supplies exactly the factors of ∏i<j(xj−xi)(yj−yi) with j=n, and the denominator supplies exactly the factors xi+yj with max(i,j)=n, each once. By the induction hypothesis, detQn−1 supplies all the remaining factors. This proves the formula.

  • (d) With xi=i and yj=j−1, xi+yj=i+j−1≥1, so Hn is a Cauchy matrix over Q. For n=3, the numerator is ((2−1)(3−1)(3−2))2=4, since yj−yi=j−i=xj−xi. The denominator is the product of all i+j−1: the rows give 1⋅2⋅3=6, 2⋅3⋅4=24, 3⋅4⋅5=60, in total 8640. Hence detH3=48640=12160. (In general detHn=cn4/c2n with cn=∏k=1n−1k!; we state this without proof. These determinants shrink extremely fast, which is why Hilbert matrices are a standard test of numerical methods.)

Exercise (C2: A circulant determinant over C)

Let a,b,c∈C, let ω=e2πi/3, and let Z=(abccabbca).

  • (a) For k=0,1,2, let wk=(1,ωk,ω2k) and λk=a+bωk+cω2k. Show that Zwk=λkwk.
  • (b) Let W be the matrix with columns w0,w1,w2. Show that ZW=Wdiag(λ0,λ1,λ2) and that detW≠0. Deduce detZ=λ0λ1λ2.
  • (c) Using ω3=1 and 1+ω+ω2=0, deduce detZ=a3+b3+c3−3abc, and check this against the Leibniz formula.

Circulant matrices of every size are treated in Chapter 12.

Solution.

  • (a) By Example (Roots of Unity), ω3=1, so ω−k=ω2k and ω−2k=ωk. Row 1 of Zwk is a+bωk+cω2k=λk. Row 2 is c+aωk+bω2k=ωk(cω−k+a+bωk)=ωk(a+bωk+cω2k)=ωkλk. Row 3 is b+cωk+aω2k=ω2k(bω−2k+cω−k+a)=ω2kλk. Hence Zwk=λkwk.

  • (b) By Theorem 0.9.2, column k of ZW is Zwk=λkwk, column k of Wdiag(λ0,λ1,λ2). The (i,k)-entry of W is (ωk)i−1, so W=V(1,ω,ω2)⊤. The nodes 1,ω,ω2 are distinct (they are e2πik/3 for k=0,1,2), so detW=detV(1,ω,ω2)≠0 by Theorem 7.4.5 and Corollary 7.8.2. By Theorem 7.5.4 and Theorem 7.4.6, detZdetW=detWλ0λ1λ2, and canceling detW≠0 gives detZ=λ0λ1λ2.

  • (c) Multiply out λ1λ2=(a+bω+cω2)(a+bω2+cω). The nine terms are a2, abω2+abω, acω+acω2, b2ω3, bcω2, bcω4=bcω, c2ω3. Using ω3=1 and ω+ω2=−1, λ1λ2=a2+b2+c2−ab−ac−bc. Then detZ=(a+b+c)(a2+b2+c2−ab−ac−bc)=a3+b3+c3−3abc, expanding and canceling. The Leibniz formula for Z gives the three even terms a⋅a⋅a, c⋅c⋅c (from σ=(1 2 3)), and b⋅b⋅b, and the three odd terms, each equal to abc with sign −: the same answer.

Exercise (C3: Rank-one updates of an invertible matrix)

Let A∈Mn(F) be invertible and u,v∈Fn.

  • (a) Prove that det(A+uv⊤)=detA(1+v⊤A−1u).
  • (b) Deduce that A+uv⊤ is invertible if and only if v⊤A−1u≠−1.
  • (c) Give an example over Q with n=2 where A is invertible, uv⊤≠O, and A+uv⊤ is not invertible.

Solution.

  • (a) Since A is invertible, A+uv⊤=A(In+A−1uv⊤)=A(In+(A−1u)v⊤) by Theorem 0.9.4. By Theorem 7.5.4 and Theorem 7.8.5 applied to the vectors A−1u and v, det(A+uv⊤)=detA(1+v⊤A−1u).

  • (b) detA≠0 by Theorem 7.5.2, so det(A+uv⊤)≠0 exactly when 1+v⊤A−1u≠0. Apply Theorem 7.5.2 again.

  • (c) Take A=I2, u=(−1,0), v=(1,0). Then v⊤u=−1, and indeed A+uv⊤=(0001) is not invertible.

Found a typo or a mistake? Report it, or read this page’s source

The text of this book is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.