User gilles gnacadja - MathOverflowmost recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-06-19T15:59:17Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/user/10271http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/97080/matrix-operations-preserving-hurwitz-stabilityMatrix Operations Preserving Hurwitz StabilityGilles Gnacadja2012-05-16T03:03:35Z2012-05-16T17:31:02Z
<p>I begin with terminology I use in the question. A real square matrix $A$ is</p>
<ul>
<li>
<i>negative-stable</i> if for every eigenvalue $\lambda$ of $A$, ${\mathrm{Re}}(\lambda) < 0$;
</li>
<li>
<i>$\ast$-negative-stable</i> if for every eigenvalue $\lambda$ of $A$, either $\lambda = 0$ or ${\mathrm{Re}}(\lambda) < 0$;
</li>
<li>
<i>nonpositive-stable</i> if for every eigenvalue $\lambda$ of $A$, ${\mathrm{Re}}(\lambda) \leqslant 0$.
</li>
</ul>
<p>I made up the term '$\ast$-negative-stable' and I would welcome better and/or established terminology. For example, the Laplacian matrix of a nonnegatively weighted (directed or undirected) graph is $\ast$-negative-stable.</p>
<p>To put it broadly, I am looking for what is known about matrix operations that preserve the above stability properties.</p>
<p>Let $A$ be a real $n{\times}n$ matrix and let $u$, $v$, $w$ be real $n{\times}1$ vectors. Consider the real $n{\times}n$ matrices $D = \mathrm{diag}(u)$ and $B = vw^{\mathrm{T}}$, and the real number $\alpha = w^{\mathrm{T}}v$. I am particularly interested in what additional conditions on the matrix $A$ would make the following implications true. (I do not mean simultaneously true.) They concern preserving stability from $A$ to $AD$ for the first three and from $A$ to $A+B$ for the last three.</p>
<ol>
<li>
( $A$ is negative-stable and $u$ is positive ) $\Rightarrow$ ( $AD$ is negative-stable )
</li>
<li>
( $A$ is $\ast$-negative-stable and $u$ is nonnegative ) $\Rightarrow$ ( $AD$ is $\ast$-negative-stable )
</li>
<li>
( $A$ is nonpositive-stable and $u$ is nonnegative ) $\Rightarrow$ ( $AD$ is nonpositive-stable )
</li>
<li>
( $A$ is negative-stable and $\alpha < 0$ ) $\Rightarrow$ ( $A + B$ is negative-stable )
</li>
<li>
( $A$ is $\ast$-negative-stable and $\alpha \leqslant 0$ ) $\Rightarrow$ ( $A + B$ is $\ast$-negative-stable )
</li>
<li>
( $A$ is nonpositive-stable and $\alpha \leqslant 0$ ) $\Rightarrow$ ( $A + B$ is nonpositive-stable )
</li>
</ol>
<p>In implications 2 and 5 about $\ast$-negative-stability, it would be acceptable to assume that $A$ is similar to a Laplacian matrix (but Laplacian matrices should not be assumed to be symmetric). Would that be sufficient?</p>
<p><b>Addendum 1</b></p>
<p>Here is a way $\ast$-negative stability can be useful in studying negative/Hurwitz stability. Suppose I know that a matrix $A$ is similar to $C = \begin{pmatrix} O_{p{\times}p} & O_{p{\times}q} \\ S & T \end{pmatrix}$, where $T$ is nonsingular. Then $T$ is negative-stable if and only if $A$ is $\ast$-negative-stable, a potentially useful observation if $A$ looks easier to work with than $T$. The notion of nonpositive stability can become useful in similar (but not identical) circumstances.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/75978/preserving-the-algebraic-multiplicity-of-the-zero-eigenvaluePreserving the algebraic multiplicity of the zero eigenvalueGilles Gnacadja2011-09-20T17:20:22Z2011-09-20T18:31:57Z
<p>Let $M$ and $N$ be two real square matrices of size $p+q$. The matrix $M$ is nonsingular. The matrix $N$ has the following block structure, where $A$ is a $q{\times}p$ matrix. <code>$N = \left(\begin{array}{cc} \text{O}_{p,p} & \text{O}_{p,q} \\ A & \text{Id}_{q} \end{array}\right)$</code>. I would like to conclude that the algebraic multiplicity of zero as an eigenvalue of the product matrix $MN$ is $p$. (The geometric multiplicity of the zero eigenvalue is preserved as $p$ from $N$ to $MN$.) I am looking for arguments to prove (or disprove) that conclusion.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/68174/equilibria-exist-in-compact-convex-forward-invariant-setsEquilibria Exist in Compact Convex Forward-Invariant SetsGilles Gnacadja2011-06-19T00:12:11Z2011-06-22T01:31:45Z
<blockquote>
<strong>Theorem.</strong> Consider a continuous map $f : {\mathbb{R}}^{n} \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^{n}$ and suppose that the autonomous dynamical system $\dot{x} = f(x)$ has a semiflow $\varphi : {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq{0}} \times {\mathbb{R}}^{n} \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^{n}$. Let $K \subseteq {\mathbb{R}}^{n}$. If $K$ is nonempty, compact, convex and forward-invariant, then $K$ contains an equilibrium of the dynamical system, i.e. a zero of the map $f$.
</blockquote>
<p>According to a reliable source, the above theorem is a standard result everyone uses in dynamical systems without proof. I propose a proof in <i>"Equilibria Exist in Compact Convex Forward-Invariant Sets"</i> at <a href="http://math.GillesGnacadja.info/files/EquilExists.html" rel="nofollow">http://math.GillesGnacadja.info/files/EquilExists.html</a>. I am interested in comments on this proof, in references to this or other proofs in the literature, and in new/better proofs.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/49202/map-transformation-to-force-convergence-to-unique-fixed-pointMap Transformation to Force Convergence to Unique Fixed PointGilles Gnacadja2010-12-13T02:29:02Z2010-12-13T16:43:10Z
<p>Is there a transformation $\mathcal{T}$ of maps <code>$\mathbb{R}_{{\geq}0}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_{{\geq}0}^{n}$</code> with the following property?</p>
<blockquote>
If a map $F : \mathbb{R}_{{\geq}0}^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_{{\geq}0}^{n}$ is smooth and order-reversing with respect to the product order and possesses a unique fixed point $\omega$, then
<ul>
<li>
The point $\omega$ is the unique fixed point of ${\mathcal{T}}\!F$; and
</li>
<li>
For some (known) point $a \in \mathbb{R}_{{\geq}0}^{n}$, the sequence of iterates of ${\mathcal{T}}\!F$ starting at $a$ converges to the (unknown) point $\omega$.
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>For more on this question, please refer to the 3-page PDF document at this address: <a href="http://math.gillesgnacadja.info/files/FixedPointAlgo_OPEN.html" rel="nofollow">http://math.gillesgnacadja.info/files/FixedPointAlgo_OPEN.html</a>. I would have liked to post everything here but I could not find a way to save and preview the question before posting it. The content of the document is as follows.</p>
<ol>
<li>
The Question
</li>
<li>
Why this Question?
</li>
<li>
The Trivial Case $n = 1$
</li>
<li>
Where Does This Question Come From?
</li>
<li>
Satisfying the Hypotheses of the Question
</li>
<li>
An Analogous Question
</li>
</ol>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/68174/equilibria-exist-in-compact-convex-forward-invariant-setsComment by Gilles GnacadjaGilles Gnacadja2012-08-11T22:48:59Z2012-08-11T22:48:59ZA colleague showed me an article that essentially has the result: "The Brouwer Fixed Point Theorem Applied to Rumour Transmission", <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2006.02.007" rel="nofollow">dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2006.02.007</a>. The article is dated 2005/2006. There have to be earlier references.http://mathoverflow.net/questions/97080/matrix-operations-preserving-hurwitz-stabilityComment by Gilles GnacadjaGilles Gnacadja2012-05-16T17:32:56Z2012-05-16T17:32:56ZThanks, Federico. I recognize that "$\ast$-negative-stable" and "nonpositive-stable" can seem strange without explanation of where they come from. Also, note that $\ast$-negative-stable matrices do not have purely imaginary eigenvalues, except possibly zero. I augmented my question with Addendum 1 to provide some motivation.http://mathoverflow.net/questions/75978/preserving-the-algebraic-multiplicity-of-the-zero-eigenvalue/75985#75985Comment by Gilles GnacadjaGilles Gnacadja2011-09-20T18:53:23Z2011-09-20T18:53:23ZThank you for this method of generating counterexamples.http://mathoverflow.net/questions/75978/preserving-the-algebraic-multiplicity-of-the-zero-eigenvalue/75984#75984Comment by Gilles GnacadjaGilles Gnacadja2011-09-20T18:39:34Z2011-09-20T18:39:34ZThank you for the obvious counterexample.http://mathoverflow.net/questions/68174/equilibria-exist-in-compact-convex-forward-invariant-setsComment by Gilles GnacadjaGilles Gnacadja2011-06-22T01:37:42Z2011-06-22T01:37:42ZThanks Jaap, for catching and illustrating this insufficiency. I changed the statement. Now I explicitly require the existence of the semiflow. In my intended application, the map $f$ is a polynomial describing the kinetics of a chemical reaction network and time runs from zero to infinity. So I believe it would be too strong to require (global) Lipschitz continuity and too weak to require local Lipschitz continuity. Thanks again.http://mathoverflow.net/questions/49202/map-transformation-to-force-convergence-to-unique-fixed-pointComment by Gilles GnacadjaGilles Gnacadja2010-12-13T16:58:45Z2010-12-13T16:58:45ZThanks to fedja for the question and to Ricky Demer for the answer. The order is indeed the product order. I added the precision in the question.