On the boundedness of linear representations of formal power series of languages.

Let $\Sigma$ be a finite non-empty set of symbols (i.e. an alphabet). Fix $\pi, \eta\in\mathbb{R}^{1\times m}$ and for every $\sigma\in\Sigma$ fix $A(\sigma)\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times m}$. We also require that for every $1 \leq i,j\leq m$ $\pi_i, \eta_i, (A(\sigma))_{i,j} \geq 0$ but $\pi,\eta,A(\sigma)\neq 0$.

If $w:=w_1\cdots w_n\in\Sigma^*$ let $A(w) := \prod_{i=1}^{n} A(w_i)$. Suppose that there exists a real $K$ such that for every $w\in\Sigma^*$ one has $|\pi A(w)\eta^{t} |\leq K$.

Is it true that this imply the existence of $K'$ such that for every $w\in\Sigma^*$ $||\pi A(w)||\leq K'$ for some $K'$? If not, any counterexample?

Here $||\cdot||$ denotes the usual $\ell_2$ norm of a real vector.

-
Is $\eta$ fixed? If $\eta$ is 0 you can't say anything. If $\eta| is strictly positive things look better. – Benjamin Steinberg Jul 26 '11 at 21:40 Thank you for replying. We fix$\eta, \pi$and$A(\sigma)$but we rule out the case$\eta=0$. I've edited the question. Thank you. – Carlo Jul 26 '11 at 21:59 I also guess there should be a counter-example with some η not strictly-positive and that the theorem might be true adding η>0 to hypothesis. Any hint or ref on this will be of great help. Thank you. – Carlo Jul 26 '11 at 22:12 As stated nothing works. Just choose matrices whose rows are orthogonal to$\eta$. Maybe you might want strictly positive matrices and vectors? – Benjamin Steinberg Jul 27 '11 at 0:27 1 Answer Here is a counterexample. Suppose that$A(\sigma)$is upper triangular with a$1$in upper left position, and that$\eta=[1\ 0\ 0\ \cdots\ 0]$and$\pi=[1\ 1\ 1\cdots\ 1]$. Note that$A(w)$is also upper triangular with a$1$at upper left, and that$A(w)\eta^t=[1\ 0\ 0\ \cdots\ 0]^t$and so$\pi A(w)\eta^t=1$for all$w$. But meanwhile, it is easy to arrange that$\pi A(w)$can become unboundedly large by taking$w$large. For a concrete example, use$A(\sigma)=[1\ 1;\ 0\ 1]$and$\eta=[1\ 0]$and$\pi=[1\ 1]\$.

-
This is an answer to the original question; it doesn't answer the strictly-positive version of the question. (So it would be fine, Recursive, to de-accept it, in the hope of getting an answer to the edited question.) –  Joel David Hamkins Jul 27 '11 at 15:31
Ok I've re-edited, now the statement should be ok with my intended interpretation of the problem. Your counterexample answer my question. Thank you! –  Carlo Jul 27 '11 at 16:57