Skip to main content
Notice removed Authoritative reference needed by CommunityBot
Bounty Ended with no winning answer by CommunityBot
deleted 61 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (yet, it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved already in [this thread][1]this thread that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal(!), the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factorize.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this [Click me][2]Click me

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case.

Please let me know about any thoughts you may have on this. [1]: https://mathoverflow.net/posts/351509/edit [2]: https://gofile.io/?c=YnM19e

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (yet, it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved already in [this thread][1] that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal(!), the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factorize.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this [Click me][2]

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case.

Please let me know about any thoughts you may have on this. [1]: https://mathoverflow.net/posts/351509/edit [2]: https://gofile.io/?c=YnM19e

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (yet, it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved already in this thread that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal(!), the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factorize.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this Click me

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case.

Notice added Authoritative reference needed by Pritam Bemis
Bounty Started worth 200 reputation by Pritam Bemis
Notice removed Authoritative reference needed by CommunityBot
Bounty Ended with no winning answer by CommunityBot
added 63 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (yet, it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved already in [this thread][1] that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal(!), the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factorize.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this [Click me][2]

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case.

Please let me know about any thoughts you may have on this. [1]: https://mathoverflow.net/posts/351509/edit [2]: https://gofile.io/?c=YnM19e

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (yet, it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved already in [this thread][1] that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal(!), the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factorize.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this [Click me][2]

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case. [1]: https://mathoverflow.net/posts/351509/edit [2]: https://gofile.io/?c=YnM19e

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (yet, it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved already in [this thread][1] that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal(!), the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factorize.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this [Click me][2]

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case.

Please let me know about any thoughts you may have on this. [1]: https://mathoverflow.net/posts/351509/edit [2]: https://gofile.io/?c=YnM19e

deleted 27 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (I am mostly interested in this choiceyet, but it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved already in [this thread][1] that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal(!), the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factoritefactorize.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this [Click me][2]

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case. [1]: https://mathoverflow.net/posts/351509/edit [2]: https://gofile.io/?c=YnM19e

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (I am mostly interested in this choice, but it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved in [this thread][1] that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal, the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factorite.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this [Click me][2]

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case. [1]: https://mathoverflow.net/posts/351509/edit [2]: https://gofile.io/?c=YnM19e

This question is about the positive definiteness of a (non-random) matrix that is defined using random variables as follows:

We fix the vector $v=(1,1)$ (yet, it seems the final result does not depend on it) and choose a positive definite covariance matrix $\Sigma \in \mathbb R^{2 \times 2}$.

Let $X$ be a $\mathbb R^2$-valued random variable such that $X$ is distributed according to

$$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$

We then define the following deterministic matrix using centred random variables $Y=X-\mathbb E(X)$

$$ \langle x,Ay\rangle = -\mathbb E\left(\langle Y,x \rangle \langle Y,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \langle Y, y\rangle\right).$$

Fedja proved already in [this thread][1] that for any $v$ and $\Sigma$ diagonal(!), the matrix $A$ is positive definite. He understood that in this case the matrix is essentially diagonal, as components $x_1,x_2$ in the measure $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^4-\vert x_2 \vert^4} \ dx.$$ factorize.

His proof also shows that at least for the special choice $x=\Sigma^{-1}v$, we have also for non-diagonal $\Sigma $, that $\langle x,Ax\rangle \ge 0.$

We then discussed in the comments whether one can extend the proof to non-diagonal $\Sigma$, but did not succeed so far.

Numerically it seems that for all choices of $\Sigma$ and $v$ I made so far, the matrix $A$ is positive definite.

Here you can find the Mathematica file I was using to verify this [Click me][2]

Another way of expressing this matrix $A$ is to write $$A = \int_{\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0} (x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle \ (d\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))-d\mu(x-\mathbb E(X))).$$

We observe that for $\langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle>0$ the integrand $(x \otimes x) \langle x,\Sigma^{-1} v \rangle $ is always positive. So if we could show that "most of the time" $$\mu(x+\mathbb E(X))\ge \mu(x-\mathbb E(X))$$

this would imply the result.

My question therefore is: How can I show the eigenvalues of $A$ are non-negative?

Numerically, I made the following observations:

  • The positive definiteness of $A$ holds independent of the choice of $v \neq 0$ and $\Sigma.$

  • If we write $$d\mu(x) \propto e^{-\langle (x-v), \Sigma^{-1} (x-v) \rangle-\vert x_1 \vert^p-\vert x_2 \vert^p} \ dx.$$

then for $p<2$ the eigenvalues of $A$ become negative, zero for $p=2$ and greater than zero for $p>4.$

This seems to be consistent with what Fedja proved in the one-dimensional case. [1]: https://mathoverflow.net/posts/351509/edit [2]: https://gofile.io/?c=YnM19e

added 378 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
Notice added Authoritative reference needed by Sascha
Bounty Started worth 500 reputation by Sascha
Notice removed Authoritative reference needed by CommunityBot
Bounty Ended with no winning answer by CommunityBot
Rollback to Revision 10
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
added 49 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
deleted 56 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
added 173 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
added 647 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
added 5 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
added 124 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
edited title
Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading
Notice added Authoritative reference needed by Kung Yao
Bounty Started worth 250 reputation by Kung Yao
added 165 characters in body
Source Link
Kung Yao
  • 192
  • 4
  • 16
Loading