Skip to main content
added 9 characters in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$, times the scalar $a \in \mathbb R$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$.

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to (1,0,\ldots,0)$$q \to \delta_{i=1} \in \ell^2$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should prove the above claim / conjecture.

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$, times the scalar $a \in \mathbb R$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to (1,0,\ldots,0)$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should prove the above claim / conjecture.

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$, times the scalar $a \in \mathbb R$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$.

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to \delta_{i=1} \in \ell^2$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should prove the above claim / conjecture.

added 2 characters in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$, times athe scalar $a \in \mathbb R$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to (1,0,\ldots,0)$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should prove the above claim / conjecture.

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$, times a scalar $a \in \mathbb R$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to (1,0,\ldots,0)$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should prove the above claim / conjecture.

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$, times the scalar $a \in \mathbb R$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to (1,0,\ldots,0)$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should prove the above claim / conjecture.

edited body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$, times a scalar $a \in \mathbb R$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to (1,0,\ldots,0)$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should proofprove the above claim / conjecture.

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$, times a scalar $a \in \mathbb R$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to (1,0,\ldots,0)$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should proof the above claim / conjecture.

A heuristic argument based on Ofer's comment

Note that $T := YY^\top = XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top$, where $A:=a 1_n 1_d^\top$ is the all-ones matrix of shape $n \times d$. Note that $AA^\top=da^21_n1_n^\top$, times a scalar $a \in \mathbb R$.

Conjecture. $\lambda_i(YY^\top) \to \lambda_i(XX^\top) + \delta_{i=1}nda^2$

I've empirically observed that the above conjecture is likely to be true. Below, I sketch some ideas which point in the direction of a possible proof.

enter image description here

Fact 1: $\mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AX^\top +X^\top A + AA^\top) \to \mbox{LSD}(XX^\top + AA^\top)$, in some sense (probably weakly).

The above fact (it seems) was implied by Ofer's comment. I've observed this empirically, but I'm not quite sure why it should be true. Maybe this is a consequence of some classical / well-known lemma from free probability theory ?

Also, using a result due to G. Golub and V. Loan (see Lemma 1 of this monograph), we deduce that

Fact 2: There exist $q_1,\ldots,q_n \ge 0$ with $\sum_{i=1}^n q_i = 1$, such that $\lambda_i(XX^\top+AA^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top + \alpha^2d 1_n1_n^\top) = \lambda_i(XX^\top) + q_i nda^2$.

Moreover, we have the formula $q_i = \dfrac{(1_n^\top u_i)(1_n^\top v_i)}{nu_i^\top v_i}$ (provided $u_i^\top v_i \ne 0$), where $u_1,\ldots,u_n$ are the eigenvectors of $XX^\top$ and $v_1,\ldots,v_n$ are the eigenvector of $v_i$. Intuitively, one whould expect $u_i$ to be pretty much orthogonal to $v_i$ for $i \ne 1$. As a consequnce, one would expect $q \to (1,0,\ldots,0)$, in some sense.

Putting all the bits together (and of course making some of the above arguments rigorous) should prove the above claim / conjecture.

deleted 2 characters in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76
Loading
deleted 17 characters in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76
Loading
added 87 characters in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76
Loading
added 50 characters in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76
Loading
added 1 character in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76
Loading
added 1 character in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76
Loading
added 1 character in body
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76
Loading
Source Link
dohmatob
  • 6.9k
  • 1
  • 18
  • 76
Loading