7
$\begingroup$

Given $M$ a symmetric matrix in $\mathbb F_2^{n\times n}$ having $\mathsf{det}_\mathbb R(M)\neq0$ (non-singular in reals) and satisfying $PMP'=(M+J+I)$ or $P(M+J+I)P'=M$ where $P$ is a permutation matrix in $\mathbb F_2^{n\times n}$ and where $J$ is all $1$s and $I$ is identity matrix in $\mathbb F_2^{n\times n}$ ($'$ is transpose and so $P'=P^{-1}$ holds).

$\mathsf{Det}(M)=\mathsf{Det}(M+J+I)$ and $\mathsf{Det}(M+I)=\mathsf{Det}(M+J)$ are satisfied as $\mathsf{Det}(P)\equiv1\bmod2$.

Can $M,M+I\not\in\mathsf{SL}(n,\mathbb F_2)$ be simultaneously impossible?

Is there an example of $\mathsf{det}(M)+\mathsf{det}(M+I)\equiv1\bmod2$?

Update Antoine Labelle's comments below suggests either $M,M+I\in\mathsf{SL}(n,\mathbb F_2)$ or $M,M+I\not\in\mathsf{SL}(n,\mathbb F_2)$ holds and he has no situation $\mathsf{det}(M)+\mathsf{det}(M+I)\equiv1\bmod2$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ what is $P'$? $P$ transposed? $\endgroup$
    – user42024
    Commented Mar 16, 2021 at 10:03
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ In 1, is $\mathsf{Det}(P) = 1$ a separate condition that you mean to impose? Do you not mean to impose it in 2? \\ Also, the answer to 1 is trivially yes, by taking $n = 1$ and $M = 0$, so I guess you want to exclude that case. \\ Finally, it seems weird to specify $P M P' = M + J + I$ or $P(M + J + I)P' = M$, since these conditions are equivalent for $P$ a permutation matrix. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Mar 16, 2021 at 12:39
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Doesn’t every permutation matrix have determinant 1 over the binary field? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 16, 2021 at 13:08
  • $\begingroup$ If $PMP’=M+I+J$ then $P(M+I)P’=PMP’+PIP’=M+J$ because $P’=P^{-1}$, permutation matrices are orthogonal. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 16, 2021 at 13:55
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure what the question is now. The latest iteration seems to be equivalent to: can both $0$ and $1$ be eigenvalues of $M$? It may also be noted that if there is such a permutation matrix $P$, it may be assumed to have order a power of $2$. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 16, 2021 at 19:07

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

Most of the question has already been addressed. As regards the last part, I just poit out that if ${\rm det} M = 0$ and ${\rm det}(M+I) = 1$, then we must have ${\rm rank}(M) = n-1$ ( I mean here the $\mathbb{F}_{2}$ rank). This follows since $M + I + J$ is (by assumption) similar to $M$, and hence has the same rank. If that rank is $n-2$ or less, then the null space of $M+I+J$ is at least two-dimensional, and the null space of $J$ is $n-1$ dimensional. Hence there is a non-zero column vector $v$ with $(M+I+J)v = 0$ and $Jv = 0.$ Hence $(M+I)v = 0,$ so that ${\rm det}(M+I) = 0.$

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ If the rank of $M+I+J$ were $n-2$ or less, then subadditivity of the rank would give $\textrm{rank}(M+I)=\textrm{rank}(M+I+J+J) \le \textrm{rank}(M+I+J) + \textrm{rank}(J) \le (n-2)+1=n-1$, contradicting $\det(M+I)=1$. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 1:52
  • $\begingroup$ But this does not show that $\det(M)=0$ while $\det(M+I)=1$ is impossible, correct? It shows only that $M$ must have rank $n-1$ in this case? Or is that somehow enough? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 1:54
  • $\begingroup$ @LouisDeaett:: Your first comment is essentially the argument I use. As for the second comment, indeed I do not claim to have completely answered that part of the question, and I have only shown that in case det M = 0, the only way that det(M+I) = 1 can occur is if M has rank n-1. I do not say, claim or prove that this is enough to exclude det (M+I) = 1 when det M = 0. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 13:07
  • $\begingroup$ Okay, that is what I thought, but I just wanted to verify. I agree it's an observation that does feel like it should be useful. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 16:19
6
$\begingroup$

Some computation in sage yielded the following example, with $n=8$ and $P$ the cyclic permutation $(12345678)$:

$$M=\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ \end{array} \right)$$

Interesting observation: Computation seems to show, however, that we always have $\text{det}(M)= \text{det}(M+I)$ (at least for cyclic permutations, which are the ones I tested). In other words, $M$ cannot have one of $0,1$ as an eigenvalue without the other. I wonder if this could be proven.

EDIT: Here is an example (still for a cyclic permutation) with nonzero determinant in characteristic $0$ if we replace the elements of $\mathbb{F}_2$ by their representative in $\{0,1\}$. The characteristic $0$ determinant is $16$.

$$M=\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 \\ 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ \end{array} \right)$$

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ In the comment on $8|n$ are you talking det mod $2$ or det in reals (in answer you say det is $16$ so I think you imply det mod $2$)? Can you check for $n=4k+a$ where $a\in\{0,1\}$? My guess is det in reals is mostly $0$ (hence $0\bmod2$) if $a=1$. $\endgroup$
    – Turbo
    Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 12:20
  • $\begingroup$ Yes unless specified otherwise it's over $\mathbb{F}_2$. Also for cyclic permutations it's easy to see that the matrix $M$ can only exist if $4|n$, so $a=1$ is impossible. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 13:10
  • $\begingroup$ Why is it easy to see? $\endgroup$
    – Turbo
    Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 14:04
  • $\begingroup$ The condition $PMP'=(M+J+I)$ basically says that $M_{i+1,j+1}=M_{i,j}+1$ for $i\ne j$, (indices taken mod $n$). If $n$ is odd you can deduce $M_{i,j}=M_{i,j}+1$ by repeating this, which is impossible. Similarly if $n=2k$ with $k$ odd we find $M_{i,i+k}=M_{i+k,i}+1$ which is imposibble as $M$ is symmetric. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 19, 2021 at 18:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .