1
$\begingroup$

Let $I$ denote an identity matrix, $E$ denote the all-one matrix of dimension $k\times k$ and $c$ some positive real number. Define $X=B(I-cE)B^T$ where $B$ is given by

$B:=\begin{pmatrix} 1 &\beta_1 &\beta_2 &\ldots, &\beta_{k-1}\\ 0 &1 &0 &\ldots &0\\ 0 &0 &1 &\ldots &0\\ \vdots &\vdots &\vdots &\ddots &\vdots\\ 0 &0 &0 &0 &1 \end{pmatrix}$

i.e., $B$ is the identity matrix with its first row filled up with $k-1$ positive real numbers $\beta_1,\ldots,\beta_{k-1}$.

I am interested in the cholesky factorization of $X$, $X=LL^T$ where $L$ is a lower triangular matrix. In particular, I am interested in the case when all the diagonal entries of $L$ are equal.

So the question is: under what condition of $c$, there exist $k-1$ reals $\beta_1,\ldots,\beta_{k-1}$ such that $L$ has equal diagonal entries?

Here are some observations I have made:

  1. It's not true that for any $c$, $L$ can be made having equal diagonals by adjusting $\beta$'s. Numerical results suggest that for $c$ larger than a certain value, this is always possible.
  2. Clearly $\det(L)=\det(X)^{1/2}=(\det(B)\det(I-cE)\det(B^T))^{1/2}=\det(I-cE)^{1/2}$ which does not depend on $\beta$. Hence asking $L$ to have equal diagonals is equivalent to asking $L$ to have minimum trace possible because of the inequality $\operatorname{trace}(L)\geq K\det(L)^{1/K}$. We want the above inequality to be tight: this happens when all diagonals (also eigenvalues) of $L$ are equal. I do not know if this observation could help.
  3. Of course we could calculate the diagonals of $L$ out using a brut force calculation. I think each entry $L_{ii}$ is a quadratic expression of $\beta$'s. However the expressions are too complicated to make any useful statement.
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Have you tried computing an upper triangular Cholesky decomposition $X=UU^T$ (which is easier because $U=BU_0$ for $1-cE = U_0 U_0^T$) and using that knowledge? $\endgroup$ Apr 29, 2014 at 15:52
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks @JohannesHahn, it's a good idea. I tried the upper triangular Cholesky on $X$ (surprisingly I did not find many references on the upper triangular Cholesky decomposition), but I think there is no simple relationship between $L_{ii}$ (diagonals of the lower triangular matrix) and $U_{ii}$ (diagonals of the upper triangular matrix) with $X=LL^T=UU^T$ unless $X$ is very special. In my case, the upper triangular decomposition is even weirder, it can be seen that the diagonals of $U=BU_0$ do not contain the parameters $\beta$... $\endgroup$
    – EEStudent
    Apr 30, 2014 at 13:56

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.