$$A = \begin{bmatrix} x_{11} A_{11} & x_{12} A_{12} & x_{13} A_{13} & \cdots & x_{1d} A_{1d}\\ x_{21} A_{21} & x_{22} A_{22} & x_{23} A_{23} & \cdots & x_{2d} A_{2d}\\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ x_{d1} A_{d1} & x_{d2} A_{d2} & x_{d3} A_{d3} & \cdots & x_{dd} A_{dd}\\ \end{bmatrix}$$

where $A_{ij}$ is an $n \times n $ invertible matrix and $x_{ij} \neq 0$ is a scalar. All the entries in matrices and scalars are from a finite field $\mathbb{F}_q$. Let $X = (x_{ij})$. It can easily be shown that there exists a matrix $X$ such that the matrix $A$ is invertible if $q > 2$. But is there any nice sufficient condition I can put on matrix $X$ or an explicit construction of $X$ to make $A$ invertible other than saying the $\det(A)$ polynomial in $x_{ij}$ must be non-zero?

  • $\begingroup$ If the Aij are all the identity matrix, (and the xij are also the same), I do not see how A can have determinant different from 0. Indeed, even if the identity matrix is only for I=1,2 and all j (or the transpose) and similarly for the xij, I see A as being singular. Gerhard "And Q Doesn't Matter Here" Paseman, 2017.08.10. $\endgroup$ – Gerhard Paseman Aug 10 '17 at 16:59
  • $\begingroup$ @Balajisb: "other than saying the $\det(A)$ polynomial in $x_{ij}$ must be non-zero" - careful here, because $A$ is a matrix over $M_n (\Bbb F_q)$ which is not commutative. You need first a notion of determinant for matrices with entries in a non-commutative ring; there are several approaches to define one, one of them being the concept of "quasideterminant". $\endgroup$ – Alex M. Aug 10 '17 at 17:58
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @AlexM. Presumably what the OP means is $\det(A)$ where $A$ is considered as a $dn \times dn$ matrix over $\mathbb F_q$. $\endgroup$ – Robert Israel Aug 10 '17 at 20:21
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexM as Robert pointed out i do mean $det(A)$ when A is considered as $dn \times dn$ matrix. $\endgroup$ – Balaji sb Aug 11 '17 at 6:30

The only easy case I can think of is where $\mathrm A_{ij} = \mathrm A_0$, where $\mathrm A_0$ is an invertible $n \times n$ matrix, for all $i,j \in [d]$. In this special case,

$$\mathrm A = \begin{bmatrix} x_{11} \mathrm A_{0} & x_{12} \mathrm A_{0} & \cdots & x_{1d} \mathrm A_{0}\\ x_{21} \mathrm A_{0} & x_{22} \mathrm A_{0} & \cdots & x_{2d} \mathrm A_{0}\\ \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ x_{d1} \mathrm A_{0} & x_{d2} \mathrm A_{0} & \cdots & x_{dd} \mathrm A_{0}\\ \end{bmatrix} = \mathrm X \otimes \mathrm A_0$$

where $\otimes$ denotes the Kronecker product. Hence,

$$\det (\mathrm A) := \left( \det (\mathrm X) \right)^n \cdot \left( \det (\mathrm A_0) \right)^d$$

and, thus, $\mathrm A$ is invertible if and only if $\mathrm X$ is invertible. If that is indeed the case, the inverse is

$$\rm A^{-1} = X^{-1} \otimes A_0^{-1}$$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Even if the matrix are non-square, I think you can take an SVD $X=U_1S_1V_1^*$ and $A_0=U_2S_2V_2^*$ and combine them as $X\otimes A_0 = (U_1 \otimes U_2) (S_1\otimes S_2) (V_1^*\otimes V_2^*)$ and reduce to the diagonal case. $\endgroup$ – Federico Poloni Sep 11 '17 at 6:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.