4
$\begingroup$

Condition : Given a $4 \times 5$ matrix, where each element is denoted by $p/q$, we have $|p|<10$ and $1\leq |q|<10$.

Example: $A$ given by

-9/7 -5/8 -1 4/5 4
-1 9/7 -6/5 -7 2/9
-1/3 -2 5/7 -2/9 -7
3 0 -5/3 8/9 -2/5

I have found that when I calculate the row reduced echelon form (RREF) of a $4\times 5$ matrix satisfying the condition above, it produces larger numbers than I expected.

For example, the RREF of $A$ is

1 0 0 0 -13325864657/7239264390 
0 1 0 0 10141123216/3619632195 
0 0 1 0 -3549396949/1447852878 
0 0 0 1 562768523/482617626 

How long is the maximum length of numerator/denominator?

It looks like $a_{1,5}$ has longest length and it's under $10^{10}$, but I can't prove it.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I know it's not what you asked, but this could be rephrased in terms of a "height" of a matrix with rational entries (basically, the maximum of the absolute values of all the denominators and numerators), and how transforming the matrix into various standard forms (eg Smith normal form, RREF, etc) affects the height. You are starting with an arbitrary matrix (of a certain fixed size) of height less than $10$ and are looking at what is the maximum possible height after passing to RREF, or if not that, upper bounds. $\endgroup$
    – David Roberts
    Commented Aug 12, 2020 at 9:28
  • $\begingroup$ In other words you have a 4 by 4 matrix of the above kind and apply its inverse to a vector of the above kind (assuming full rank, otherwise you have a smaller size matrix and life gets easier) and ask how many digits the numerator and the denominator may have after that. Plug {8/9,9/5,9/8,9/7}*inverse({{9,9,9,9},{9/5,-9/8,-9/7,8/9},{-9/8,-9/7,8/9,9/5},{-9/7,8/9,-8/5,9/8}}) into Wolfram Alpha to see that 17 digits for the denominator are possible and that is, actually, the limit. Not voting to close because I cannot find the answer for the numerator in 5 minutes but this is surely MSE, not MO $\endgroup$
    – fedja
    Commented Aug 13, 2020 at 5:04
  • $\begingroup$ I'm an idiot: the largest possible numerator is exactly the same as the largest possible denominator, so 17 digits is the answer for both. However that length is impossible to achieve simultaneously, so if this problem arose as an exercise in evil teaching (give your students an online assignment to find the RREF and provide one less position in the input field than what is needed to type the answer), then you are safe with 32 digit places plus one division sign holder and you know the matrix now. If it doesn't get closed, I'll post the argument later.' $\endgroup$
    – fedja
    Commented Aug 13, 2020 at 14:59

1 Answer 1

5
$\begingroup$

Surprisingly the question hasn't been closed yet, so I'm posting the solution, as promised. As I said, bringing the matrix to the row echelon form is equivalent to the left multiplication by the inverse to the $4\times 4$ sub-matrix (if the rank is full) or smaller size sub-matrix if the rank is smaller than $4$. I'll consider the full rank case only. Let's look at the first entry of $A^{-1}x$. By Cramer's rule, it is just the ratio of the determinants of matrices with the same three columns (from where it is obvious that the longest possible numerator is the same as the longest possible denominator).

Now let $C_1,C_2,C_3$ be those common columns. In each column we can write each entry as a fraction with the denominator from $1$ to $9$. We will not care if the fraction is reducible or not. Now for each of these columns we will compute two quantities: the least common multiple of the denominators $D_j$ and the square root $M_j$ of the sum of squares of the entries. Then all $3\times 3$ minors have the common denominator $D=D_1D_2D_3$ and so each of the two full determinants is just an integer divided by $2520D_1D_2D_3$ ($2520$ is the least common multiple of the numbers from $1$ to $9$). This integer can become the numerator/denominator of the result if no further cancellations take place. By the Hadamard inequality (the volume of a parallelepiped does not exceed the product of its sides), that integer is at most $9\times 2\times 2520\times M_1M_2M_3D_1D_2D_3$.

Now let us look at the product $M_1D_1$, say. Notice that there are $4$ primes up to $9$: $2,3,5,7$. Having the same prime in two different denominators in $C_1$ is not optimal because we can leave only the highest power and increase $M_1$ without changing $D_1$, so each prime occurs in at most one denominator in the (formal) worst case scenario. If $2$ and $3$ occur together (the denominator $6$), then there is a denominator-free entry and we can increase $6$ to $8$ and put $9$ on that entry, increasing $D_1$ $12$ times and decreasing $M_1$ at most $9$ times. Finally, if we can increase the power of some prime $p$ in the denominator by $1$, we'd better do it because $M_1$ will decrease at most $p$ times but $D_1$ will increase $p$ times. Thus, the largest product $M_1D_1$ is achieved (formally) at the column $(9/5,9/7,9/8,9/9)$, which gives $M_1D_1\le Q=9\times\sqrt{5^{-2}+7^{-2}+8^{-2}+9^{-2}}\times 2520$.

The final estimate for the numerator/denominator is then $9\times 2520\times 2\times Q^3\le 1.4\times 10^{16}$, so the number of digits cannot be greater than $17$.

Plugging {8/9,9/5,9/8,9/7}*inverse({{9,9,9,9},{9/5,-9/8,-9/7,8/9},{-9/8,-9/7,8/9,9/5},{-9/7,8/9,-9/5,9/8}}) into Wolfram Alpha (or any other computational tool), we see that 17 digits are attainable (the matrix has the same sign pattern as the Hadamard $4\times 4$ matrix of $\pm 1$'s, so our estimate is not too crude and the denominator $12,887,816,516,918,280$ is actually rather close to our upper bound).

$\endgroup$

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