1
$\begingroup$

For $0 \le A \in GL(n,\mathbb{R})$, let $Aw = \Delta(A)$, where $\Delta$ denotes the map taking a matrix to a vector of its diagonal entries and/or forming a diagonal matrix from a vector, according to context. Writing $Z := \Delta(\Delta(A))^{-1}A$, we have the equation $Zw = 1$. Readers familiar with the theory of magnitude à la Leinster will recognize this as the equation defining a "weighting" from a "similarity matrix" $Z$ (hence the category theory tags). It turns out that if $\Delta(\Delta(A))^{-1} 11^T \ge A$ (i.e., the diagonal entries of $A$ are greater than or equal to the other entries in their row) and $A_{j\ell}A_{\ell k} \le A_{jj}A_{jk}$ identically (this last being a rephrasing of the triangle inequality), then writing $Z = \exp(-td)$ componentwise yields a Lawvere metric $d$ for each $t$, though the parametric dependence on $t$ is linear and hence boring.

(FWIW, the RHS of the equation $Aw = \Delta(A)$ is used to ensure that $\Delta(d) = 0$, which seems pretty important to any sensible sort of metric geometry, "metametrics" notwithstanding; the constraint $\Delta(\Delta(A))^{-1} 11^T \ge A$ is used to ensure that $d \ge 0$, which also seems pretty important.)

My question is:

are such matrices $A$ (better still, equations of the form above involving them) discussed in the literature? What about if we drop the "triangle inequality" part?

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I think there's something I'm not understanding. As you introduce it, $A$ is just any invertible matrix with positive entries, so I don't think you're really asking if such matrices $A$ appear in the literature -- do you rather mean "do such metrics $d$ appear in the literature?" or something like that? $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 18, 2021 at 16:17
  • $\begingroup$ @TimCampion- There are two constraints, one mandatory [$\Delta(\Delta(A))^{-1}11^T \ge A$, i.e., the diagonal entries are greater than or equal to the other entries in their row] and one optional but highly preferred [$A_{j\ell}A_{\ell k} \le A_{jj}A_{jk}$, which turns out to be a rephrasing of the triangle inequality]. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 18, 2021 at 16:31
  • $\begingroup$ I should also mention that I know about *-matrices with * = L, M, Z, etc. Neither these nor diagonally dominant matrices seem particularly relevant. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 18, 2021 at 16:33

0

You must log in to answer this question.