2
$\begingroup$

Is it true that \begin{gather} \min\left(\lambda_{\min}(M_{12}), \lambda_{\min}(M_{13}), \lambda_{\min}(M_{14}), \lambda_{\min}(M_{15}), \lambda_{\min}(M_{23}), \\ \lambda_{\min}(M_{24}), \lambda_{\min}(M_{25}), \lambda_{\min}(M_{34}), \lambda_{\min}(M_{35}), \lambda_{\min}(M_{45})\right) \leq \frac{2}{25} \end{gather} where $M_{ij}$ is the matrix obtained by deleting the $i$-th and $j$-th rows and columns of $$ M = \mathbf{x} \mathbf{x}^{\top} + \mathbf{y} \mathbf{y}^{\top} + \mathbf{z} \mathbf{z}^{\top} $$ for all column vectors $\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}, \mathbf{z} \in \mathbb{R}^5$ with $\|\mathbf{x}\| = \|\mathbf{y}\| = \|\mathbf{z}\| = 1$?

Any helpful answer would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

$\endgroup$
18
  • $\begingroup$ I can't even see the inequality. I don't know if it's just me, though. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 9 at 2:05
  • $\begingroup$ No, and I'm on a computer. The last thing I see is $\lambda_{\min}(M_{25}), \lambda_{\min}(M$. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 9 at 3:10
  • $\begingroup$ is it true in any corner cases? e.g.when x=y=z the spectrum is math.stackexchange.com/questions/403614/…. and so we indeed get it there. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 9 at 4:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Related: mathoverflow.net/questions/477724 $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 10 at 13:48
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The number in the question was changed from $9/20$ to $2/25$ without any notice on that. And after the previous version was answered… $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 19 at 20:51

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

$\def\d{\mathrm{d}}\def\Vol{\mathop{\mathrm{Vol}}}$Okay, this really seems not that straigntforward to generalize the previous answer here. However, here is the method which seems to work (and which seemingly is generalizable). This is more or less the same computation written in a more appropriate language.

Let $X$ be the matrix with columns $\mathbf x$, $\mathbf y$ and $\mathbf z$ (writing $X=(\mathbf x,\mathbf y,\mathbf z)$); then $M=XX^\top$. Denote by $\Gamma=X^\top X$ the Gram matrix of the vectors $\mathbf x$, $\mathbf y$, and $\mathbf z$.

It is known that, for any $n\times k$ matrix $A$ and any $k\times n$ matrix $B$ with $n\geq k$, the characteristic polynomials of $AB$ and $BA$ are related by $\chi_{AB}(x)=x^{n-k}\chi_{BA}(x)$, where $\chi_A(x)=\det(xI-A)$. Therefore, in our situation we have $$ \chi_M(x)=x^2\chi_\Gamma(x). $$ Next, one can see that $$ \frac{\d^2}{\d x^2}\chi_M(x)=2\sum_{i<j} \chi_{M_{ij}}(x). $$ To see this, in the left-hand side, consider the summands where the two operators $\d/\d x$ are applied to the fixed linear terms on the diagonal of $xI-M$; the sum of all those is exactly $\chi_{M_{ij}}(x)$.

To summarize, $$ p(x):=\sum_{i<j}\chi_{M_{ij}}(x)=\frac12(x^2\chi_\Gamma(x))''=10x^3-18x^2+\alpha x-\beta, $$ where $\beta=\det\Gamma=\Vol(\mathbf x,\mathbf y,\mathbf z)^2\leq 1$.

Notice that $x^2\chi_\Gamma(x)$ has only real root; hence $p(x)$ has only real roots $\lambda_1\leq \lambda_2\leq\lambda_3$. Notice that for some $i<j$ we have $\chi_{M_{ij}}(\lambda_1)\geq 0$, hence the smallest eigenvalue of $M_{ij}$ does not exceed $\lambda_1$. So, we are interested in estimating $\lambda_1$.

We have $$ \lambda_1+\lambda_2+\lambda_3=\frac 95, \quad \frac1{10}\geq \frac\beta{10}=\lambda_1\lambda_2\lambda_3\geq \lambda_1^2\left(\frac95-2\lambda_1\right), $$ so $20\lambda_1^3-18\lambda_1^2+1\geq 0$. Since $\lambda_1\leq 3/5$, we get that $\lambda_1$ does not exceed the second largest root of $20x^3-18x^2+1$, which is approx. $0.285$. In particular, $\lambda_1\leq 9/20$ with a large gap.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I do not understand the question. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 12 at 7:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Did you notice that $\lambda_1$ is the smallest root? $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 16 at 11:28
  • $\begingroup$ What if the number on the right-hand side of the inequality in the question is 2/25? Thanks. $\endgroup$
    – Jasmine
    Commented Sep 18 at 9:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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