Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with inverse-problems
Search options answers only
not deleted
user 18060
Inverse problems involve for example reconstruction of an object based on physical measurements and finding a best model/parameters out of a family given observed data. Typically the corresponding "forward" problems are well-posed and can be solved straightforwardly, while the inverse problems are often ill-posed. Not to be confused with the (inverse) tag.
7
votes
Accepted
An explicit reconstruction of a matrix from its minors
Assume for simplicity that $kl=d+1$.
Then I claim that $V \otimes \det V$ appears as a summand of $\left( \bigwedge^k V\right)^{\otimes l}$ with multiplicity $l-1$.
The maps $\left( \bigwedge^k V\ri …
- 148k