Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

A Conjecture about eigenvalues

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Peter B

unread,
Sep 22, 2008, 12:00:02 PM9/22/08
to
I'm looking for a proof of the following Conjecture

Let A be a diagonal p-dim matrix with a_1 >= a_2 >=...>= a_p >=0 on the
diagonal. For an arbitrary column vector v, the matrix (A + v*t(v))
has the eigenvalues b_1>=b_2>=...>=b_p>=0 such that b_i >= a_i for all
i=1,..,p.

Note: t(v) is a transpose of v, that is, a row vector (so, v*t(v) is a
matrix).

I can prove it only in some special cases, but not in general. Please
let me know, if you have seen anything similar, or know how to prove
it.

Ilya Zakharevich

unread,
Sep 22, 2008, 1:00:01 PM9/22/08
to
[A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
Peter B
<pio...@gmail.com>], who wrote in article <gb8fe2$m75$1...@news.acm.uiuc.edu>:

Look for minimax characterization of eigenvalues of self-adjoint
operators.

Hope this helps,
Ilya

Peter B

unread,
Sep 25, 2008, 5:00:01 PM9/25/08
to
On Sep 22, 1:00 pm, Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-ab...@ilyaz.org> wrote:
> [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
> Peter B
> <piot...@gmail.com>], who wrote in article <gb8fe2$m7...@news.acm.uiuc.edu>:

>
> > I'm looking for a proof of the following Conjecture
>
> > Let A be a diagonal p-dim matrix with a_1 >= a_2 >=...>= a_p >=0 on the
> > diagonal. For an arbitrary column vector v, the matrix (A + v*t(v))
> > has the eigenvalues b_1>=b_2>=...>=b_p>=0 such that b_i >= a_i for all
> > i=1,..,p.
>
> > Note: t(v) is a transpose of v, that is, a row vector (so, v*t(v) is a
> > matrix).
>
> > I can prove it only in some special cases, but not in general. Please
> > let me know, if you have seen anything similar, or know how to prove
> > it.
>
> Look for minimax characterization of eigenvalues of self-adjoint
> operators.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Ilya

Thanks.

The question was answered in sci.math. It can be concluded from the
interlocking eigenvalues lemma used in optimization theory. For
example see p. 300 in David G. Luenberger and Yinyu Y, Linear and
Nonlinear Programming: Third Edition (2008). You can also find the
proof of my version at

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/57ef0ef3e666bec0/925d0b480e37b076?lnk=raot&fwc=2

0 new messages