Talk:Block matrix pseudoinverse

Latest comment: 13 days ago by 2A02:810B:4540:B70:9DE7:8890:8E30:88A6 in topic The expansion in the Derivation section is wrong
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Block matrix pseudoinverse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:53, 4 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Moved here from article section Row-wise partitioning in under-determined least squares

edit

[Comment re. below: According to section "Derivation" above this method of calculating [A, B]+ for m>=n+p. Can it then be used for an underdetermined system where by definition m (size of x and equal to number of variables) > n+p (number of equations)?]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Loraof (talkcontribs) 21:40, 21 Februrary 2018 (UTC)

Reference for overdetermined?=

edit

I don't think the reference cited covers the overdetermined case? Or am I missing something simple? Billlion (talk) 22:09, 20 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Sorry I think it was my misunderstanding, I meant row wise and overdetermined. That is not in this article and I cant find similar results for that in the literature. Billlion (talk) 10:11, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Merge this stub with Woodbury Matrix Identity

edit

An entire article from one case-study? Probably should be filed and submerged under Woodbury matrix identity or a similar super-topic in Linear Algebra. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.68.165 (talk) 19:05, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

The expansion in the Derivation section is wrong

edit

A left inverse of a matrix $X$ of full column rank has the form $(X^TX)^{-1}X^T$, a right inverse of a matrix $Y$ of full row rank has the form $Y^T(YY^T)^{-1}$. In the derivation for $\begin{bmatrix} A & B \end{bmatrix}^{-1}$ and $\begin{bmatrix} A^T \\ B^T \end{bmatrix}^{-1}$ those are not properly expanded. 2A02:810B:4540:B70:9DE7:8890:8E30:88A6 (talk) 21:01, 26 June 2024 (UTC)Reply