Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Mathematics/2023 November 3

Mathematics desk
< November 2 << Oct | November | Dec >> November 4 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


November 3

edit

Limiting proportions of this matrix "metric"

edit

The real-valued "metric"   on the set of   matrices whose values are all   or   defined by   is, as the air quotes suggest, not actually a metric, as there are matrices one can find that break the triangle inequality with it. However, in my probabilistic attempts to determine the proportion of triplets   such that  ,  , and  , it appears that the first proportion approaches a value around  , the second proportion tends to  , and the third proportion naturally tends to  . This leads me to two questions:

1. Is there actually a limit to these proportions and can it be expressed concisely?

2. Are there infinitely many matrix triples   such that  , even the proportion of such triples tends to  ?

GalacticShoe (talk) 15:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For 2, my suggestion would be to let H be a Hadamard matrix with determinant n^(n/2), with all 1s in the first row. Let A, C be 0,1 matrices with H=A-C. Let B be the zero matrix. Then d(A,C)=n^(n/2), d(B,C)=0 and d(A,B) is exponentially smaller than d(A,C), using the idea in this MO post and the fact that Hadamard matrices maximise the determinant among [-1,1] matrices. —Kusma (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is an excellent idea and it settles question 2 in the affirmative, though for my own future remembrance and clarity, I would like to note specifically that the reason why   is because   having all  s in the first row means that   must have all  s in the first row. Thanks! GalacticShoe (talk) 19:28, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]