Is there a name for this particular type of matrix?











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
2












Consider the following matrix structure:



$$
M = begin{pmatrix}
a & d & c & c \
d & a & b & b \
c & b & a & e \
c & b & e & a
end{pmatrix}
$$



It is a real, symmetric matrix.
I'm looking into physical properties (spin correlations) of a model that are described by a matrix of this structure.



Qn: Does anyone recognize this matrix as any special type of matrix?





It has the following (weird) property:



Consider its inverse, $M^{-1}$. Its elements are extremely complicated, for example the (3,3) element is:



$$
(M^{-1})_{3,3} = frac{a left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)}{left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2} - left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2}}
$$

and the (3,4) element is:
$$
(M^{-1})_{3,4} = - frac{a left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)}{left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2} - left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2}}
$$



but their difference is extremely simple:
$$
(M^{-1})_{3,3} - (M^{-1})_{3,4} = boxed{frac{1}{a-e}}
$$



You can use Mathematica etc. to verify.



But I realized, this is just the same as considering the (3,4) subblock:
$$
M' = begin{pmatrix} a & e\e & a end{pmatrix}
$$

and its inverse is trivial:
$$
(M')^{-1} = frac{1}{(a+e)(a-e)} begin{pmatrix} a & -e\-e & a end{pmatrix}
$$



And the difference between the diagonal and off-diagonal elements:
$$
(M'^{-1})_{1,1} - (M'^{-1})_{1,2} = boxed{frac{1}{a-e}}
$$

is exactly the same as before!



Is this just a coincidence or is there some justification to just considering a subblock $M'$ instead of the full $M$ when taking the inverse?










share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite
    2












    Consider the following matrix structure:



    $$
    M = begin{pmatrix}
    a & d & c & c \
    d & a & b & b \
    c & b & a & e \
    c & b & e & a
    end{pmatrix}
    $$



    It is a real, symmetric matrix.
    I'm looking into physical properties (spin correlations) of a model that are described by a matrix of this structure.



    Qn: Does anyone recognize this matrix as any special type of matrix?





    It has the following (weird) property:



    Consider its inverse, $M^{-1}$. Its elements are extremely complicated, for example the (3,3) element is:



    $$
    (M^{-1})_{3,3} = frac{a left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)}{left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2} - left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2}}
    $$

    and the (3,4) element is:
    $$
    (M^{-1})_{3,4} = - frac{a left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)}{left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2} - left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2}}
    $$



    but their difference is extremely simple:
    $$
    (M^{-1})_{3,3} - (M^{-1})_{3,4} = boxed{frac{1}{a-e}}
    $$



    You can use Mathematica etc. to verify.



    But I realized, this is just the same as considering the (3,4) subblock:
    $$
    M' = begin{pmatrix} a & e\e & a end{pmatrix}
    $$

    and its inverse is trivial:
    $$
    (M')^{-1} = frac{1}{(a+e)(a-e)} begin{pmatrix} a & -e\-e & a end{pmatrix}
    $$



    And the difference between the diagonal and off-diagonal elements:
    $$
    (M'^{-1})_{1,1} - (M'^{-1})_{1,2} = boxed{frac{1}{a-e}}
    $$

    is exactly the same as before!



    Is this just a coincidence or is there some justification to just considering a subblock $M'$ instead of the full $M$ when taking the inverse?










    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      2









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      2






      2





      Consider the following matrix structure:



      $$
      M = begin{pmatrix}
      a & d & c & c \
      d & a & b & b \
      c & b & a & e \
      c & b & e & a
      end{pmatrix}
      $$



      It is a real, symmetric matrix.
      I'm looking into physical properties (spin correlations) of a model that are described by a matrix of this structure.



      Qn: Does anyone recognize this matrix as any special type of matrix?





      It has the following (weird) property:



      Consider its inverse, $M^{-1}$. Its elements are extremely complicated, for example the (3,3) element is:



      $$
      (M^{-1})_{3,3} = frac{a left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)}{left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2} - left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2}}
      $$

      and the (3,4) element is:
      $$
      (M^{-1})_{3,4} = - frac{a left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)}{left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2} - left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2}}
      $$



      but their difference is extremely simple:
      $$
      (M^{-1})_{3,3} - (M^{-1})_{3,4} = boxed{frac{1}{a-e}}
      $$



      You can use Mathematica etc. to verify.



      But I realized, this is just the same as considering the (3,4) subblock:
      $$
      M' = begin{pmatrix} a & e\e & a end{pmatrix}
      $$

      and its inverse is trivial:
      $$
      (M')^{-1} = frac{1}{(a+e)(a-e)} begin{pmatrix} a & -e\-e & a end{pmatrix}
      $$



      And the difference between the diagonal and off-diagonal elements:
      $$
      (M'^{-1})_{1,1} - (M'^{-1})_{1,2} = boxed{frac{1}{a-e}}
      $$

      is exactly the same as before!



      Is this just a coincidence or is there some justification to just considering a subblock $M'$ instead of the full $M$ when taking the inverse?










      share|cite|improve this question













      Consider the following matrix structure:



      $$
      M = begin{pmatrix}
      a & d & c & c \
      d & a & b & b \
      c & b & a & e \
      c & b & e & a
      end{pmatrix}
      $$



      It is a real, symmetric matrix.
      I'm looking into physical properties (spin correlations) of a model that are described by a matrix of this structure.



      Qn: Does anyone recognize this matrix as any special type of matrix?





      It has the following (weird) property:



      Consider its inverse, $M^{-1}$. Its elements are extremely complicated, for example the (3,3) element is:



      $$
      (M^{-1})_{3,3} = frac{a left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)}{left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2} - left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2}}
      $$

      and the (3,4) element is:
      $$
      (M^{-1})_{3,4} = - frac{a left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)}{left(left(a^{2} - c^{2}right) left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2} - left(left(a^{2} - d^{2}right) left(a e - c^{2}right) - left(a b - c dright)^{2}right)^{2}}
      $$



      but their difference is extremely simple:
      $$
      (M^{-1})_{3,3} - (M^{-1})_{3,4} = boxed{frac{1}{a-e}}
      $$



      You can use Mathematica etc. to verify.



      But I realized, this is just the same as considering the (3,4) subblock:
      $$
      M' = begin{pmatrix} a & e\e & a end{pmatrix}
      $$

      and its inverse is trivial:
      $$
      (M')^{-1} = frac{1}{(a+e)(a-e)} begin{pmatrix} a & -e\-e & a end{pmatrix}
      $$



      And the difference between the diagonal and off-diagonal elements:
      $$
      (M'^{-1})_{1,1} - (M'^{-1})_{1,2} = boxed{frac{1}{a-e}}
      $$

      is exactly the same as before!



      Is this just a coincidence or is there some justification to just considering a subblock $M'$ instead of the full $M$ when taking the inverse?







      linear-algebra matrices inverse block-matrices






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Oct 22 at 19:03









      ksgj1

      1356




      1356






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          I don't know the physics, but the phenomenon you described can be explained mathematically as follows. Suppose $M$ is an invertible matrix of the form $pmatrix{X&pv^T\ uq^T&Z}$, where $X,Z$ are invertible matrices of the same sizes and $p,q,u,v$ are some vectors. Then $M^{-1}$ is in the form of $pmatrix{ast&ast\ ast&S^{-1}}$, where
          $$
          S=Z-(uq^T)X^{-1}(pv^T)=Z-beta uv^T
          $$

          is the Schur complement of $Z$ in $X$ and $beta (=q^TX^{-1}p)$ is some scalar. Since $S$ is a rank-$1$ modifiction of $Z$, by Sherman-Morrison formula, $S^{-1}$ is also a rank-$1$ modification of $Z^{-1}$, with
          $$
          S^{-1}
          =Z^{-1}+frac{beta Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}}{1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u}
          =Z^{-1}+gamma Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}tag{1}
          $$

          for some scalar $gamma (=beta/(1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u))$.



          In your case, $Z=pmatrix{a&e\ e&a}$ and $u=v=pmatrix{1\ 1}$. Therefore all elements of $Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}$ are identical to each other. It follows from $(1)$ that $S^{-1}$ is obtained by shifting the entries of $Z^{-1}$ by the same constant. Therefore $
          (M^{-1})_{33}-(M^{-1})_{34}=(S^{-1})_{11}-(S^{-1})_{12}=(Z^{-1})_{11}-(Z^{-1})_{12}$
          .






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • Wow, that's amazing. Thank you.
            – ksgj1
            Oct 23 at 0:09










          • Can I double check the Sherman-Morrison formula. Should it not be $Z^{-1} + frac{...}{1-...}$? because here $S = Z - beta u v^T$, not $S = Z+beta u v^T$. (I'm comparing directly to the wiki page you linked)
            – ksgj1
            Nov 24 at 3:27












          • @ksgj1 Yes, fixed now. Thanks for catching the typo.
            – user1551
            Nov 24 at 6:27











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2966493%2fis-there-a-name-for-this-particular-type-of-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          I don't know the physics, but the phenomenon you described can be explained mathematically as follows. Suppose $M$ is an invertible matrix of the form $pmatrix{X&pv^T\ uq^T&Z}$, where $X,Z$ are invertible matrices of the same sizes and $p,q,u,v$ are some vectors. Then $M^{-1}$ is in the form of $pmatrix{ast&ast\ ast&S^{-1}}$, where
          $$
          S=Z-(uq^T)X^{-1}(pv^T)=Z-beta uv^T
          $$

          is the Schur complement of $Z$ in $X$ and $beta (=q^TX^{-1}p)$ is some scalar. Since $S$ is a rank-$1$ modifiction of $Z$, by Sherman-Morrison formula, $S^{-1}$ is also a rank-$1$ modification of $Z^{-1}$, with
          $$
          S^{-1}
          =Z^{-1}+frac{beta Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}}{1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u}
          =Z^{-1}+gamma Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}tag{1}
          $$

          for some scalar $gamma (=beta/(1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u))$.



          In your case, $Z=pmatrix{a&e\ e&a}$ and $u=v=pmatrix{1\ 1}$. Therefore all elements of $Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}$ are identical to each other. It follows from $(1)$ that $S^{-1}$ is obtained by shifting the entries of $Z^{-1}$ by the same constant. Therefore $
          (M^{-1})_{33}-(M^{-1})_{34}=(S^{-1})_{11}-(S^{-1})_{12}=(Z^{-1})_{11}-(Z^{-1})_{12}$
          .






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • Wow, that's amazing. Thank you.
            – ksgj1
            Oct 23 at 0:09










          • Can I double check the Sherman-Morrison formula. Should it not be $Z^{-1} + frac{...}{1-...}$? because here $S = Z - beta u v^T$, not $S = Z+beta u v^T$. (I'm comparing directly to the wiki page you linked)
            – ksgj1
            Nov 24 at 3:27












          • @ksgj1 Yes, fixed now. Thanks for catching the typo.
            – user1551
            Nov 24 at 6:27















          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted










          I don't know the physics, but the phenomenon you described can be explained mathematically as follows. Suppose $M$ is an invertible matrix of the form $pmatrix{X&pv^T\ uq^T&Z}$, where $X,Z$ are invertible matrices of the same sizes and $p,q,u,v$ are some vectors. Then $M^{-1}$ is in the form of $pmatrix{ast&ast\ ast&S^{-1}}$, where
          $$
          S=Z-(uq^T)X^{-1}(pv^T)=Z-beta uv^T
          $$

          is the Schur complement of $Z$ in $X$ and $beta (=q^TX^{-1}p)$ is some scalar. Since $S$ is a rank-$1$ modifiction of $Z$, by Sherman-Morrison formula, $S^{-1}$ is also a rank-$1$ modification of $Z^{-1}$, with
          $$
          S^{-1}
          =Z^{-1}+frac{beta Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}}{1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u}
          =Z^{-1}+gamma Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}tag{1}
          $$

          for some scalar $gamma (=beta/(1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u))$.



          In your case, $Z=pmatrix{a&e\ e&a}$ and $u=v=pmatrix{1\ 1}$. Therefore all elements of $Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}$ are identical to each other. It follows from $(1)$ that $S^{-1}$ is obtained by shifting the entries of $Z^{-1}$ by the same constant. Therefore $
          (M^{-1})_{33}-(M^{-1})_{34}=(S^{-1})_{11}-(S^{-1})_{12}=(Z^{-1})_{11}-(Z^{-1})_{12}$
          .






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • Wow, that's amazing. Thank you.
            – ksgj1
            Oct 23 at 0:09










          • Can I double check the Sherman-Morrison formula. Should it not be $Z^{-1} + frac{...}{1-...}$? because here $S = Z - beta u v^T$, not $S = Z+beta u v^T$. (I'm comparing directly to the wiki page you linked)
            – ksgj1
            Nov 24 at 3:27












          • @ksgj1 Yes, fixed now. Thanks for catching the typo.
            – user1551
            Nov 24 at 6:27













          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          4
          down vote



          accepted






          I don't know the physics, but the phenomenon you described can be explained mathematically as follows. Suppose $M$ is an invertible matrix of the form $pmatrix{X&pv^T\ uq^T&Z}$, where $X,Z$ are invertible matrices of the same sizes and $p,q,u,v$ are some vectors. Then $M^{-1}$ is in the form of $pmatrix{ast&ast\ ast&S^{-1}}$, where
          $$
          S=Z-(uq^T)X^{-1}(pv^T)=Z-beta uv^T
          $$

          is the Schur complement of $Z$ in $X$ and $beta (=q^TX^{-1}p)$ is some scalar. Since $S$ is a rank-$1$ modifiction of $Z$, by Sherman-Morrison formula, $S^{-1}$ is also a rank-$1$ modification of $Z^{-1}$, with
          $$
          S^{-1}
          =Z^{-1}+frac{beta Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}}{1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u}
          =Z^{-1}+gamma Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}tag{1}
          $$

          for some scalar $gamma (=beta/(1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u))$.



          In your case, $Z=pmatrix{a&e\ e&a}$ and $u=v=pmatrix{1\ 1}$. Therefore all elements of $Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}$ are identical to each other. It follows from $(1)$ that $S^{-1}$ is obtained by shifting the entries of $Z^{-1}$ by the same constant. Therefore $
          (M^{-1})_{33}-(M^{-1})_{34}=(S^{-1})_{11}-(S^{-1})_{12}=(Z^{-1})_{11}-(Z^{-1})_{12}$
          .






          share|cite|improve this answer














          I don't know the physics, but the phenomenon you described can be explained mathematically as follows. Suppose $M$ is an invertible matrix of the form $pmatrix{X&pv^T\ uq^T&Z}$, where $X,Z$ are invertible matrices of the same sizes and $p,q,u,v$ are some vectors. Then $M^{-1}$ is in the form of $pmatrix{ast&ast\ ast&S^{-1}}$, where
          $$
          S=Z-(uq^T)X^{-1}(pv^T)=Z-beta uv^T
          $$

          is the Schur complement of $Z$ in $X$ and $beta (=q^TX^{-1}p)$ is some scalar. Since $S$ is a rank-$1$ modifiction of $Z$, by Sherman-Morrison formula, $S^{-1}$ is also a rank-$1$ modification of $Z^{-1}$, with
          $$
          S^{-1}
          =Z^{-1}+frac{beta Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}}{1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u}
          =Z^{-1}+gamma Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}tag{1}
          $$

          for some scalar $gamma (=beta/(1+beta v^TZ^{-1}u))$.



          In your case, $Z=pmatrix{a&e\ e&a}$ and $u=v=pmatrix{1\ 1}$. Therefore all elements of $Z^{-1}uv^TZ^{-1}$ are identical to each other. It follows from $(1)$ that $S^{-1}$ is obtained by shifting the entries of $Z^{-1}$ by the same constant. Therefore $
          (M^{-1})_{33}-(M^{-1})_{34}=(S^{-1})_{11}-(S^{-1})_{12}=(Z^{-1})_{11}-(Z^{-1})_{12}$
          .







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Nov 24 at 6:27

























          answered Oct 22 at 22:00









          user1551

          70.5k566125




          70.5k566125












          • Wow, that's amazing. Thank you.
            – ksgj1
            Oct 23 at 0:09










          • Can I double check the Sherman-Morrison formula. Should it not be $Z^{-1} + frac{...}{1-...}$? because here $S = Z - beta u v^T$, not $S = Z+beta u v^T$. (I'm comparing directly to the wiki page you linked)
            – ksgj1
            Nov 24 at 3:27












          • @ksgj1 Yes, fixed now. Thanks for catching the typo.
            – user1551
            Nov 24 at 6:27


















          • Wow, that's amazing. Thank you.
            – ksgj1
            Oct 23 at 0:09










          • Can I double check the Sherman-Morrison formula. Should it not be $Z^{-1} + frac{...}{1-...}$? because here $S = Z - beta u v^T$, not $S = Z+beta u v^T$. (I'm comparing directly to the wiki page you linked)
            – ksgj1
            Nov 24 at 3:27












          • @ksgj1 Yes, fixed now. Thanks for catching the typo.
            – user1551
            Nov 24 at 6:27
















          Wow, that's amazing. Thank you.
          – ksgj1
          Oct 23 at 0:09




          Wow, that's amazing. Thank you.
          – ksgj1
          Oct 23 at 0:09












          Can I double check the Sherman-Morrison formula. Should it not be $Z^{-1} + frac{...}{1-...}$? because here $S = Z - beta u v^T$, not $S = Z+beta u v^T$. (I'm comparing directly to the wiki page you linked)
          – ksgj1
          Nov 24 at 3:27






          Can I double check the Sherman-Morrison formula. Should it not be $Z^{-1} + frac{...}{1-...}$? because here $S = Z - beta u v^T$, not $S = Z+beta u v^T$. (I'm comparing directly to the wiki page you linked)
          – ksgj1
          Nov 24 at 3:27














          @ksgj1 Yes, fixed now. Thanks for catching the typo.
          – user1551
          Nov 24 at 6:27




          @ksgj1 Yes, fixed now. Thanks for catching the typo.
          – user1551
          Nov 24 at 6:27


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2966493%2fis-there-a-name-for-this-particular-type-of-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Different font size/position of beamer's navigation symbols template's content depending on regular/plain...

          Berounka

          I want to find a topological embedding $f : X rightarrow Y$ and $g: Y rightarrow X$, yet $X$ is not...