I am having some trouble in the proof of the Absolute Bound Condition for primitive symmetric association Schemes in the book Algebraic Combinatorics I by Bannai and Ito (Chapter 2, Section 4, Theorem 9):
Let $\chi=(X,\lbrace{R_i\rbrace}_{0\leq i \leq d})$ be a primitive symmetric association scheme of class $d$. Let the $\lbrace E_i\rbrace_{0\leq i\leq d}$ be the primitive idempotents of the adjacency algebra of $\chi$. Denote by $E_i^h$ to be the Hadamard product $\circ$ of $E_i$ with itself $h$ times. Since $\chi$ is primitive, we have for any $j$ and $i$ an $0\leq h \leq d$ such that $E_j$ occurs in the linear decomposition of $E_i^h$ with respect to the basis $E_0,\ldots,E_d.$
I do not understand how the emboldened statement is justified. It says in the book that this is because imprimitivity is a equivalent to there being a suitable rearrangement of indices $1,\ldots,d$ and an index $0<t<d$ such that the Hadamard product $E_i \circ E_j$ is a linear combination of $E_0,E_1,\ldots,E_t$ for all $0\leq i,j \leq t.$
To get an idea, I tried to show this by contradiction on the special case when $d=3$ and the assumption that $E_2$ does not occur in the decomposition of $E_1^h$ for $0\leq h \leq 3.$ With this assumption, we get $q_{11}^2=0$ so \begin{align*} E_1^2 = &q_{11}^0 E_0 + q_{11}^1 E_1 + q_{11}^3E_3,\\ E_1^3 =&q_{11}^0(q_{01}^0 E_0 + q_{01}^1 E_1 + q_{01}^2 E_2 + q_{01}^3 E_3) + q_{11}^1(q_{11}^0 E_0 + q_{11}^1 E_1 + q_{11}^2 E_2 + q_{11}^3 E_3)\\ &+q_{11}^3(q_{13}^0 E_0 + q_{13}^1 E_1 + q_{13}^2 E_2 + q_{13}^3 E_3). \end{align*} Since $E_2$ does not occur in $E_1^3$, the latter gives us $q_{11}^0q_{01}^2 + q_{11}^1 q_{11}^2 + q_{11}^3q_{13}^2 = 0.$ Since $q_{01}^2=0=q_{11}^2,$ we obtain $q_{11}^3q_{13}^2=0.$
If $q_{11}^3=0$, then since $q_{11}^2=0$, we have the linear span of $E_0,E_1$ as a subalgebra of the adjacency algebra, violating primitivity. However, I no longer know what to do when $q_{13}^2=0.$ If I could show $q_{33}^2=0$, then the linear span of $E_0,E_1,E_3$ would form a subalgebra of the adjacency algebra and would violate primitivity. However, I don't know how to show $q_{33}^2=0.$
Since the Bose-Mesner algebra is also spanned by the $E_i$, and these spectral idempotents are orthogonal, the claim that $W$ is invariant under the full Bose-Mesner algebra is thus equivalent to showing any $E_j$ that occurs in the linear decomposition of some Hadamard power of $E$ is itself in $W.$ However, I failed to show this, or the weaker but more important fact that $W$ is closed under matrix multiplication.
– F.Tomas Feb 03 '21 at 11:22