34

If $A \in M_n(\mathbb{R})$ is an anti-diagonal $n \times n$ matrix, is there a quick way to find its eigenvalues in a way similar to finding the eigenvalues of a diagonal matrix? The standard way for finding the eigenvalues for any $n \times n$ is usually straightforward, but may sometimes lead to painstaking computational time. Just wondering if there was a quicker way in doing so for any anti-diagonal matrix without having to resort to the standard method of finding the determinant of $A - \lambda I$, where $I$ is the $n \times n$ identity matrix, and setting it equal to $0$ and solving for $\lambda$.

Libertron
  • 4,503
  • 3
    if $n$ is odd then one eigenvalue will surely be the $\lfloor \frac{n}{2} \rfloor$-th term of the matrix – Bman72 Sep 06 '14 at 17:28
  • 1
    @Ale: Could you please point me to a reference with regard to your comment of the parity of $n$? I wasn't aware of this fact. – Libertron Sep 06 '14 at 17:30
  • 3
    Yes sure, just consider a antidiagonal matrix of size $n$ with $n=2m+1, \text{for} m\in \Bbb{N}$. Consider the case $n=5$ (you can easily transport it to any odd number, but it is easier for me to explain), then you have a matrix that looks like this

    $$A=\begin{pmatrix}0&0&0&0&a_{15}\0&0&0&a_{24}&0\0&0&a_{33}&0&0\0&a_{42}&0&0&0\a_{51}&0&0&0&0 \end{pmatrix}$$

    You can notice that if you multiply $A \cdot \begin{pmatrix}0\0\1\0\0\end{pmatrix}$ you get $a_{33}\cdot (0,0,1,0,0)^T$ and so $a_{33}$ is an eigenvalue by definition.

    – Bman72 Sep 06 '14 at 17:34
  • 1
    @Libertron If $n$ is odd then it has a "middle" entry, i.e. the anti-diagonal intersects with the main diagonal. Consider what happens when you subtract that entry. – Erick Wong Sep 06 '14 at 17:35
  • 1
    @Ale Technically this would be the $\lceil n/2 \rceil$-th term, no? – Erick Wong Sep 06 '14 at 17:36
  • @ErickWong yes sure, i made a mistake – Bman72 Sep 06 '14 at 17:36
  • However i notice now, just by putting some random antidiagonal matrix in wolframalpha, that if $n$ is odd one eigenvalue is $\lceil \frac{n}{2} \rceil$ and the other are all in pairs, that is if $\lambda_1$ is one eigenvalue, then $-\lambda_1$ is also. If $n$ is even then every eigenvalue is in pair. It would be nice to prove this. I'm going to think about it – Bman72 Sep 06 '14 at 17:38

3 Answers3

38

For ease of formatting and explanation, I'll be doing everything for the $5 \times 5$ example. However, the same trick works for any $n \times n$ antidiagonal matrix (though slightly differently for even $n$).

Suppose $$ A = \begin{pmatrix}0&0&0&0&a_{15}\\0&0&0&a_{24}&0\\0&0&a_{33}&0&0\\0&a_{42}&0&0&0\\a‌​_{51}&0&0&0&0 \end{pmatrix} $$

Here's a neat trick: we note that $$ A^2 = \pmatrix{ a_{15}a_{51}&&&&\\ &a_{24}a_{42}&&&\\ &&(a_{33})^2&&\\ &&&a_{24}a_{42}&\\ &&&&a_{15}a_{51}\\ } $$ So, the eigenvalues of $A^2$ are precisely $\{a_{15}a_{51}, a_{24}a_{42}, (a_{33})^2\}$.

Now, note that if $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $A$, then $\lambda^2$ must be an eigenvalue of $A^2$. This gives you six candidates for the eigenvalues of $A$.


In fact, with more thorough analysis, we can guarantee that the eigenvalues will be precisely $\lambda = \pm \sqrt{a_{i,(n+1-i)}a_{(n+1-i),i}}$ for $i = 1,\dots,\lfloor n/2\rfloor$ and, for odd $n$, $\lambda = a_{(n+1)/2,(n+1)/2}$.

Proof that this is the case: Let $e_1,\dots,e_n$ denote the standard basis vectors. Let $S_{ij}$ denote the span of the vectors $e_i$ and $e_j$.

Note that $A$ is invariant over $S_{i(n-i)}$ for $i = 1,\dots,\lfloor n/2\rfloor$. We may then consider the restriction $A_{i(n-i)}: S_{i(n-i)} \to S_{i(n-i)}$, which can be represented by the matrix $$ \pmatrix{0 & a_{i(n-i)}\\a_{(n-i)i} & 0} $$ It suffices to find the eigenvalues of this transformation.

For the case of an odd $n$, it is sufficient to note that $a_{(n+1)/2,(n+1)/2}$ lies on the diagonal with zeros in its row and column.


Another explanation: denote the matrix $S = \pmatrix{e_1 & e_{n} & e_2 & e_{n-1} & \cdots}$

Noting that $S$ is orthogonal (i.e. $S^{-1} = S^{T}$), we find that $$ SAS^{-1} = \pmatrix{ 0&a_{1,n}\\ a_{n,1}&0\\ &&0&a_{2,n-1}\\ &&a_{n-1,2}&0\\ &&&&\ddots } $$ This matrix is similar, and therefore has the same eigenvalues. However, it is also block diagonal.

Ben Grossmann
  • 234,171
  • 12
  • 184
  • 355
9

Suppose $A$ has even size, say, $2m \times 2m$. Then by reordering the basis we can produce a block diagonal matrix with the same eigenvalues as the original.

$$ \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & a_{1,2m} \\ a_{2m,1} & 0 \\ \end{array} \right) \oplus \cdots \oplus \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & a_{m,m+1} \\ a_{m+1,m} & 0 \\ \end{array} \right). $$ The characteristic polynomial is

$$\det(\lambda I - A) = \det\left(\lambda I - \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & a_{1,2m} \\ a_{2m,1} & 0 \\ \end{array} \right)\right) \cdots \det\left(\lambda I - \left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & a_{m,m+1} \\ a_{m+1,m} & 0 \\ \end{array} \right)\right) = (\lambda^2 - a_{1,2m}a_{2m,1})\cdots(\lambda^2 - a_{m,m+1}a_{m+1,m}) . $$ and so the eigenvalues are the roots of these factor polynomials, namely both square roots of each of the products $a_{1,2m}a_{2m,1}, \ldots, a_{m,m+1} a_{m+1,m}$.

If $A$ has odd size, say, $(2m + 1) \times (2m + 1)$ when we change basis we can send the middle ($(m+1)$st) element to the end, in which case the characteristic polynomial takes a similar form as in the even case (with indices $> m$ shifted up one), but with an additional factor of $\lambda - a_{m+1, m+1}$, so the additional eigenvalue in this case is just the middle entry of the matrix.

Travis Willse
  • 108,056
6

One can actually find the eigenvalues of $A$ directly without reordering the indices (note: I'm not saying that this is the quickest or preferred way to find those eigenvalues -- this is not). The eigenvalues of $A$ are just the roots of the characteristic polynomial $\det(xI-A)$. When $n$ is odd, let $m=\frac{n+1}2$ and write $$ A=\left[\begin{array}{c|c|c}0&0&A_{13}\\ \hline 0&a_{mm}&0\\ \hline A_{31}&0&0\end{array}\right]\tag{$\ast$} $$ where $A_{13}$ and $A_{31}$ are two anti diagonal matrices of size $m-1$. By Laplace expansion along the middle row, we get $\det(xI-A)=(x-a_{mm})\det\left[\begin{array}{c|c}xI&-A_{13}\\ \hline -A_{31}&xI\end{array}\right]$. Using the formula $\det\pmatrix{X&Y\\ Z&W}=\det(XW-YZ)$ when $Z$ and $W$ commute, we further obtain \begin{align*} \det(xI-A)&=(x-a_{mm})\det(x^2I-A_{13}A_{31})\\ &= (x-a_{mm})(x^2-a_{1n}a_{n1})(x^2-a_{2,n-1}a_{n-1,2})\cdots\left(x^2-a_{m-1,m+1}a_{m+1,m-1}\right) \end{align*} and finding its roots is a trivial matter.

When $n$ is even, the central element in $(\ast)$ vanishes and we may skip the Laplace expansion step. The characteristic polynomial of $A$ is then $$ (x^2-a_{1n}a_{n1})(x^2-a_{2,n-1}a_{n-1,2})\cdots\left(x^2-a_{\frac n2,\frac n2+1}a_{\frac n2+1,\frac n2}\right). $$

user1551
  • 149,263
  • Yes, I did think along the line you outlined. My apology for the ignorant edit. Please change it back, adding however a reference to a proof of the determinant formula. – Hans Oct 26 '19 at 09:20
  • @Hans Let me thank you for your contributions. It was a useful edit, not an "ignorant" one. It just seemed to suggest that the formula was originally proved or should be proved by using Schur complement, which I think is a bit misleading. – user1551 Oct 26 '19 at 16:09
  • Thank you for your generous comment. On second thought, this proposition can indeed be proved through analytic continuation by the Schur complement as follows. Suppose $A$ commutes with $C$. $$\det\pmatrix{A+xI&B\ C&D}=\det(A+xI)\det\left(D-C(A+xI)^{-1}B\right)=\det\big((A+xI)(D-(A+xI)^{-1}CB)\big)=\det\big((A+xI)D-CB\big)$$ for all $x$ with large enough $|x|$ to make $A+xI$ nonsingular. But both ends of the above long equation exist and are analytic with respect to all $x$. The equation can be analytically continued to $x=0$. We arrive at the desired determinant equation. – Hans Oct 26 '19 at 23:34
  • @RodrigodeAzevedo Thanks. Fixed. – user1551 Jul 29 '20 at 14:47