How to show for any symmetric matrices the quadratic mean of eigenvalues less than square of Frobenius norm?












1












$begingroup$


Let $A$ be a symmetric matrix which has $k$ non-zero eigenvalue. Show that the square of Frobenius norm is always bigger than the average of squared eigenvalues. That is:



$$|A|_F^2 geq frac{1}{k} (sum_{i=1}^k |lambda_i|)^2$$



My try: applying $|A|_F^2=sum_{i=1}^k lambda_i^2$.



Also, do we have the correspondence of this in a vector form?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    Let $A$ be a symmetric matrix which has $k$ non-zero eigenvalue. Show that the square of Frobenius norm is always bigger than the average of squared eigenvalues. That is:



    $$|A|_F^2 geq frac{1}{k} (sum_{i=1}^k |lambda_i|)^2$$



    My try: applying $|A|_F^2=sum_{i=1}^k lambda_i^2$.



    Also, do we have the correspondence of this in a vector form?










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      Let $A$ be a symmetric matrix which has $k$ non-zero eigenvalue. Show that the square of Frobenius norm is always bigger than the average of squared eigenvalues. That is:



      $$|A|_F^2 geq frac{1}{k} (sum_{i=1}^k |lambda_i|)^2$$



      My try: applying $|A|_F^2=sum_{i=1}^k lambda_i^2$.



      Also, do we have the correspondence of this in a vector form?










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Let $A$ be a symmetric matrix which has $k$ non-zero eigenvalue. Show that the square of Frobenius norm is always bigger than the average of squared eigenvalues. That is:



      $$|A|_F^2 geq frac{1}{k} (sum_{i=1}^k |lambda_i|)^2$$



      My try: applying $|A|_F^2=sum_{i=1}^k lambda_i^2$.



      Also, do we have the correspondence of this in a vector form?







      linear-algebra eigenvalues-eigenvectors trace symmetric-matrices






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Jan 8 at 3:45







      Saeed

















      asked Jan 7 at 19:11









      SaeedSaeed

      763310




      763310






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          We have
          begin{align*}
          k^{-1}|A|_F^2 = k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}lambda_i^2 ge left(k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i| right)^2
          end{align*}

          by the inequality between quadratic means and arithmetic means. Another proof would be, with $mathbf{lambda} = (|lambda_1|, cdots, |lambda_k|)$ and $mathbf{1} = (1, cdots, 1)$, we have
          begin{align*}
          |A|_F^2 = k^{-1}(mathbf{lambda}^intercalmathbf{lambda})(mathbf{1}^intercalmathbf{1}) ge k^{-1} (mathbf{lambda}^intercal mathbf{1})^2 = k^{-1}left(sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i|right)^2
          end{align*}

          by Cauchy-Schwarz.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            The second proof makes sense to me, but could you elaborate how we can use AM-GM to get the result because we have no multiplication hear?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 7 at 19:56










          • $begingroup$
            The first proof uses AM-QM, not AM-GM. AM-QM is actually proved through exactly the same steps as seen with the CS proof seen in the second proof.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 7 at 19:59










          • $begingroup$
            The second proof both $k^-1$ gets cancelled and does not give the claim? Can you elaborate that?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 8 at 18:09










          • $begingroup$
            Oops, typo, the first $k^{-1}$ was not meant to be there. Fixed.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 8 at 22:06











          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',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          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%2f3065379%2fhow-to-show-for-any-symmetric-matrices-the-quadratic-mean-of-eigenvalues-less-th%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









          1












          $begingroup$

          We have
          begin{align*}
          k^{-1}|A|_F^2 = k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}lambda_i^2 ge left(k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i| right)^2
          end{align*}

          by the inequality between quadratic means and arithmetic means. Another proof would be, with $mathbf{lambda} = (|lambda_1|, cdots, |lambda_k|)$ and $mathbf{1} = (1, cdots, 1)$, we have
          begin{align*}
          |A|_F^2 = k^{-1}(mathbf{lambda}^intercalmathbf{lambda})(mathbf{1}^intercalmathbf{1}) ge k^{-1} (mathbf{lambda}^intercal mathbf{1})^2 = k^{-1}left(sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i|right)^2
          end{align*}

          by Cauchy-Schwarz.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            The second proof makes sense to me, but could you elaborate how we can use AM-GM to get the result because we have no multiplication hear?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 7 at 19:56










          • $begingroup$
            The first proof uses AM-QM, not AM-GM. AM-QM is actually proved through exactly the same steps as seen with the CS proof seen in the second proof.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 7 at 19:59










          • $begingroup$
            The second proof both $k^-1$ gets cancelled and does not give the claim? Can you elaborate that?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 8 at 18:09










          • $begingroup$
            Oops, typo, the first $k^{-1}$ was not meant to be there. Fixed.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 8 at 22:06
















          1












          $begingroup$

          We have
          begin{align*}
          k^{-1}|A|_F^2 = k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}lambda_i^2 ge left(k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i| right)^2
          end{align*}

          by the inequality between quadratic means and arithmetic means. Another proof would be, with $mathbf{lambda} = (|lambda_1|, cdots, |lambda_k|)$ and $mathbf{1} = (1, cdots, 1)$, we have
          begin{align*}
          |A|_F^2 = k^{-1}(mathbf{lambda}^intercalmathbf{lambda})(mathbf{1}^intercalmathbf{1}) ge k^{-1} (mathbf{lambda}^intercal mathbf{1})^2 = k^{-1}left(sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i|right)^2
          end{align*}

          by Cauchy-Schwarz.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            The second proof makes sense to me, but could you elaborate how we can use AM-GM to get the result because we have no multiplication hear?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 7 at 19:56










          • $begingroup$
            The first proof uses AM-QM, not AM-GM. AM-QM is actually proved through exactly the same steps as seen with the CS proof seen in the second proof.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 7 at 19:59










          • $begingroup$
            The second proof both $k^-1$ gets cancelled and does not give the claim? Can you elaborate that?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 8 at 18:09










          • $begingroup$
            Oops, typo, the first $k^{-1}$ was not meant to be there. Fixed.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 8 at 22:06














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          We have
          begin{align*}
          k^{-1}|A|_F^2 = k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}lambda_i^2 ge left(k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i| right)^2
          end{align*}

          by the inequality between quadratic means and arithmetic means. Another proof would be, with $mathbf{lambda} = (|lambda_1|, cdots, |lambda_k|)$ and $mathbf{1} = (1, cdots, 1)$, we have
          begin{align*}
          |A|_F^2 = k^{-1}(mathbf{lambda}^intercalmathbf{lambda})(mathbf{1}^intercalmathbf{1}) ge k^{-1} (mathbf{lambda}^intercal mathbf{1})^2 = k^{-1}left(sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i|right)^2
          end{align*}

          by Cauchy-Schwarz.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          We have
          begin{align*}
          k^{-1}|A|_F^2 = k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}lambda_i^2 ge left(k^{-1}sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i| right)^2
          end{align*}

          by the inequality between quadratic means and arithmetic means. Another proof would be, with $mathbf{lambda} = (|lambda_1|, cdots, |lambda_k|)$ and $mathbf{1} = (1, cdots, 1)$, we have
          begin{align*}
          |A|_F^2 = k^{-1}(mathbf{lambda}^intercalmathbf{lambda})(mathbf{1}^intercalmathbf{1}) ge k^{-1} (mathbf{lambda}^intercal mathbf{1})^2 = k^{-1}left(sum_{i=1}^{k}|lambda_i|right)^2
          end{align*}

          by Cauchy-Schwarz.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Jan 8 at 22:04









          Saeed

          763310




          763310










          answered Jan 7 at 19:25









          Tom ChenTom Chen

          548212




          548212












          • $begingroup$
            The second proof makes sense to me, but could you elaborate how we can use AM-GM to get the result because we have no multiplication hear?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 7 at 19:56










          • $begingroup$
            The first proof uses AM-QM, not AM-GM. AM-QM is actually proved through exactly the same steps as seen with the CS proof seen in the second proof.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 7 at 19:59










          • $begingroup$
            The second proof both $k^-1$ gets cancelled and does not give the claim? Can you elaborate that?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 8 at 18:09










          • $begingroup$
            Oops, typo, the first $k^{-1}$ was not meant to be there. Fixed.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 8 at 22:06


















          • $begingroup$
            The second proof makes sense to me, but could you elaborate how we can use AM-GM to get the result because we have no multiplication hear?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 7 at 19:56










          • $begingroup$
            The first proof uses AM-QM, not AM-GM. AM-QM is actually proved through exactly the same steps as seen with the CS proof seen in the second proof.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 7 at 19:59










          • $begingroup$
            The second proof both $k^-1$ gets cancelled and does not give the claim? Can you elaborate that?
            $endgroup$
            – Saeed
            Jan 8 at 18:09










          • $begingroup$
            Oops, typo, the first $k^{-1}$ was not meant to be there. Fixed.
            $endgroup$
            – Tom Chen
            Jan 8 at 22:06
















          $begingroup$
          The second proof makes sense to me, but could you elaborate how we can use AM-GM to get the result because we have no multiplication hear?
          $endgroup$
          – Saeed
          Jan 7 at 19:56




          $begingroup$
          The second proof makes sense to me, but could you elaborate how we can use AM-GM to get the result because we have no multiplication hear?
          $endgroup$
          – Saeed
          Jan 7 at 19:56












          $begingroup$
          The first proof uses AM-QM, not AM-GM. AM-QM is actually proved through exactly the same steps as seen with the CS proof seen in the second proof.
          $endgroup$
          – Tom Chen
          Jan 7 at 19:59




          $begingroup$
          The first proof uses AM-QM, not AM-GM. AM-QM is actually proved through exactly the same steps as seen with the CS proof seen in the second proof.
          $endgroup$
          – Tom Chen
          Jan 7 at 19:59












          $begingroup$
          The second proof both $k^-1$ gets cancelled and does not give the claim? Can you elaborate that?
          $endgroup$
          – Saeed
          Jan 8 at 18:09




          $begingroup$
          The second proof both $k^-1$ gets cancelled and does not give the claim? Can you elaborate that?
          $endgroup$
          – Saeed
          Jan 8 at 18:09












          $begingroup$
          Oops, typo, the first $k^{-1}$ was not meant to be there. Fixed.
          $endgroup$
          – Tom Chen
          Jan 8 at 22:06




          $begingroup$
          Oops, typo, the first $k^{-1}$ was not meant to be there. Fixed.
          $endgroup$
          – Tom Chen
          Jan 8 at 22:06


















          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.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3065379%2fhow-to-show-for-any-symmetric-matrices-the-quadratic-mean-of-eigenvalues-less-th%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

          Mario Kart Wii

          What does “Dominus providebit” mean?

          File:Tiny Toon Adventures Wacky Sports JP Title.png