Identity between resolvent and singular value density
I was reading the paper
Sengupta, Anirvan M., and Partha P. Mitra. "Distributions of singular
values for some random matrices." Physical Review E 60.3 (1999): 3389.
but got stuck at equation (3):
Here $lambda_n$ are the singular values of a matrix $M$ (eventually taken to be a random matrix), $rho(lambda)$ denotes the density of singular values of $M$, and the resolvent $mathcal G(z)$ is defined by:
So how does (3) follow from (2)?
linear-algebra random-matrices singularvalues
add a comment |
I was reading the paper
Sengupta, Anirvan M., and Partha P. Mitra. "Distributions of singular
values for some random matrices." Physical Review E 60.3 (1999): 3389.
but got stuck at equation (3):
Here $lambda_n$ are the singular values of a matrix $M$ (eventually taken to be a random matrix), $rho(lambda)$ denotes the density of singular values of $M$, and the resolvent $mathcal G(z)$ is defined by:
So how does (3) follow from (2)?
linear-algebra random-matrices singularvalues
add a comment |
I was reading the paper
Sengupta, Anirvan M., and Partha P. Mitra. "Distributions of singular
values for some random matrices." Physical Review E 60.3 (1999): 3389.
but got stuck at equation (3):
Here $lambda_n$ are the singular values of a matrix $M$ (eventually taken to be a random matrix), $rho(lambda)$ denotes the density of singular values of $M$, and the resolvent $mathcal G(z)$ is defined by:
So how does (3) follow from (2)?
linear-algebra random-matrices singularvalues
I was reading the paper
Sengupta, Anirvan M., and Partha P. Mitra. "Distributions of singular
values for some random matrices." Physical Review E 60.3 (1999): 3389.
but got stuck at equation (3):
Here $lambda_n$ are the singular values of a matrix $M$ (eventually taken to be a random matrix), $rho(lambda)$ denotes the density of singular values of $M$, and the resolvent $mathcal G(z)$ is defined by:
So how does (3) follow from (2)?
linear-algebra random-matrices singularvalues
linear-algebra random-matrices singularvalues
asked Nov 29 at 21:19
becko
2,34431942
2,34431942
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
I also have problems, but let me write what I got:
Perhaps you know that $lim_{epsilonto 0^+}frac{1}{pi}Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=delta(t)$. In any case, this follows from $Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=frac{1}{epsilon((t/epsilon)^2+1)}$. Hence, we get the right part of (3) is equal to $2lambdasum_ndelta(lambda^2-lambda_n^2)$, so we should prove that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=delta(t-a)$. Unfortunately, I prove instead that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=-delta(t+|a|)+delta(t-|a|)$.
It's easier to approximate $delta$ by $phi_epsilon=epsilon^{-1}phi(t/epsilon)$, where $phi$ is compactly supported and even. Now, let $psi$ be a test function and evaluate
$$
begin{align}
int 2tphi_epsilon(t^2-a^2)psi(t),dt &= int_{-infty}^0+int_0^{infty} \
&=-int_{-a^2}^infty phi_epsilon(s)psi(-sqrt{s+a^2}),ds +int_{-a^2}^inftyphi_epsilon(s)psi(sqrt{s+a^2}),ds,
end{align}
$$
where I used the change of variables $t^2-a^2=s$. Therefore, taking the limit $epsilonto 0$ we get $2tdelta(t^2-a^2) = -delta(t+|a|)+ delta(t-|a|)$. I don't know if I made a mistake.
1
I agree, $2lambdadelta(lambda-lambda_n^2) = delta(lambda-lambda_n) + delta(lambda+lambda_n)$. But I think in this case it is safe to assume that $lambda,lambda_n > 0$ (singular values of random matrices are almost surely positive), in which case $delta(lambda+lambda_n) = 0$. But I'm not 100% convinced by this argument.
– becko
Nov 30 at 20:32
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019236%2fidentity-between-resolvent-and-singular-value-density%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
I also have problems, but let me write what I got:
Perhaps you know that $lim_{epsilonto 0^+}frac{1}{pi}Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=delta(t)$. In any case, this follows from $Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=frac{1}{epsilon((t/epsilon)^2+1)}$. Hence, we get the right part of (3) is equal to $2lambdasum_ndelta(lambda^2-lambda_n^2)$, so we should prove that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=delta(t-a)$. Unfortunately, I prove instead that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=-delta(t+|a|)+delta(t-|a|)$.
It's easier to approximate $delta$ by $phi_epsilon=epsilon^{-1}phi(t/epsilon)$, where $phi$ is compactly supported and even. Now, let $psi$ be a test function and evaluate
$$
begin{align}
int 2tphi_epsilon(t^2-a^2)psi(t),dt &= int_{-infty}^0+int_0^{infty} \
&=-int_{-a^2}^infty phi_epsilon(s)psi(-sqrt{s+a^2}),ds +int_{-a^2}^inftyphi_epsilon(s)psi(sqrt{s+a^2}),ds,
end{align}
$$
where I used the change of variables $t^2-a^2=s$. Therefore, taking the limit $epsilonto 0$ we get $2tdelta(t^2-a^2) = -delta(t+|a|)+ delta(t-|a|)$. I don't know if I made a mistake.
1
I agree, $2lambdadelta(lambda-lambda_n^2) = delta(lambda-lambda_n) + delta(lambda+lambda_n)$. But I think in this case it is safe to assume that $lambda,lambda_n > 0$ (singular values of random matrices are almost surely positive), in which case $delta(lambda+lambda_n) = 0$. But I'm not 100% convinced by this argument.
– becko
Nov 30 at 20:32
add a comment |
I also have problems, but let me write what I got:
Perhaps you know that $lim_{epsilonto 0^+}frac{1}{pi}Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=delta(t)$. In any case, this follows from $Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=frac{1}{epsilon((t/epsilon)^2+1)}$. Hence, we get the right part of (3) is equal to $2lambdasum_ndelta(lambda^2-lambda_n^2)$, so we should prove that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=delta(t-a)$. Unfortunately, I prove instead that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=-delta(t+|a|)+delta(t-|a|)$.
It's easier to approximate $delta$ by $phi_epsilon=epsilon^{-1}phi(t/epsilon)$, where $phi$ is compactly supported and even. Now, let $psi$ be a test function and evaluate
$$
begin{align}
int 2tphi_epsilon(t^2-a^2)psi(t),dt &= int_{-infty}^0+int_0^{infty} \
&=-int_{-a^2}^infty phi_epsilon(s)psi(-sqrt{s+a^2}),ds +int_{-a^2}^inftyphi_epsilon(s)psi(sqrt{s+a^2}),ds,
end{align}
$$
where I used the change of variables $t^2-a^2=s$. Therefore, taking the limit $epsilonto 0$ we get $2tdelta(t^2-a^2) = -delta(t+|a|)+ delta(t-|a|)$. I don't know if I made a mistake.
1
I agree, $2lambdadelta(lambda-lambda_n^2) = delta(lambda-lambda_n) + delta(lambda+lambda_n)$. But I think in this case it is safe to assume that $lambda,lambda_n > 0$ (singular values of random matrices are almost surely positive), in which case $delta(lambda+lambda_n) = 0$. But I'm not 100% convinced by this argument.
– becko
Nov 30 at 20:32
add a comment |
I also have problems, but let me write what I got:
Perhaps you know that $lim_{epsilonto 0^+}frac{1}{pi}Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=delta(t)$. In any case, this follows from $Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=frac{1}{epsilon((t/epsilon)^2+1)}$. Hence, we get the right part of (3) is equal to $2lambdasum_ndelta(lambda^2-lambda_n^2)$, so we should prove that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=delta(t-a)$. Unfortunately, I prove instead that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=-delta(t+|a|)+delta(t-|a|)$.
It's easier to approximate $delta$ by $phi_epsilon=epsilon^{-1}phi(t/epsilon)$, where $phi$ is compactly supported and even. Now, let $psi$ be a test function and evaluate
$$
begin{align}
int 2tphi_epsilon(t^2-a^2)psi(t),dt &= int_{-infty}^0+int_0^{infty} \
&=-int_{-a^2}^infty phi_epsilon(s)psi(-sqrt{s+a^2}),ds +int_{-a^2}^inftyphi_epsilon(s)psi(sqrt{s+a^2}),ds,
end{align}
$$
where I used the change of variables $t^2-a^2=s$. Therefore, taking the limit $epsilonto 0$ we get $2tdelta(t^2-a^2) = -delta(t+|a|)+ delta(t-|a|)$. I don't know if I made a mistake.
I also have problems, but let me write what I got:
Perhaps you know that $lim_{epsilonto 0^+}frac{1}{pi}Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=delta(t)$. In any case, this follows from $Im(frac{1}{t-iepsilon})=frac{1}{epsilon((t/epsilon)^2+1)}$. Hence, we get the right part of (3) is equal to $2lambdasum_ndelta(lambda^2-lambda_n^2)$, so we should prove that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=delta(t-a)$. Unfortunately, I prove instead that $2tdelta(t^2-a^2)=-delta(t+|a|)+delta(t-|a|)$.
It's easier to approximate $delta$ by $phi_epsilon=epsilon^{-1}phi(t/epsilon)$, where $phi$ is compactly supported and even. Now, let $psi$ be a test function and evaluate
$$
begin{align}
int 2tphi_epsilon(t^2-a^2)psi(t),dt &= int_{-infty}^0+int_0^{infty} \
&=-int_{-a^2}^infty phi_epsilon(s)psi(-sqrt{s+a^2}),ds +int_{-a^2}^inftyphi_epsilon(s)psi(sqrt{s+a^2}),ds,
end{align}
$$
where I used the change of variables $t^2-a^2=s$. Therefore, taking the limit $epsilonto 0$ we get $2tdelta(t^2-a^2) = -delta(t+|a|)+ delta(t-|a|)$. I don't know if I made a mistake.
answered Nov 29 at 23:45
user90189
752616
752616
1
I agree, $2lambdadelta(lambda-lambda_n^2) = delta(lambda-lambda_n) + delta(lambda+lambda_n)$. But I think in this case it is safe to assume that $lambda,lambda_n > 0$ (singular values of random matrices are almost surely positive), in which case $delta(lambda+lambda_n) = 0$. But I'm not 100% convinced by this argument.
– becko
Nov 30 at 20:32
add a comment |
1
I agree, $2lambdadelta(lambda-lambda_n^2) = delta(lambda-lambda_n) + delta(lambda+lambda_n)$. But I think in this case it is safe to assume that $lambda,lambda_n > 0$ (singular values of random matrices are almost surely positive), in which case $delta(lambda+lambda_n) = 0$. But I'm not 100% convinced by this argument.
– becko
Nov 30 at 20:32
1
1
I agree, $2lambdadelta(lambda-lambda_n^2) = delta(lambda-lambda_n) + delta(lambda+lambda_n)$. But I think in this case it is safe to assume that $lambda,lambda_n > 0$ (singular values of random matrices are almost surely positive), in which case $delta(lambda+lambda_n) = 0$. But I'm not 100% convinced by this argument.
– becko
Nov 30 at 20:32
I agree, $2lambdadelta(lambda-lambda_n^2) = delta(lambda-lambda_n) + delta(lambda+lambda_n)$. But I think in this case it is safe to assume that $lambda,lambda_n > 0$ (singular values of random matrices are almost surely positive), in which case $delta(lambda+lambda_n) = 0$. But I'm not 100% convinced by this argument.
– becko
Nov 30 at 20:32
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019236%2fidentity-between-resolvent-and-singular-value-density%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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