Linear Algebra/Comparing Set Descriptions

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
< Linear Algebra
Jump to: navigation, search
← General = Particular + Homogeneous Comparing Set Descriptions Automation →

This subsection is optional. Later material will not require the work here.

Contents

[edit] Comparing Set Descriptions

A set can be described in many different ways. Here are two different descriptions of a single set:


\{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 2 \\ 3 \end{pmatrix}z\,\big|\, z\in\mathbb{R}\}
\quad\text{and}\quad
\{\begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ 4 \\ 6 \end{pmatrix}w\,\big|\, w\in\mathbb{R}\}.

For instance, this set contains


\begin{pmatrix} 5 \\ 10 \\ 15 \end{pmatrix}

(take z = 5 and w = 5 / 2) but does not contain


\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 8 \\ 11 \end{pmatrix}

(the first component gives z = 4 but that clashes with the third component, similarly the first component gives w = 4 / 5 but the third component gives something different). Here is a third description of the same set:


\{\begin{pmatrix} 3 \\ 6 \\ 9 \end{pmatrix}+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ -2 \\ -3 \end{pmatrix}y\,\big|\, y\in\mathbb{R}\}.

We need to decide when two descriptions are describing the same set. More pragmatically stated, how can a person tell when an answer to a homework question describes the same set as the one described in the back of the book?

[edit] Set Equality

Sets are equal if and only if they have the same members. A common way to show that two sets, S1 and S2, are equal is to show mutual inclusion: any member of S1 is also in S2, and any member of S2 is also in S1.[1]

Example 4.1

To show that


S_1=
\{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ -1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}c+\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}d\,\big|\, c,d\in\mathbb{R}\}

equals


S_2=
\{\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}m+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ -3 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}n\,\big|\, m,n\in\mathbb{R}\}

we show first that S_1\subseteq S_2 and then that S_2\subseteq S_1.

For the first half we must check that any vector from S1 is also in S2. We first consider two examples to use them as models for the general argument. If we make up a member of S1 by trying c = 1 and d = 1, then to show that it is in S2 we need m and n such that


\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}m
+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ -3 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}n
=\begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ 0 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}

that is, this relation holds between m and n.


\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
4m  &-  &n  &=  &2  \\
1m  &-  &3n &=  &0  \\
&   &0  &=  &0
\end{array}

Similarly, if we try c = 2 and d = − 1, then to show that the resulting member of S1 is in S2 we need m and n such that


\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}m
+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ -3 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}n
=\begin{pmatrix} 3 \\ -3 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}

that is, this holds.


\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
4m  &-  &n  &=  &3  \\
1m  &-  &3n &=  &-3 \\
&   &0  &=  &0
\end{array}

In the general case, to show that any vector from S1 is a member of S2 we must show that for any c and d there are appropriate m and n. We follow the pattern of the examples; fix


\begin{pmatrix} c+d \\ -c+d \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}\in S_1

and look for m and n such that


\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}m
+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ -3 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}n
=\begin{pmatrix} c+d \\ -c+d \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}

that is, this is true.


\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
4m  &-  &n  &=  &c+d  \\
m  &-  &3n &=  &-c+d  \\
&   &0  &=  &0
\end{array}

Applying Gauss' method

\begin{array}{rcl}
\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
4m  &-  &n  &=  &c+d  \\
m  &-  &3n &=  &-c+d
\end{array}
&\xrightarrow[]{-(1/4)\rho_1+\rho_2}
&\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
4m  &-  &n        &=  &c+d            \\
&   &-(11/4)n &=  &-(5/4)c+(3/4)d
\end{array}
\end{array}

gives n = (5 / 11)c − (3 / 11)d and m = (4 / 11)c + (2 / 11)d. This shows that for any choice of c and d there are appropriate m and n. We conclude any member of S1 is a member of S2 because it can be rewritten in this way:


\begin{pmatrix} c+d \\ -c+d \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}
=\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}((4/11)c+(2/11)d)+
\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ -3 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}((5/11)c-(3/11)d).

For the other inclusion,  S_2\subseteq S_1 , we want to do the opposite. We want to show that for any choice of m and n there are appropriate c and d. So fix m and n and solve for c and d:

\begin{array}{rcl}
\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
c  &+ &d  &= &4m-n \\
-c  &+ &d  &= &m-3n
\end{array}
&\xrightarrow[]{\rho_1+\rho_2}
&\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
c  &+ &d  &= &4m-n \\
&  &2d &= &5m-4n
\end{array}
\end{array}

shows that d = (5 / 2)m − 2n and c = (3 / 2)m + n. Thus any vector from S2


\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}m+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ -3 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}n

is also of the right form for S1


\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ -1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}((3/2)m+n)
+\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}((5/2)m-2n).
Example 4.2

Of course, sometimes sets are not equal. The method of the prior example will help us see the relationship between the two sets. These


P=
\{\begin{pmatrix} x+y \\ 2x \\ y \end{pmatrix}\,\big|\, x,y\in\mathbb{R}\}
\quad\text{and}\quad
R=
\{\begin{pmatrix} m+p \\ n \\ p \end{pmatrix}\,\big|\, m,n,p\in\mathbb{R}\}

are not equal sets. While P is a subset of R, it is a proper subset of R because R is not a subset of P.

To see that, observe first that given a vector from P we can express it in the form for R— if we fix x and y, we can solve for appropriate m, n, and p:


\begin{array}{*{3}{rc}r}
m  &   &   &+  &p  &=  &x+y  \\
&   &n  &   &   &=  &2x   \\
&   &   &   &p  &=  &y
\end{array}

shows that that any


\vec{v}=
\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 2 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}x+
\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}y

can be expressed as a member of R with m = x, n = 2x, and p = y:


\vec{v}=
\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}x+
\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}2x+
\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}y.

Thus  P\subseteq R .

But, for the other direction, the reduction resulting from fixing m, n, and p and looking for x and y

\begin{array}{rcl}
\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
x  &+  &y  &=  &m+p  \\
2x  &   &   &=  &n    \\
&   &y  &=  &p
\end{array}
&\xrightarrow[]{-2\rho_1+\rho_2}
&\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
x  &+  &y  &=  &m+p  \\
&   &-2y&=  &-2m+n-2p \\
&   &y  &=  &p
\end{array}                                  \\
&\xrightarrow[]{(1/2)\rho_2+\rho_3}
&\begin{array}{*{2}{rc}r}
x  &+  &y  &=  &m+p  \\
&   &-2y&=  &-2m+n-2p \\
&   &0  &=  &m+(1/2)n
\end{array}
\end{array}

shows that the only vectors


\begin{pmatrix} m+p \\ n \\ p \end{pmatrix}\in R

representable in the form


\begin{pmatrix} x+y \\ 2x \\ y \end{pmatrix}

are those where 0 = m + (1 / 2)n. For instance,


\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}

is in R but not in P.

[edit] Exercises

Problem 1

Decide if the vector is a member of the set.

  1. \begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ 3 \end{pmatrix}, \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}k\,\big|\, k\in\mathbb{R}\}
  2. \begin{pmatrix} -3 \\ 3 \end{pmatrix}, \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ -1 \end{pmatrix}k\,\big|\, k\in\mathbb{R}\}
  3. \begin{pmatrix} -3 \\ 3 \\ 4 \end{pmatrix}, \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ -1 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}k\,\big|\, k\in\mathbb{R}\}
  4. \begin{pmatrix} -3 \\ 3 \\ 4 \end{pmatrix}, \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ -1 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}k+\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}m
\,\big|\, k,m\in\mathbb{R}\}
  5. \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 4 \\ 14 \end{pmatrix}, \{\begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ 2 \\ 5 \end{pmatrix}k+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ 0 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}m
\,\big|\, k,m\in\mathbb{R}\}
  6. \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 4 \\ 6 \end{pmatrix}, \{\begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ 2 \\ 5 \end{pmatrix}k+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ 0 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}m
\,\big|\, k,m\in\mathbb{R}\}
Problem 2

Produce two descriptions of this set that are different than this one.


\{\begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ -5 \end{pmatrix}k\,\big|\, k\in\mathbb{R}\}
This exercise is recommended for all readers.
Problem 3

Show that the three descriptions given at the start of this subsection all describe the same set.

This exercise is recommended for all readers.
Problem 4

Show that these sets are equal


\{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 4 \\ 1 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ 0 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}z\,\big|\, z\in\mathbb{R}  \}
\quad\text{and}\quad
\{\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 4 \\ 2 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ 0 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}k\,\big|\, k\in\mathbb{R}  \},

and that both describe the solution set of this system.


\begin{array}{*{4}{rc}r}
x  &-  &y  &+  &z  &+  &w  &=  &-1  \\
&   &y  &   &   &-  &w  &=  &3   \\
x  &   &   &+  &z  &+  &2w &=  &4
\end{array}
This exercise is recommended for all readers.
Problem 5

Decide if the sets are equal.

  1.  \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 3 \end{pmatrix}t
\,\big|\, t\in\mathbb{R}\} and  \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 8 \end{pmatrix}
+\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ -1 \end{pmatrix}s
\,\big|\, s\in\mathbb{R}\}
  2.  \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 3 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}t
+\begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ 1 \\ 5 \end{pmatrix}s
\,\big|\, t,s\in\mathbb{R}\} and  \{\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 7 \\ 7 \end{pmatrix}m
+\begin{pmatrix} -4 \\ -2 \\ -10 \end{pmatrix}n
\,\big|\, m,n\in\mathbb{R}\}
  3.  \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}t
\,\big|\, t\in\mathbb{R}\} and  \{\begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ 4 \end{pmatrix}m
+\begin{pmatrix} 4 \\ 8 \end{pmatrix}n
\,\big|\, m,n\in\mathbb{R}\}
  4.  \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}s
+\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}t
\,\big|\, s,t\in\mathbb{R}\} and  \{\begin{pmatrix} -1 \\ 1 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}m
+\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \\ 3 \end{pmatrix}n
\,\big|\, m,n\in\mathbb{R}\}
  5.  \{\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 3 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}t
+\begin{pmatrix} 2 \\ 4 \\ 6 \end{pmatrix}s
\,\big|\, t,s\in\mathbb{R}\} and  \{\begin{pmatrix} 3 \\ 7 \\ 7 \end{pmatrix}t
+\begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 3 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}s
\,\big|\, t,s\in\mathbb{R}\}

Solutions

[edit] Footnotes

  1. More information on set equality is in the appendix.
← General = Particular + Homogeneous Comparing Set Descriptions Automation →
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Toolbox
Sister projects
Print/export