Subsection 12.1.4 Elementary Row Operations
Theorem 12.1.5. Elementary Row Operations.
If any sequence of the following operations is performed on the augmented matrix of a system of equations, the resulting matrix is a system that is equivalent to the original system. The following operations on a matrix are called elementary row operations:
Exchange any two rows of the matrix.
Multiply any row of the matrix by a nonzero constant.
Multiply any row of the matrix by a nonzero constant and add the result to a second row, with the sum replacing that second row.
Definition 12.1.6. Row Equivalent Matrices.
Two matrices,
and
are said to be row-equivalent if one can be obtained from the other by any sequence of zero or more elementary row operations.
If we use the notation
to stand for Row
of a matrix and
to stand for row equivalence, then
means that the matrix
is obtained from the matrix
by multiplying the Row
of
by
and adding the result to Row
The operation of multiplying row
by
is indicated by
while exchanging rows
and
is denoted by
The matrix notation for the system given in our first example, with the subsequent steps, is:
This again gives us the solution. This procedure is called the
Gauss-Jordan elimination method.
It is important to remember when solving any system of equations via this or any similar approach that at any step in the procedure we can rewrite the matrix in “equation format” to help us to interpret the meaning of the augmented matrix.
In our first example we found a unique solution, only one triple, namely
which satisfies all three equations. For a system involving three unknowns, are there any other possible results? To answer this question, let’s review some basic facts from analytic geometry.
The graph of a linear equation in three-dimensional space is a plane. So geometrically we can visualize the three linear equations as three planes in three-space. Certainly the three planes can intersect in a unique point, as in the first example, or two of the planes could be parallel. If two planes are parallel, there are no common points of intersection; that is, there are no triple of real numbers that will satisfy all three equations. Another possibility is that the three planes could intersect along a common axis or line. In this case, there would be an infinite number of real number triples in
Yet another possibility would be if the first two planes intersect in a line, but the line is parallel to, but not on, the third plane, giving us no solution. Finally if all three equations describe the same plane, the solution set would be that plane.
We can generalize these observations. In a system of
linear equations,
unknowns, there can be
an infinite number of solutions.
To illustrate these points, consider the following examples:
Example 12.1.7. A system with no solutions.
Find all solutions to the system
The reader can verify that the augmented matrix of this system, reduces to
We can attempt to row-reduce this matrix further if we wish. However, any further row-reduction will not substantially change the last row, which, in equation form, is or simply It is clear that we cannot find real numbers and that will satisfy this equation. Hence we cannot find real numbers that will satisfy all three original equations simultaneously. When this occurs, we say that the system has no solution, or the solution set is empty.
Example 12.1.8. A system with an infinite number of solutions.
Next, let’s attempt to find all of the solutions to:
The augmented matrix for the system is
which reduces to
If we apply additional elementary row operations to this matrix, it will only become more complicated. In particular, we cannot get a one in the third row, third column. Since the matrix is in simplest form, we will express it in equation format to help us determine the solution set.
Any real numbers will satisfy the last equation. However, the first equation can be rewritten as which describes the coordinate in terms of . Similarly, the second equation gives in terms of . A convenient way of listing the solutions of this system is to use set notation. If we call the solution set of the system then
What this means is that if we wanted to list all solutions, we would replace by all possible numbers. Clearly, there is an infinite number of solutions, two of which are and when takes on the values 0 and 11, respectively.
A Word Of Caution: Frequently we may can get “different-looking” answers to the same problem when a system has an infinite number of solutions. Assume the solutions set in this example is reported to be Certainly the result described by looks different from that described by To see whether they indeed describe the same set, we wish to determine whether every solution produced in can be generated in For example, the solution generated by when is The same triple can be produced by by taking We must prove that every solution described in is described in and, conversely, that every solution described in is described in (See Exercise 6 of this section.)
To summarize the procedure in the Gauss-Jordan technique for solving systems of equations, we attempt to obtain 1’s along the main diagonal of the coefficient matrix with 0’s above and below the diagonal. We may find in attempting this that this objective cannot be completed, as in the last two examples we have seen. Depending on the way we interpret the results in equation form, we either recognize that no solution exists, or we identify “free variables” on which an infinite number of solutions are based. The final matrix forms that we have produced in our examples are referred to as
echelon forms.
In practice, larger systems of linear equations are solved using computers. Generally, the Gauss-Jordan algorithm is the most useful; however, slight variations of this algorithm are also used. The different approaches share many of the same advantages and disadvantages. The two major concerns of all methods are:
minimizing inaccuracies due to round-off errors, and
minimizing computer time.
Subsection 12.1.6 SageMath Note - Matrix Reduction
Given an augmented matrix,
there is a matrix method called
echelon_form
that can be used to row reduce
Here is the result for the system in
Example 12.1.11. In the assignment of a matrix value to
notice that the first argument is QQ, which indicates that the entries should be rational numbers. As long as all the entries are rational, which is the case here since integers are rational, the row-reduced matrix will be all rational.
If we don’t specify the set from which entries are taken, it would assumed to be the integers and we do not get a fully row-reduced matrix. This is because the next step in working with the next output would involve multiplying row 2 by
and row 3 by
but these multipliers are not integers.
If we specifying real entries, the result isn’t as nice and clean as the rational output.
The default number of decimal places may vary from what you see here, but it can be controlled. The single small number in row three column four isn’t exactly zero because of round-off but we could just set it to zero.