1 Introduction
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix, Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ denote the underlying weighted digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B , and ℬ = { p ( B ) ∣ p ∈ ℂ [ t ] } ℬ conditional-set 𝑝 𝐵 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 {\mathcal{B}}=\{p(B)\mid p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t]\} caligraphic_B = { italic_p ( italic_B ) ∣ italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] } denote the vector space over ℂ ℂ {\mathbb{C}} blackboard_C of all polynomials in B 𝐵 B italic_B . In this paper, we study connections between commutative association schemes and λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrices by considering the following question: under which combinatorial or algebraic restriction on Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is the vector space ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B the Bose–Mesner algebra of a commutative association scheme? Formal definitions are given in Section 2 .
We first give the relevant background before presenting our main results. Let X 𝑋 X italic_X denote a finite set, and Mat X ( ℂ ) subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ \mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) the set of complex matrices with rows and columns indexed by X 𝑋 X italic_X . Let ℛ = { R 0 , R 1 , … , R d } ℛ subscript 𝑅 0 subscript 𝑅 1 … subscript 𝑅 𝑑 {\mathcal{R}}=\{R_{0},R_{1},\ldots,R_{d}\} caligraphic_R = { italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denote a set of cardinality d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 of nonempty subsets of X × X 𝑋 𝑋 X\times X italic_X × italic_X . The elements of the set ℛ ℛ {\mathcal{R}} caligraphic_R are called relations (or classes ) on X 𝑋 X italic_X . For each integer i 𝑖 i italic_i ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) , let B i ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) subscript 𝐵 𝑖 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ B_{i}\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) denote the adjacency matrix of the graph ( X , R i ) 𝑋 subscript 𝑅 𝑖 (X,R_{i}) ( italic_X , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) (directed, in general). The pair 𝔛 = ( X , ℛ ) 𝔛 𝑋 ℛ {{\mathfrak{X}}}=(X,{\mathcal{R}}) fraktur_X = ( italic_X , caligraphic_R ) is a commutative d 𝑑 d italic_d -class association scheme if the relation matrices B i subscript 𝐵 𝑖 B_{i} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT satisfy the following properties
(AS1)
B 0 = I subscript 𝐵 0 𝐼 B_{0}=I italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_I , the identity matrix.
(AS2)
∑ i = 0 d B i = J superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝑑 subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝐽 \displaystyle{\sum_{i=0}^{d}B_{i}=J} ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_J , the all-ones matrix.
(AS3)
B i ⊤ ∈ { B 0 , B 1 , … , B d } superscript subscript 𝐵 𝑖 top subscript 𝐵 0 subscript 𝐵 1 … subscript 𝐵 𝑑 {B_{i}}^{\top}\in\{B_{0},B_{1},\ldots,B_{d}\} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ { italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } for 0 ≤ i ≤ d 0 𝑖 𝑑 0\leq i\leq d 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d .
(AS4)
B i B j subscript 𝐵 𝑖 subscript 𝐵 𝑗 B_{i}B_{j} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a linear combination of B 0 , B 1 , … , B d subscript 𝐵 0 subscript 𝐵 1 … subscript 𝐵 𝑑
B_{0},B_{1},\ldots,B_{d} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 0 ≤ i , j ≤ d formulae-sequence 0 𝑖 𝑗 𝑑 0\leq i,j\leq d 0 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_d (i.e., for every i , j 𝑖 𝑗
i,j italic_i , italic_j ( 0 ≤ i , j ≤ d ) formulae-sequence 0 𝑖 𝑗 𝑑 (0\leq i,j\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_d ) there exist positive integers p i j h subscript superscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝑖 𝑗 p^{h}_{ij} italic_p start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ h ≤ d ) 0 ℎ 𝑑 (0\leq h\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_h ≤ italic_d ) , known as intersection numbers , such that B i B j = ∑ h = 0 d p i j h B h subscript 𝐵 𝑖 subscript 𝐵 𝑗 superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝑑 subscript superscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝑖 𝑗 subscript 𝐵 ℎ B_{i}B_{j}=\sum_{h=0}^{d}p^{h}_{ij}B_{h} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ).
(AS5)
B i B j = B j B i subscript 𝐵 𝑖 subscript 𝐵 𝑗 subscript 𝐵 𝑗 subscript 𝐵 𝑖 B_{i}B_{j}=B_{j}B_{i} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for every i , j 𝑖 𝑗
i,j italic_i , italic_j ( 0 ≤ i , j ≤ d ) formulae-sequence 0 𝑖 𝑗 𝑑 (0\leq i,j\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_d ) (i.e., for the intersection numbers p i j h subscript superscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝑖 𝑗 p^{h}_{ij} italic_p start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , 0 ≤ i , j , h ≤ d formulae-sequence 0 𝑖 𝑗
ℎ 𝑑 0\leq i,j,h\leq d 0 ≤ italic_i , italic_j , italic_h ≤ italic_d , from (AS4) we have that p i j h = p j i h subscript superscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝑖 𝑗 subscript superscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝑗 𝑖 p^{h}_{ij}=p^{h}_{ji} italic_p start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ).
By (AS1) –(AS5) the vector space ℳ = span { B 0 , B 1 , … , B d } ℳ span subscript 𝐵 0 subscript 𝐵 1 … subscript 𝐵 𝑑 {\mathcal{M}}=\operatorname{span}\{B_{0},B_{1},\ldots,B_{d}\} caligraphic_M = roman_span { italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } is a commutative algebra; it is known as the Bose–Mesner algebra of 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X . We say that a matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B generates ℳ ℳ {\mathcal{M}} caligraphic_M if every element in ℳ ℳ {\mathcal{M}} caligraphic_M can be written as a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B . We say that 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X is symmetric if the B i subscript 𝐵 𝑖 B_{i} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ’s are symmetric matrices.
A nonnegative matrix B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) such that ∑ z ∈ X ( B ) y z = ∑ z ∈ X ( B ) z y = λ subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐵 𝑧 𝑦 𝜆 \sum_{z\in X}(B)_{yz}=\sum_{z\in X}(B)_{zy}=\lambda ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_λ for each y ∈ X 𝑦 𝑋 y\in X italic_y ∈ italic_X is called a λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrix . If λ = 1 𝜆 1 \lambda=1 italic_λ = 1 , the matrix is simply called doubly stochastic . The following result was proved by Birkhoff (1946) and independently by von Neumann (1953): Each doubly stochastic matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B can be represented as a convex combination of permutation matrices, that is,
B = c 1 P 1 + c 2 P 2 + ⋯ + c m P m 𝐵 subscript 𝑐 1 subscript 𝑃 1 subscript 𝑐 2 subscript 𝑃 2 ⋯ subscript 𝑐 𝑚 subscript 𝑃 𝑚 B=c_{1}P_{1}+c_{2}P_{2}+\cdots+c_{m}P_{m} italic_B = italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
(1)
where the c i subscript 𝑐 𝑖 c_{i} italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ’s are positive real numbers with ∑ i = 1 m c i = 1 superscript subscript 𝑖 1 𝑚 subscript 𝑐 𝑖 1 \sum_{i=1}^{m}c_{i}=1 ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 , and P 1 , P 2 , … , P m subscript 𝑃 1 subscript 𝑃 2 … subscript 𝑃 𝑚
P_{1},P_{2},\ldots,P_{m} italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are distinct permutation matrices. It is well known that the convex representation (1 ) of the doubly stochastic matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B is unique (up to reordering the terms) if and only if the graph Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is uniquely edge colourable, where Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is a bipartite graph with bipartition ( V 1 , V 2 ) subscript 𝑉 1 subscript 𝑉 2 (V_{1},V_{2}) ( italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , where V 1 = { x 1 , x 2 , … , x | X | } subscript 𝑉 1 subscript 𝑥 1 subscript 𝑥 2 … subscript 𝑥 𝑋 V_{1}=\{x_{1},x_{2},\ldots,x_{|X|}\} italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , V 2 = { y 1 , y 2 , … , y | X | } subscript 𝑉 2 subscript 𝑦 1 subscript 𝑦 2 … subscript 𝑦 𝑋 V_{2}=\{y_{1},y_{2},\ldots,y_{|X|}\} italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } and two vertices x i subscript 𝑥 𝑖 x_{i} italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and y j subscript 𝑦 𝑗 y_{j} italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are joined by ( ∑ i = 1 m P i ) i j subscript superscript subscript 𝑖 1 𝑚 subscript 𝑃 𝑖 𝑖 𝑗 \left(\sum_{i=1}^{m}P_{i}\right)_{ij} ( ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT edges ( 1 ≤ i , j ≤ | X | ) formulae-sequence 1 𝑖 𝑗 𝑋 (1\leq i,j\leq|X|) ( 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ | italic_X | ) (see, for example, [1 , Subchapter 9.2] ). In [19 ] , Dufossé and Uçar showed that determining the minimal number of permutation matrices needed in (1 ) is strongly NP-complete. Some interesting papers that study doubly stochastic matrices are, for example, [4 , 6 , 7 , 35 , 36 ] . With respect to representation (1 ), from our point of view, it would be interesting to study the combinatorial structure of a (di)graph with adjacency matrix ∑ i = 1 m P i superscript subscript 𝑖 1 𝑚 subscript 𝑃 𝑖 \sum_{i=1}^{m}P_{i} ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . In this paper we study representation (1 ) in the set-up of Problem 1.1 .
Problem 1.1
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a non-negative matrix. Assume that the matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B has exactly m + 1 𝑚 1 m+1 italic_m + 1 distinct entries { 0 , c 1 , … , c m } 0 subscript 𝑐 1 … subscript 𝑐 𝑚 \{0,c_{1},\ldots,c_{m}\} { 0 , italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , so that we can write B 𝐵 B italic_B as a linear combination of 01 01 01 01 -matrices F i subscript 𝐹 𝑖 F_{i} italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 ≤ i ≤ m ) 1 𝑖 𝑚 (1\leq i\leq m) ( 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_m ) as follows
B = c 1 F 1 + c 2 F 2 + ⋯ + c m F m 𝐵 subscript 𝑐 1 subscript 𝐹 1 subscript 𝑐 2 subscript 𝐹 2 ⋯ subscript 𝑐 𝑚 subscript 𝐹 𝑚 B=c_{1}F_{1}+c_{2}F_{2}+\cdots+c_{m}F_{m} italic_B = italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
(note that the c i subscript 𝑐 𝑖 c_{i} italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ’s are positive real numbers and our F i subscript 𝐹 𝑖 F_{i} italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ’s are not necessarily permutation matrices). We also assume that F i subscript 𝐹 𝑖 F_{i} italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ’s are ∘ \circ ∘ -idempotents, i.e., F i ∘ F j = 𝐎 subscript 𝐹 𝑖 subscript 𝐹 𝑗 𝐎 F_{i}\circ F_{j}=\operatorname{\boldsymbol{O}} italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = bold_O whenever i ≠ j 𝑖 𝑗 i\neq j italic_i ≠ italic_j , where ∘ \circ ∘ denotes the elementwise-Hadamard product. Let A = ∑ i = 0 m F i 𝐴 superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝑚 subscript 𝐹 𝑖 A=\sum_{i=0}^{m}F_{i} italic_A = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Can we describe the combinatorial structure (or give some algebraic properties) of the digraph Γ = Γ ( A ) Γ Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) , so that the vector space ℬ = { p ( B ) ∣ p ∈ ℂ [ t ] } ℬ conditional-set 𝑝 𝐵 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 {\mathcal{B}}=\{p(B)\mid p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t]\} caligraphic_B = { italic_p ( italic_B ) ∣ italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] } over ℂ ℂ {\mathbb{C}} blackboard_C of all polynomials in B 𝐵 B italic_B is the Bose–Mesner algebra of a commutative association scheme? Also, what can we say about the entries of the matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B ?
Since the all-1 1 1 1 matrix J 𝐽 J italic_J belongs to every commutative association scheme, as a first sub-problem of Problem 1.1 , we are interested in the case when J 𝐽 J italic_J is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B . This property implies that B 𝐵 B italic_B is a λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrix (see Theorem 1.1 ), so we obtain an answer to the second part of the problem. Let us give some background in this direction. For the moment, let Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ denote an undirected graph with vertex set X 𝑋 X italic_X , adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A , and let J 𝐽 J italic_J denote the all-ones matrix of order | X | 𝑋 |X| | italic_X | . In [26 ] , Hoffman proved that there exists a polynomial p ( x ) 𝑝 𝑥 p(x) italic_p ( italic_x ) such that
p ( A ) = J 𝑝 𝐴 𝐽 p(A)=J italic_p ( italic_A ) = italic_J
(2)
if and only if Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is connected and regular. In [27 ] , Hoffman and McAndrew studied the case of a directed graph, and obtained a similar result: there exists a polynomial p ( x ) 𝑝 𝑥 p(x) italic_p ( italic_x ) such that (2 ) holds if and only if Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is strongly connected and regular. Moreover, they showed that the unique polynomial of smallest degree satisfying (2 ) is h ( t ) = | X | q ( k ) q ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 𝑋 𝑞 𝑘 𝑞 𝑡 h(t)=\frac{|X|}{q(k)}q(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG start_ARG italic_q ( italic_k ) end_ARG italic_q ( italic_t ) , where Γ = Γ ( A ) Γ Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) is a regular digraph of valency k 𝑘 k italic_k , and ( t − k ) q ( t ) 𝑡 𝑘 𝑞 𝑡 (t-k)q(t) ( italic_t - italic_k ) italic_q ( italic_t ) is the minimal polynomial of A 𝐴 A italic_A . Next, it is well known that a digraph Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is strongly connected if and only if its adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A is irreducible (see, for example, [31 , Section 8.3] ). For the moment, let C ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐶 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ C\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_C ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a nonnegative matrix. In [41 ] , Wu and Deng study a polynomial that sends a nonnegative irreducible matrix to a positive rank one matrix; they showed that there is a polynomial p ( t ) ∈ ℝ [ t ] 𝑝 𝑡 ℝ delimited-[] 𝑡 p(t)\in{\mathbb{R}}[t] italic_p ( italic_t ) ∈ blackboard_R [ italic_t ] such that p ( C ) 𝑝 𝐶 p(C) italic_p ( italic_C ) is a positive matrix of rank one if and only if C 𝐶 C italic_C is irreducible. Moreover, they show that the lowest degree of such a polynomial p ( t ) 𝑝 𝑡 p(t) italic_p ( italic_t ) with trace p ( C ) = | X | trace 𝑝 𝐶 𝑋 \operatorname{trace}p(C)=|X| roman_trace italic_p ( italic_C ) = | italic_X | is unique. The first main result of our paper is Theorem 1.1 , which is in the same spirit as that of Hoffman and McAndrew from [27 ] (note that one direction of our theorem also follows from [41 , Theorem 2.2] ).
B = ( 1 3 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 2 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 ) 𝐵 1 3 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 2 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 B=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccccccc}\frac{1}{3}&0&0&\frac{2}{3}&0&0&0&0\\
\frac{1}{3}&\frac{1}{3}&0&0&0&\frac{1}{3}&0&0\\
0&\frac{2}{3}&\frac{1}{3}&0&0&0&0&0\\
0&0&\frac{1}{3}&\frac{1}{3}&0&0&0&\frac{1}{3}\\
\frac{1}{3}&0&0&0&0&0&0&\frac{2}{3}\\
0&0&0&0&1&0&0&0\\
0&0&\frac{1}{3}&0&0&\frac{2}{3}&0&0\\
0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0\end{array}\right) italic_B = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 1 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 1 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY )
1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 2 3 2 3 \frac{2}{3} divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 2 3 2 3 \frac{2}{3} divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 2 3 2 3 \frac{2}{3} divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 3 1 3 \frac{1}{3} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 \frac{2}{3} divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG
Figure 1: A doubly stochastic matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B and its underlying weighted digraph. The Hoffman polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B is h ( t ) = 8 q ( 1 ) q ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 8 𝑞 1 𝑞 𝑡 h(t)=\frac{8}{q(1)}q(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG 8 end_ARG start_ARG italic_q ( 1 ) end_ARG italic_q ( italic_t ) , where q ( t ) = t 7 − 1 3 t 6 + 1 3 t 5 + 5 27 t 4 − 8 27 t 3 + 8 27 t 2 − 32 243 t 𝑞 𝑡 superscript 𝑡 7 1 3 superscript 𝑡 6 1 3 superscript 𝑡 5 5 27 superscript 𝑡 4 8 27 superscript 𝑡 3 8 27 superscript 𝑡 2 32 243 𝑡 q(t)=t^{7}-\frac{1}{3}t^{6}+\frac{1}{3}t^{5}+\frac{5}{27}t^{4}-\frac{8}{27}t^{%
3}+\frac{8}{27}t^{2}-\frac{32}{243}t italic_q ( italic_t ) = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 7 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 5 end_ARG start_ARG 27 end_ARG italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG 8 end_ARG start_ARG 27 end_ARG italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 8 end_ARG start_ARG 27 end_ARG italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG 32 end_ARG start_ARG 243 end_ARG italic_t .
Theorem 1.1
For a nonnegative matrix B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) there exists a polynomial p ∈ ℂ [ t ] 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t] italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] such that
p ( B ) = J 𝑝 𝐵 𝐽 p(B)=J italic_p ( italic_B ) = italic_J
(3)
if and only if B 𝐵 B italic_B is a λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix. Moreover, the unique polynomial of smallest degree satisfying (3 ) is h ( t ) = | X | q ( λ ) q ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 𝑋 𝑞 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 h(t)=\frac{|X|}{q(\lambda)}q(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG start_ARG italic_q ( italic_λ ) end_ARG italic_q ( italic_t ) , where q ( λ ) ≠ 0 𝑞 𝜆 0 q(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 and ( t − λ ) q ( t ) 𝑡 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 (t-\lambda)q(t) ( italic_t - italic_λ ) italic_q ( italic_t ) is the minimal polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B .
We call the polynomial h ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 h(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) from the Theorem 1.1 Hoffman polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B . We use Theorem 1.1 to prove Theorem 1.2 ,
giving an algebraic-combinatorial characterization when the Bose–Mesner algebra of a commutative association scheme is generated by a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrix (for results about when the Bose–Mesner algebra of a commutative association scheme is generated by a (directed) graph, see [21 , 32 , 43 ] ). For a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues { λ , λ 1 , … , λ d } 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 1 … subscript 𝜆 𝑑 \{\lambda,\lambda_{1},\ldots,\lambda_{d}\} { italic_λ , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } the Hoffman polynomial is h ( t ) = | X | π 0 ∏ i = 1 d ( t − λ i ) ℎ 𝑡 𝑋 subscript 𝜋 0 superscript subscript product 𝑖 1 𝑑 𝑡 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 h(t)=\frac{|X|}{\pi_{0}}\prod_{i=1}^{d}(t-\lambda_{i}) italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG start_ARG italic_π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , where π 0 = ∏ i = 1 d ( λ − λ i ) subscript 𝜋 0 superscript subscript product 𝑖 1 𝑑 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 \pi_{0}=\prod_{i=1}^{d}(\lambda-\lambda_{i}) italic_π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_λ - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) . In Section 5 , using the inner product ⟨ p , q ⟩ = 1 | X | trace ( p ( B ) q ( B ) ¯ ⊤ ) 𝑝 𝑞
1 𝑋 trace 𝑝 𝐵 superscript ¯ 𝑞 𝐵 top \langle p,q\rangle=\frac{1}{|X|}\operatorname{trace}(p(B)\overline{q(B)}^{\top}) ⟨ italic_p , italic_q ⟩ = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_p ( italic_B ) over¯ start_ARG italic_q ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) on the ring ℝ d [ t ] subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 {\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] , we define the so-called “predistance polynomials” { p i ( t ) } i = 0 d superscript subscript subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝑡 𝑖 0 𝑑 \{p_{i}(t)\}_{i=0}^{d} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , and we show that ∑ i = 0 d p i ( A ) = J superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝑑 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐴 𝐽 \sum_{i=0}^{d}p_{i}(A)=J ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A ) = italic_J (see Lemma 4.5 ). The term “predistance polynomials” is taken from the theory of distance-regular graphs (see, for example, [15 , 16 , 17 , 20 , 38 ] ). For the moment Problem 1.1 seems to be a hard problem, so we make one restriction on it: we assume that the number of distinct eigenvalues of B 𝐵 B italic_B is D + 1 𝐷 1 D+1 italic_D + 1 , where D 𝐷 D italic_D is the diameter of a graph Γ = Γ ( A ) Γ Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) . The motivation for this restriction (again) arises from the theory of distance-regular graphs (see, for example, [12 , 20 , 22 , 33 , 34 ] ). As a consequence of our restriction, the second main result of this paper is the following theorem:
Theorem 1.2
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a nonnegative irreducible matrix. Let ℬ = { p ( B ) ∣ p ∈ ℂ [ t ] } ℬ conditional-set 𝑝 𝐵 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 {\mathcal{B}}=\{p(B)\mid p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t]\} caligraphic_B = { italic_p ( italic_B ) ∣ italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] } denote the vector space of all polynomials in B 𝐵 B italic_B . Define a 01 01 01 01 -matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A in the following way: ( A ) x y = 1 subscript 𝐴 𝑥 𝑦 1 (A)_{xy}=1 ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 if and only if ( B i ) x y > 0 subscript subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝑥 𝑦 0 (B_{i})_{xy}>0 ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0 . Let Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote a digraph with adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A , diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D , and let A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denote the distance-D 𝐷 D italic_D matrix of Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ . Then, ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B is the Bose–Mesner algebra of a commutative D 𝐷 D italic_D -class association scheme if and only if B 𝐵 B italic_B is a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrix with D + 1 𝐷 1 D+1 italic_D + 1 distinct eigenvalues and A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B .
Our Theorem 1.2 is an analogue of a result from algebraic graph theory, see for example [22 , Proposition 2] or [24 ] , where the authors considered an undirected graph (symmetric adjacency matrix) and proved the following claim: An undirected regular graph Γ = Γ ( A ) Γ Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) with diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D and d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues is a distance-regular if and only if D = d 𝐷 𝑑 D=d italic_D = italic_d and the distance-D 𝐷 D italic_D matrix A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in A 𝐴 A italic_A .
B = {blockarray} c c c c c c c & a b c d e f {block} c ( c c c c c c ) a 1 2 1 4 1 4 000 b 0 1 2 0 1 4 1 4 0 c 00 1 2 1 4 1 4 0 d 1 4 00 1 2 0 1 4 e 1 4 000 1 2 1 4 f 0 1 4 1 4 00 1 2 𝐵 {blockarray} 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 & 𝑎 𝑏 𝑐 𝑑 𝑒 𝑓 {block} 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑎 1 2 1 4 1 4 000 𝑏 0 1 2 0 1 4 1 4 0 𝑐 00 1 2 1 4 1 4 0 𝑑 1 4 00 1 2 0 1 4 𝑒 1 4 000 1 2 1 4 𝑓 0 1 4 1 4 00 1 2 B=\blockarray{ccccccc}~{}&abcdef\\
\block{c(cccccc)}a\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{4}000\\
b0\frac{1}{2}0\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{4}0\\
c00\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{4}0\\
d\frac{1}{4}00\frac{1}{2}0\frac{1}{4}\\
e\frac{1}{4}000\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{4}\\
f0\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{4}00\frac{1}{2}\\
italic_B = italic_c italic_c italic_c italic_c italic_c italic_c italic_c & italic_a italic_b italic_c italic_d italic_e italic_f italic_c ( italic_c italic_c italic_c italic_c italic_c italic_c ) italic_a divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 000 italic_b 0 divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG 0 divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 0 italic_c 00 divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 0 italic_d divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 00 divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG 0 divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG italic_e divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 000 divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG italic_f 0 divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 00 divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG a 𝑎 a italic_a f 𝑓 f italic_f b 𝑏 b italic_b e 𝑒 e italic_e d 𝑑 d italic_d c 𝑐 c italic_c 1 2 1 2 \frac{1}{2} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG 1 2 1 2 \frac{1}{2} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG 1 2 1 2 \frac{1}{2} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG 1 2 1 2 \frac{1}{2} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG 1 2 1 2 \frac{1}{2} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG 1 2 1 2 \frac{1}{2} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG 1 4 1 4 \frac{1}{4} divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG
Figure 2: A normal doubly stochastic matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B and its underlying weighted digraph. The Hoffman polynimal of B 𝐵 B italic_B is h ( t ) = 16 t 3 − 16 t 2 + 8 t − 2 ℎ 𝑡 16 superscript 𝑡 3 16 superscript 𝑡 2 8 𝑡 2 h(t)=16t^{3}-16t^{2}+8t-2 italic_h ( italic_t ) = 16 italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 16 italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 8 italic_t - 2 , and the predistance polynomials are p 0 ( t ) = 1 subscript 𝑝 0 𝑡 1 p_{0}(t)=1 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = 1 , p 1 ( t ) = 4 t − 2 subscript 𝑝 1 𝑡 4 𝑡 2 p_{1}(t)=4t-2 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = 4 italic_t - 2 , p 2 ( t ) = 8 t 2 − 8 t + 2 subscript 𝑝 2 𝑡 8 superscript 𝑡 2 8 𝑡 2 p_{2}(t)=8t^{2}-8t+2 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = 8 italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 8 italic_t + 2 and p 3 ( t ) = 16 t 3 − 24 t 2 + 12 t − 3 subscript 𝑝 3 𝑡 16 superscript 𝑡 3 24 superscript 𝑡 2 12 𝑡 3 p_{3}(t)=16t^{3}-24t^{2}+12t-3 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = 16 italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 24 italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 12 italic_t - 3 . By Lemma 4.5 , ∑ i = 0 3 p i ( B ) = J superscript subscript 𝑖 0 3 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 𝐽 \sum_{i=0}^{3}p_{i}(B)=J ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_J . Moreover, B 𝐵 B italic_B generates a 3 3 3 3 -class association scheme.
Our paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 , we recall basic concepts from algebraic graph theory (experts from the field can skip this section). Our paper then starts from Section 3 , where we prove Theorem 1.1 . In Section 4 we define predistance-polynomials, the polynomials that we use later in the paper. In Section 5 , we prove Theorem 1.2 .
2 Preliminaries
A digraph with vertex set X 𝑋 X italic_X and arc set ℰ ℰ {\cal E} caligraphic_E is a pair Γ = ( X , ℰ ) Γ 𝑋 ℰ \Gamma=(X,{\cal E}) roman_Γ = ( italic_X , caligraphic_E ) which consists of a finite set X = X ( Γ ) 𝑋 𝑋 Γ X=X(\Gamma) italic_X = italic_X ( roman_Γ ) of vertices and a set ℰ = ℰ ( Γ ) ℰ ℰ Γ {\cal E}={\cal E}(\Gamma) caligraphic_E = caligraphic_E ( roman_Γ ) of arcs (directed edges ) between vertices of Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ . As the initial and final vertices of an arc are not necessarily different, digraphs may have loops (arcs from a vertex to itself) and multiple arcs, that is, there can be more than one arc from each vertex to any other. If e = ( x , y ) ∈ ℰ 𝑒 𝑥 𝑦 ℰ e=(x,y)\in{\cal E} italic_e = ( italic_x , italic_y ) ∈ caligraphic_E is an arc from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y , then the vertex x 𝑥 x italic_x (and the arc e 𝑒 e italic_e ) is adjacent to the vertex y 𝑦 y italic_y , and the vertex y 𝑦 y italic_y (and the arc e 𝑒 e italic_e ) is adjacent from x 𝑥 x italic_x . The converse directed graph Γ ¯ ¯ Γ \overline{\Gamma} over¯ start_ARG roman_Γ end_ARG is obtained from Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ by reversing the direction of each arc.
For a vertex x 𝑥 x italic_x , let Γ 1 ← ( x ) superscript subscript Γ 1 ← 𝑥 \Gamma_{1}^{\leftarrow}(x) roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) (resp. Γ 1 → ( x ) superscript subscript Γ 1 → 𝑥 \Gamma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(x) roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) ) denote the set of vertices adjacent to (resp. from) the vertex x 𝑥 x italic_x . In other words,
Γ 1 → ( x ) = { z ∣ ( x , z ) ∈ ℰ ( Γ ) } and Γ 1 ← ( x ) = { z ∣ ( z , x ) ∈ ℰ ( Γ ) } . formulae-sequence superscript subscript Γ 1 → 𝑥 conditional-set 𝑧 𝑥 𝑧 ℰ Γ and
superscript subscript Γ 1 ← 𝑥 conditional-set 𝑧 𝑧 𝑥 ℰ Γ \Gamma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(x)=\{z\mid(x,z)\in{\cal E}(\Gamma)\}\qquad\mbox{ and %
}\qquad\Gamma_{1}^{\leftarrow}(x)=\{z\mid(z,x)\in{\cal E}(\Gamma)\}. roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = { italic_z ∣ ( italic_x , italic_z ) ∈ caligraphic_E ( roman_Γ ) } and roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = { italic_z ∣ ( italic_z , italic_x ) ∈ caligraphic_E ( roman_Γ ) } .
Two small comments about the above notation: (i) drawing a directed edge from x 𝑥 x italic_x to z 𝑧 z italic_z , we have x → z → 𝑥 𝑧 x\rightarrow z italic_x → italic_z , which yields the idea of using the notation Γ 1 → ( x ) superscript subscript Γ 1 → 𝑥 \Gamma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(x) roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) ; (ii) drawing a directed edge from z 𝑧 z italic_z to x 𝑥 x italic_x , we have x ← z ← 𝑥 𝑧 x\leftarrow z italic_x ← italic_z (or z → x → 𝑧 𝑥 z\rightarrow x italic_z → italic_x ), which yields the idea of using the notation Γ 1 ← ( x ) superscript subscript Γ 1 ← 𝑥 \Gamma_{1}^{\leftarrow}(x) roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) . The elements of Γ 1 → ( x ) superscript subscript Γ 1 → 𝑥 \Gamma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(x) roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) are called neighbors of x 𝑥 x italic_x . Instead of a set of vertices, we can consider a set of arcs: for a vertex y 𝑦 y italic_y , let δ 1 ← ( y ) superscript subscript 𝛿 1 ← 𝑦 \delta_{1}^{\leftarrow}(y) italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) (resp. δ 1 → ( y ) superscript subscript 𝛿 1 → 𝑦 \delta_{1}^{\rightarrow}(y) italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) ) denote the set of arcs adjacent to (resp. from) the vertex y 𝑦 y italic_y . The number | δ 1 → ( y ) | superscript subscript 𝛿 1 → 𝑦 |\delta_{1}^{\rightarrow}(y)| | italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) | is called the out-degree of y 𝑦 y italic_y and is equal to the number of edges leaving y 𝑦 y italic_y . The number | δ 1 ← ( y ) | superscript subscript 𝛿 1 ← 𝑦 |\delta_{1}^{\leftarrow}(y)| | italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) | is called the in-degree of y 𝑦 y italic_y and is equal to the number of edges going to y 𝑦 y italic_y . A digraph Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is k 𝑘 k italic_k -regular (of valency k 𝑘 k italic_k ) if | δ 1 → ( y ) | = | δ 1 ← ( y ) | = k subscript superscript 𝛿 → 1 𝑦 superscript subscript 𝛿 1 ← 𝑦 𝑘 |\delta^{\rightarrow}_{1}(y)|=|\delta_{1}^{\leftarrow}(y)|=k | italic_δ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) | = | italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) | = italic_k for all y ∈ X 𝑦 𝑋 y\in X italic_y ∈ italic_X . We call Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ simple if Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ contains neither loops nor multiple edges.
Let Γ = ( X , ℰ ) Γ 𝑋 ℰ \Gamma=(X,{\cal E}) roman_Γ = ( italic_X , caligraphic_E ) denote a digraph. For any two vertices x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X , a directed walk of length h ℎ h italic_h from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y is a sequence [ x 0 , x 1 , x 2 , … , x h ] subscript 𝑥 0 subscript 𝑥 1 subscript 𝑥 2 … subscript 𝑥 ℎ
[x_{0},x_{1},x_{2},\ldots,x_{h}] [ italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ( x i ∈ X , 0 ≤ i ≤ h ) formulae-sequence subscript 𝑥 𝑖 𝑋 0 𝑖 ℎ (x_{i}\in X,\,0\leq i\leq h) ( italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ italic_X , 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_h ) such that x 0 = x subscript 𝑥 0 𝑥 x_{0}=x italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_x , x h = y subscript 𝑥 ℎ 𝑦 x_{h}=y italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_y , and x i subscript 𝑥 𝑖 x_{i} italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is adjacent to x i + 1 subscript 𝑥 𝑖 1 x_{i+1} italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (i.e. x i + 1 ∈ Γ 1 → ( x i ) subscript 𝑥 𝑖 1 subscript superscript Γ → 1 subscript 𝑥 𝑖 x_{i+1}\in\Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{1}(x_{i}) italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) for 0 ≤ i ≤ h − 1 0 𝑖 ℎ 1 0\leq i\leq h-1 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_h - 1 . We say that Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is strongly connected if for any x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X there is a directed walk from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y . A closed directed walk is a directed walk from a vertex to itself. A directed path is a directed walk such that all vertices of the directed walk are distinct. A cycle is a closed directed path. The girth of Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is the length of a shortest cycle in Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ .
For any x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X , the distance from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y (or between x 𝑥 x italic_x and y 𝑦 y italic_y ), denoted by ∂ ( x , y ) 𝑥 𝑦 \partial(x,y) ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) , is the length of a shortest directed path from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y . The diameter D = D ( Γ ) 𝐷 𝐷 Γ D=D(\Gamma) italic_D = italic_D ( roman_Γ ) of a strongly connected digraph Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is defined to be
D = max { ∂ ( y , z ) | y , z ∈ X } . 𝐷 conditional 𝑦 𝑧 𝑦 𝑧
𝑋 D=\max\{\partial(y,z)\,|\,y,z\in X\}. italic_D = roman_max { ∂ ( italic_y , italic_z ) | italic_y , italic_z ∈ italic_X } .
For a vertex x ∈ X 𝑥 𝑋 x\in X italic_x ∈ italic_X and any nonnegative integer i 𝑖 i italic_i not exceeding D 𝐷 D italic_D , let Γ i → ( x ) subscript superscript Γ → 𝑖 𝑥 \Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{i}(x) roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) (or Γ i ( x ) subscript Γ 𝑖 𝑥 \Gamma_{i}(x) roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) ) denote the subset of vertices in X 𝑋 X italic_X that are at distance i 𝑖 i italic_i from x 𝑥 x italic_x , i.e.,
Γ i → ( x ) = { z ∈ X ∣ ∂ ( x , z ) = i } . subscript superscript Γ → 𝑖 𝑥 conditional-set 𝑧 𝑋 𝑥 𝑧 𝑖 \Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{i}(x)=\{z\in X\mid\partial(x,z)=i\}. roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = { italic_z ∈ italic_X ∣ ∂ ( italic_x , italic_z ) = italic_i } .
We also define the set Γ i ← ( x ) subscript superscript Γ ← 𝑖 𝑥 \Gamma^{\leftarrow}_{i}(x) roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) as Γ i ← ( x ) = { z ∈ X ∣ ∂ ( z , x ) = i } subscript superscript Γ ← 𝑖 𝑥 conditional-set 𝑧 𝑋 𝑧 𝑥 𝑖 \Gamma^{\leftarrow}_{i}(x)=\{z\in X\mid\partial(z,x)=i\} roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = { italic_z ∈ italic_X ∣ ∂ ( italic_z , italic_x ) = italic_i } . Let Γ − 1 ( x ) = Γ D + 1 ( x ) := ∅ subscript Γ 1 𝑥 subscript Γ 𝐷 1 𝑥 assign \Gamma_{-1}(x)=\Gamma_{D+1}(x):=\emptyset roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) := ∅ . The eccentricity of x 𝑥 x italic_x , denoted by ε = ε ( x ) 𝜀 𝜀 𝑥 \varepsilon=\varepsilon(x) italic_ε = italic_ε ( italic_x ) , is the maximum distance between x 𝑥 x italic_x and any other vertex of Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ . Note that the diameter of Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ equals max { ε ( x ) ∣ x ∈ X } conditional 𝜀 𝑥 𝑥 𝑋 \max\{\varepsilon(x)\mid x\in X\} roman_max { italic_ε ( italic_x ) ∣ italic_x ∈ italic_X } .
All undirected graphs in this paper can be understood as digraphs in which an undirected edge between two vertices x 𝑥 x italic_x and y 𝑦 y italic_y represents two arcs, an arc from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y , and an arc from y 𝑦 y italic_y to x 𝑥 x italic_x . In diagrams, instead of drawing two arcs, we draw one undirected edge between vertices x 𝑥 x italic_x and y 𝑦 y italic_y . For a basic introduction to the theory of undirected graphs we refer to [25 , Section 2] . With the word graph we refer to a finite simple digraph.
2.1 Doubly stochastic matrix
Let X 𝑋 X italic_X denote a nonempty finite set and let ℝ ℝ {\mathbb{R}} blackboard_R (resp. ℂ ℂ {\mathbb{C}} blackboard_C ) denote the real number field (resp. the complex number field). Let Mat X ( ℝ ) subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ \mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) (resp. Mat X ( ℂ ) subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ \mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) ) denote the ℝ ℝ {\mathbb{R}} blackboard_R -algebra (resp. the ℂ ℂ {\mathbb{C}} blackboard_C -algebra) consisting of all matrices whose rows and columns are indexed by X 𝑋 X italic_X and whose entries are in ℝ ℝ {\mathbb{R}} blackboard_R (resp. ℂ ℂ {\mathbb{C}} blackboard_C ).
A square matrix B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) is said to be a λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic if B ≥ 𝐎 𝐵 𝐎 B\geq\operatorname{\boldsymbol{O}} italic_B ≥ bold_O and B 𝐣 = B ⊤ 𝐣 = λ 𝐣 𝐵 𝐣 superscript 𝐵 top 𝐣 𝜆 𝐣 B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=B^{\top}\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=\lambda%
\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_B bold_j = italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT bold_j = italic_λ bold_j , where 𝐎 𝐎 \operatorname{\boldsymbol{O}} bold_O is the zero square matrix of order | X | 𝑋 |X| | italic_X | , B ≥ 𝐎 𝐵 𝐎 B\geq\operatorname{\boldsymbol{O}} italic_B ≥ bold_O is a shortcut for ( B ) x y ≥ 0 subscript 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 0 (B)_{xy}\geq 0 ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≥ 0 (for all x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X ), 𝐣 𝐣 \operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} bold_j is the | X | 𝑋 |X| | italic_X | -dimensional column-vector with 1 1 1 1 in all entries, and B ⊤ superscript 𝐵 top B^{\top} italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the transpose of B 𝐵 B italic_B . If λ = 1 𝜆 1 \lambda=1 italic_λ = 1 , the matrix is called doubly stochastic . A permutation matrix P 𝑃 P italic_P is a square matrix with exactly one 1 1 1 1 in each row and column, and the rest of the entries being zero.
2.2 Elementary algebraic graph theory
In this section, we recall some definitions and basic concepts from algebraic graph theory.
The adjacency matrix A ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝐴 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ A\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_A ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) of a digraph Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ (with vertex set X 𝑋 X italic_X ) is indexed by the vertices from X 𝑋 X italic_X , and defined in the following way
( A ) y z = the number of arcs from y to z ( y , z ∈ X ) ( A ) y z = the number of arcs from y to z 𝑦 𝑧
𝑋
\mbox{$(A)_{yz}=$ the number of arcs from $y$ to $z$}\qquad(y,z\in X) ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = the number of arcs from italic_y to italic_z ( italic_y , italic_z ∈ italic_X )
(4)
(note that ( A ) y z ∈ ℤ 0 + subscript 𝐴 𝑦 𝑧 subscript superscript ℤ 0 (A)_{yz}\in{\mathbb{Z}}^{+}_{0} ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). The distance-i 𝑖 i italic_i matrix A i subscript 𝐴 𝑖 A_{i} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 2 ≤ i ≤ D ) 2 𝑖 𝐷 (2\leq i\leq D) ( 2 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_D ) of a digraph Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ with diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D and vertex set X 𝑋 X italic_X is defined by
( A i ) z y = { 1 if ∂ ( z , y ) = i , 0 otherwise. ( z , y ∈ X , 2 ≤ i ≤ D ) . (A_{i})_{zy}=\left\{\begin{matrix}1&\mbox{ if $\partial(z,y)=i$},\\
0&\mbox{ otherwise.~{}~{}~{}~{}}\end{matrix}\right.\qquad(z,y\in X,~{}2\leq i%
\leq D). ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL 1 end_CELL start_CELL if ∂ ( italic_z , italic_y ) = italic_i , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL otherwise. end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ( italic_z , italic_y ∈ italic_X , 2 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_D ) .
We also define A 0 = I subscript 𝐴 0 𝐼 A_{0}=I italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_I and A 1 = A subscript 𝐴 1 𝐴 A_{1}=A italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_A . A matrix B ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) is said to be reducible when there exists a permutation matrix P 𝑃 P italic_P such that P ⊤ B P = ( X Y 𝐎 Z ) superscript 𝑃 top 𝐵 𝑃 matrix 𝑋 𝑌 𝐎 𝑍 P^{\top}BP=\left(\begin{matrix}X&Y\\
\operatorname{\boldsymbol{O}}&Z\end{matrix}\right) italic_P start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_B italic_P = ( start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_X end_CELL start_CELL italic_Y end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL bold_O end_CELL start_CELL italic_Z end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) , where X 𝑋 X italic_X and Z 𝑍 Z italic_Z are both square, and 𝐎 𝐎 \operatorname{\boldsymbol{O}} bold_O is a zero matrix of suitable size. Otherwise, B 𝐵 B italic_B is said to be irreducible .
Theorem 2.1 (Perron–Frobenius Theorem)
Let B 𝐵 B italic_B denote an irreducible nonnegative matrix, and let eig ( B ) normal-eig 𝐵 \operatorname{eig}(B) roman_eig ( italic_B ) denote the set of
distinct eigenvalues of B 𝐵 B italic_B . If θ = max λ ∈ eig ( B ) | λ | 𝜃 subscript 𝜆 normal-eig 𝐵 𝜆 \theta=\max\limits_{\lambda\in\operatorname{eig}(B)}|\lambda| italic_θ = roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_λ ∈ roman_eig ( italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_λ | , then the following hold.
(i)
θ ∈ eig ( B ) 𝜃 eig 𝐵 \theta\in\operatorname{eig}(B) italic_θ ∈ roman_eig ( italic_B ) and θ > 0 𝜃 0 \theta>0 italic_θ > 0 .
(ii)
The algebraic multiplicity of θ 𝜃 \theta italic_θ is equal to 1 1 1 1 .
(iii)
There exists an eigenvector 𝝂 𝝂 {\boldsymbol{\nu}} bold_italic_ν with all positive entries, such that B 𝝂 = θ 𝝂 𝐵 𝝂 𝜃 𝝂 B{\boldsymbol{\nu}}=\theta{\boldsymbol{\nu}} italic_B bold_italic_ν = italic_θ bold_italic_ν .
Sometimes it is useful to normalize a vector 𝛎 𝛎 {\boldsymbol{\nu}} bold_italic_ν from (iii) in such a way that the smallest entry is equal to 1 1 1 1 . Such a vector 𝛎 𝛎 {\boldsymbol{\nu}} bold_italic_ν is called a Perron–Frobenius eigenvector.
Proof.
See, for example, [31 , Section 8.3] .
Lemma 2.2 (see, for example, [31 , Section 8.3] )
A digraph Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ with adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A is strongly connected if and only if A 𝐴 A italic_A is an irreducible matrix.
Corollary 2.3
Let Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote a simple strongly connected digraph, and let eig ( Γ ) normal-eig normal-Γ \operatorname{eig}(\Gamma) roman_eig ( roman_Γ ) denote the set of distinct eigenvalues of Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ . If θ = max λ ∈ spec ( Γ ) | λ | 𝜃 subscript 𝜆 normal-spec normal-Γ 𝜆 \theta=\max_{\lambda\in\operatorname{spec}(\Gamma)}|\lambda| italic_θ = roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_λ ∈ roman_spec ( roman_Γ ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_λ | , then the following hold.
(i)
θ ∈ eig ( Γ ) 𝜃 eig Γ \theta\in\operatorname{eig}(\Gamma) italic_θ ∈ roman_eig ( roman_Γ ) and θ > 0 𝜃 0 \theta>0 italic_θ > 0 .
(ii)
The algebraic multiplicity of θ 𝜃 \theta italic_θ is equal to 1 1 1 1 .
(iii)
There exists an eigenvector 𝝂 𝝂 {\boldsymbol{\nu}} bold_italic_ν with all positive entries, such that A 𝝂 = θ 𝝂 𝐴 𝝂 𝜃 𝝂 A{\boldsymbol{\nu}}=\theta{\boldsymbol{\nu}} italic_A bold_italic_ν = italic_θ bold_italic_ν .
Proof.
Routine using Lemma 2.2 . (See, for example, [31 , Section 8.3] .)
A matrix A ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝐴 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ A\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_A ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) is called normal if it commutes with its adjoint, i.e. if A A ¯ ⊤ = A ¯ ⊤ A 𝐴 superscript ¯ 𝐴 top superscript ¯ 𝐴 top 𝐴 A\overline{A}^{\top}=\overline{A}^{\top}A italic_A over¯ start_ARG italic_A end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = over¯ start_ARG italic_A end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_A .
Theorem 2.4 (see, for example, [2 , Chapter 7] )
Let A ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝐴 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ A\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_A ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) denote a matrix over ℂ ℂ {\mathbb{C}} blackboard_C , with rows and columns indexed by X 𝑋 X italic_X . Then, the following are equivalent.
(i)
(ii)
ℂ | X | superscript ℂ 𝑋 {\mathbb{C}}^{|X|} blackboard_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT has an orthonormal basis consisting of eigenvectors of A 𝐴 A italic_A .
(iii)
A 𝐴 A italic_A is a diagonalizable matrix.
(iv)
The algebraic multiplicity of λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ is equal to the geometric multiplicity of λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ , for every eigenvalue λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ of A 𝐴 A italic_A .
Two matrices A , B ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝐴 𝐵
subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ A,B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_A , italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) are said to be simultaneously diagonalizable if there is a nonsingular S ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝑆 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ S\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_S ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) such that S − 1 A S superscript 𝑆 1 𝐴 𝑆 S^{-1}AS italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_A italic_S and S − 1 B S superscript 𝑆 1 𝐵 𝑆 S^{-1}BS italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_B italic_S are both diagonal.
Lemma 2.5 ([28 , Theorem 1.3.12] )
Two diagonalizable matrices are simultaneously diagonalizable if and only if they commute.
Theorem 2.6
Let ℳ ℳ {\mathcal{M}} caligraphic_M denote a space of commutative normal matrices. Then, there exists a unitary matrix U ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝑈 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ U\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_U ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) which diagonalizes ℳ ℳ {\mathcal{M}} caligraphic_M .
Proof.
Immediate from Theorem 2.4 , Lemma 2.5 and [28 , Subsection 1.3] .
2.3 Underlying digraph of a nonnegative matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B
The underlying digraph of a nonnegative matrix B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) is defined as a pair Γ = ( X , E ) Γ 𝑋 𝐸 \Gamma=(X,E) roman_Γ = ( italic_X , italic_E ) , in which X 𝑋 X italic_X denotes the set of vertices (nodes), and E 𝐸 E italic_E stands for the set of arcs such that ( x , y ) ∈ E 𝑥 𝑦 𝐸 (x,y)\in E ( italic_x , italic_y ) ∈ italic_E if and only if ( B ) x y > 0 subscript 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 0 (B)_{xy}>0 ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0 . With other words, the adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A of an underlying digraph of a nonnegative matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B is defined in the following way:
( A ) x y = { 1 if B x y > 0 , 0 otherwise. ( x , y ∈ X ) . subscript 𝐴 𝑥 𝑦 cases 1 if B x y > 0 0 otherwise. 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋
(A)_{xy}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}1&\mbox{ if $B_{xy}>0$},\\
0&\mbox{ otherwise.}\end{array}\right.\qquad(x,y\in X). ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 1 end_CELL start_CELL if italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL otherwise. end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ( italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X ) .
Lemma 2.7
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a nonnegative matrix, and let A 𝐴 A italic_A denote the adjacency matrix of the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B . Then B 𝐵 B italic_B is irreducible if and only if A 𝐴 A italic_A is irreducible.
2.4 Underlying weighted digraph of a nonnegative matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B
A weighted digraph is a digraph whose arcs are assigned values, known as weights . An underlying weighted digraph of a nonnegative matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B is defined as a triplet Δ = ( X , E , ω ) Δ 𝑋 𝐸 𝜔 \Delta=(X,E,\omega) roman_Δ = ( italic_X , italic_E , italic_ω ) for which the following (i)–(iii) holds.
(i)
X 𝑋 X italic_X denotes the set of vertices.
(ii)
E 𝐸 E italic_E stands for the set of arcs such that ( x , y ) ∈ E 𝑥 𝑦 𝐸 (x,y)\in E ( italic_x , italic_y ) ∈ italic_E if and only if B x , y > 0 subscript 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦
0 B_{x,y}>0 italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0 .
(iii)
ω : E → ℝ 0 + : 𝜔 → 𝐸 subscript superscript ℝ 0 \omega:E\rightarrow{\mathbb{R}}^{+}_{0} italic_ω : italic_E → blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT stands for a function that weights each arc of the graph, which is defined in the following way: ω ( x , y ) = ( B ) x y 𝜔 𝑥 𝑦 subscript 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \omega(x,y)=(B)_{xy} italic_ω ( italic_x , italic_y ) = ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( ( x , y ) ∈ E ) 𝑥 𝑦 𝐸 ((x,y)\in E) ( ( italic_x , italic_y ) ∈ italic_E ) .
Note that Δ Δ \Delta roman_Δ is the underlying digraph of a nonnegative matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B such that each arc ( x , y ) 𝑥 𝑦 (x,y) ( italic_x , italic_y ) of Δ Δ \Delta roman_Δ has weight ( B ) x y subscript 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 (B)_{xy} ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
2.5 Number of walks in Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ and B ℓ superscript 𝐵 ℓ B^{\ell} italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
Lemma 2.8 is well known for undirected graphs. We give a corresponding claim for directed graphs, in particular, for our definition of the adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A of a digraph Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ as given in (4 ).
Lemma 2.8
Let Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote a strongly connected digraph with vertex set X 𝑋 X italic_X , diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D , and adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A . The number of walks of length ℓ ∈ ℕ normal-ℓ ℕ \ell\in{\mathbb{N}} roman_ℓ ∈ blackboard_N in Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y is equal to ( x , y ) 𝑥 𝑦 (x,y) ( italic_x , italic_y ) -entry of the matrix A ℓ superscript 𝐴 normal-ℓ A^{\ell} italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .
Proof.
Pick x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X . We prove the claim by mathematical induction on h = ∂ ( x , y ) ℎ 𝑥 𝑦 h=\partial(x,y) italic_h = ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) (the distance from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y ).
Base of induction. For ℓ = 1 ℓ 1 \ell=1 roman_ℓ = 1 the claim is trivial.
Induction step. Assume that, if ∂ ( x , y ) = h ∈ { 1 , … , m − 1 } 𝑥 𝑦 ℎ 1 … 𝑚 1 \partial(x,y)=h\in\{1,\ldots,m-1\} ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) = italic_h ∈ { 1 , … , italic_m - 1 } ( m ≥ 2 ) 𝑚 2 (m\geq 2) ( italic_m ≥ 2 ) , then the number of walks of length h ℎ h italic_h is equal to ( x , y ) 𝑥 𝑦 (x,y) ( italic_x , italic_y ) -entry of the matrix A h superscript 𝐴 ℎ A^{h} italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . We prove that the claim is true for m 𝑚 m italic_m .
( A m ) x y subscript superscript 𝐴 𝑚 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle(A^{m})_{xy} ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( A m − 1 A ) x y absent subscript superscript 𝐴 𝑚 1 𝐴 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=(A^{m-1}A)_{xy} = ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ X ( A m − 1 ) x z ⋅ ( A ) z y . absent subscript 𝑧 𝑋 ⋅ subscript superscript 𝐴 𝑚 1 𝑥 𝑧 subscript 𝐴 𝑧 𝑦 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in X}(A^{m-1})_{xz}\cdot(A)_{zy}. = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
(5)
By the induction assumption, ( A m − 1 ) x z subscript superscript 𝐴 𝑚 1 𝑥 𝑧 (A^{m-1})_{xz} ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the number of walks of length m − 1 𝑚 1 m-1 italic_m - 1 from x 𝑥 x italic_x to z 𝑧 z italic_z . The entry ( A ) z y subscript 𝐴 𝑧 𝑦 (A)_{zy} ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is nonzero (i.e., equal to the number of walks of length 1 1 1 1 from z 𝑧 z italic_z to y 𝑦 y italic_y ) if and only if in Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ there is at least one arc from z 𝑧 z italic_z to y 𝑦 y italic_y . So, in (5 ), we start from the sum S = 0 𝑆 0 S=0 italic_S = 0 , and for every z ∈ X 𝑧 𝑋 z\in X italic_z ∈ italic_X if there is at least one arc ( z , y ) 𝑧 𝑦 (z,y) ( italic_z , italic_y ) we add the number ( A m − 1 ) x z ⋅ ( A ) z y ⋅ subscript superscript 𝐴 𝑚 1 𝑥 𝑧 subscript 𝐴 𝑧 𝑦 (A^{m-1})_{xz}\cdot(A)_{zy} ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to S 𝑆 S italic_S . Thus, the sum (5 ) represents the number of walks of length m 𝑚 m italic_m from x 𝑥 x italic_x to y 𝑦 y italic_y , and the result follows.
Lemma 2.9
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a nonnegative matrix and Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B with adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A . Then, for any ℓ ∈ ℕ normal-ℓ ℕ \ell\in{\mathbb{N}} roman_ℓ ∈ blackboard_N ,
( B ℓ ) z y ≠ 0 if and only if ( A ℓ ) z y ≠ 0 ( y , z ∈ X ) . formulae-sequence subscript superscript 𝐵 ℓ 𝑧 𝑦 0 if and only if
subscript superscript 𝐴 ℓ 𝑧 𝑦 0 𝑦 𝑧
𝑋
(B^{\ell})_{zy}\neq 0\qquad\mbox{ if and only if }\qquad(A^{\ell})_{zy}\neq 0%
\qquad(y,z\in X). ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 if and only if ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 ( italic_y , italic_z ∈ italic_X ) .
Proof.
Immediate from the definition of the underlying digraph and the underlying weighted digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B .
2.6 A vector space of all polynomials in a normal nonnegative matrix
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal nonnegative matrix. By Theorem 2.4 , B 𝐵 B italic_B has | X | 𝑋 |X| | italic_X | linearly independent eigenvectors 𝒰 = { u 1 , u 2 , … , u | X | } 𝒰 subscript 𝑢 1 subscript 𝑢 2 … subscript 𝑢 𝑋 {\cal U}=\{u_{1},u_{2},...,u_{|X|}\} caligraphic_U = { italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } which form an orthonormal basis for ℂ | X | superscript ℂ 𝑋 \mathbb{C}^{|X|} blackboard_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . Let V i subscript 𝑉 𝑖 V_{i} italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denote the eigenspace V i = ker ( B − λ i I ) subscript 𝑉 𝑖 kernel 𝐵 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 𝐼 V_{i}=\ker(B-\lambda_{i}I) italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_ker ( italic_B - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I ) and dim ( V i ) = m i , dimension subscript 𝑉 𝑖 subscript 𝑚 𝑖 \dim(V_{i})=m_{i}, roman_dim ( italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , for 0 ≤ i ≤ d 0 𝑖 𝑑 0\leq i\leq d 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d . For every vector u i ∈ 𝒰 subscript 𝑢 𝑖 𝒰 u_{i}\in{{\cal U}} italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ caligraphic_U there exists exactly one eigenspace V j subscript 𝑉 𝑗 V_{j} italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that u i ∈ V j subscript 𝑢 𝑖 subscript 𝑉 𝑗 u_{i}\in V_{j} italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , and since V i ∩ V j = { 𝟎 } subscript 𝑉 𝑖 subscript 𝑉 𝑗 0 V_{i}\cap V_{j}=\{{\boldsymbol{0}}\} italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∩ italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { bold_0 } for i ≠ j 𝑖 𝑗 i\not=j italic_i ≠ italic_j , we can partition the set 𝒰 𝒰 {\cal U} caligraphic_U into sets 𝒰 0 , subscript 𝒰 0 {\cal U}_{0}, caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , 𝒰 1 , subscript 𝒰 1 {\cal U}_{1}, caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , …, 𝒰 d subscript 𝒰 𝑑 {\cal U}_{d} caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that
𝒰 i is a basis for V i , 𝒰 = 𝒰 0 ∪ 𝒰 1 ∪ … ∪ 𝒰 d and 𝒰 i ∩ 𝒰 j = ∅ . formulae-sequence subscript 𝒰 𝑖 is a basis for subscript 𝑉 𝑖 𝒰
subscript 𝒰 0 subscript 𝒰 1 … subscript 𝒰 𝑑 and subscript 𝒰 𝑖 subscript 𝒰 𝑗
{\cal U}_{i}\mbox{ is a basis for }V_{i},\qquad{\cal U}={\cal U}_{0}\cup{\cal U%
}_{1}\cup\ldots\cup{\cal U}_{d}\qquad\mbox{ and }\qquad{\cal U}_{i}\cap{\cal U%
}_{j}=\emptyset. caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a basis for italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , caligraphic_U = caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∪ caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∪ … ∪ caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∩ caligraphic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∅ .
Note that
ℂ | X | = V 0 ⊕ V 1 ⊕ ⋯ ⊕ V d ( orthogonal direct sum ) superscript ℂ 𝑋 direct-sum subscript 𝑉 0 subscript 𝑉 1 ⋯ subscript 𝑉 𝑑 orthogonal direct sum
{\mathbb{C}}^{|X|}=V_{0}\oplus V_{1}\oplus\cdots\oplus V_{d}\quad(\mbox{%
orthogonal direct sum}) blackboard_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊕ italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊕ ⋯ ⊕ italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( orthogonal direct sum )
and
m 0 + m 1 + ⋯ + m d = | X | . subscript 𝑚 0 subscript 𝑚 1 ⋯ subscript 𝑚 𝑑 𝑋 m_{0}+m_{1}+\cdots+m_{d}=|X|. italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = | italic_X | .
(6)
Definition 2.10
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal nonnegative matrix. For each eigenvalue λ i subscript 𝜆 𝑖 \lambda_{i} italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) of B 𝐵 B italic_B , let U i subscript 𝑈 𝑖 U_{i} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denote the matrix whose columns form an orthonormal basis of its eigenspace V i = ker ( B − λ i I ) ⊆ ℂ | X | subscript 𝑉 𝑖 kernel 𝐵 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 𝐼 superscript ℂ 𝑋 V_{i}=\ker(B-\lambda_{i}I)\subseteq{\mathbb{C}}^{|X|} italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_ker ( italic_B - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I ) ⊆ blackboard_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . The primitive idempotents of B 𝐵 B italic_B are matrices E i subscript 𝐸 𝑖 E_{i} italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT defined in the following way:
E i := U i U i ¯ ⊤ ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) . assign subscript 𝐸 𝑖 subscript 𝑈 𝑖 superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 𝑖 top 0 𝑖 𝑑
E_{i}:=U_{i}\overline{U_{i}}^{\top}\qquad(0\leq i\leq d). italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) .
Proposition 2.11
With reference to Definition 2.10 , let ℬ = { p ( B ) ∣ p ∈ ℂ [ x ] } ℬ conditional-set 𝑝 𝐵 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑥 {\mathcal{B}}=\{p(B)\mid p\in{\mathbb{C}}[x]\} caligraphic_B = { italic_p ( italic_B ) ∣ italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_x ] } denote the vector space over ℂ ℂ {\mathbb{C}} blackboard_C of all polynomials in B 𝐵 B italic_B . Then, the following hold.
(i)
Any power of B 𝐵 B italic_B can be expressed as a linear combination of the idempotents E i subscript 𝐸 𝑖 E_{i} italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) , i.e.,
B h = ∑ i = 0 d λ i h E i ( h ∈ ℕ ) . superscript 𝐵 ℎ superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝑑 superscript subscript 𝜆 𝑖 ℎ subscript 𝐸 𝑖 ℎ ℕ
B^{h}=\sum_{i=0}^{d}\lambda_{i}^{h}E_{i}\qquad(h\in{\mathbb{N}}). italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_h ∈ blackboard_N ) .
(ii)
{ E 0 , E 1 , … , E d } subscript 𝐸 0 subscript 𝐸 1 … subscript 𝐸 𝑑 \{E_{0},E_{1},\ldots,E_{d}\} { italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } is an orthogonal basis of ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B .
(iii)
{ I , B , B 2 , … , B d } 𝐼 𝐵 superscript 𝐵 2 … superscript 𝐵 𝑑 \{I,B,B^{2},\ldots,B^{d}\} { italic_I , italic_B , italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } is a basis of ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B .
(iv)
B ¯ ⊤ = B ⊤ = p ( B ) superscript ¯ 𝐵 top superscript 𝐵 top 𝑝 𝐵 \overline{B}^{\top}=B^{\top}=p(B) over¯ start_ARG italic_B end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_p ( italic_B ) for some polynomial p ∈ ℂ [ t ] 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t] italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] .
Proof.
(i) With respect to Definition 2.10 , abbreviate m i = m ( λ i ) subscript 𝑚 𝑖 𝑚 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 m_{i}=m(\lambda_{i}) italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_m ( italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) . Pick i 𝑖 i italic_i ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) , and note that
B U i = λ i U i . 𝐵 subscript 𝑈 𝑖 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 subscript 𝑈 𝑖 BU_{i}=\lambda_{i}U_{i}. italic_B italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
If U = [ U 1 | U 2 | … | U d ] 𝑈 delimited-[] conditional subscript 𝑈 1 subscript 𝑈 2 … subscript 𝑈 𝑑 U=[U_{1}|U_{2}|\ldots|U_{d}] italic_U = [ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | … | italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] , then
B = U Λ U ¯ ⊤ , where Λ = [ λ 0 I m 0 0 … 0 0 λ 1 I m 1 … 0 ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ 0 0 … λ d I m d ] . formulae-sequence 𝐵 𝑈 Λ superscript ¯ 𝑈 top where
Λ delimited-[] matrix subscript 𝜆 0 subscript 𝐼 subscript 𝑚 0 0 … 0 0 subscript 𝜆 1 subscript 𝐼 subscript 𝑚 1 … 0 ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ 0 0 … subscript 𝜆 𝑑 subscript 𝐼 subscript 𝑚 𝑑 B=U\Lambda\overline{U}^{\top},\qquad\mbox{ where }\qquad\Lambda=\left[\begin{%
matrix}\lambda_{0}I_{m_{0}}&0&\ldots&0\\
0&\lambda_{1}I_{m_{1}}&\ldots&0\\
\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\
0&0&\ldots&\lambda_{d}I_{m_{d}}\end{matrix}\right]. italic_B = italic_U roman_Λ over¯ start_ARG italic_U end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , where roman_Λ = [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL … end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL … end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋱ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL … end_CELL start_CELL italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] .
Now, it is routine to see that
B 𝐵 \displaystyle B italic_B
= U Λ U ¯ ⊤ = [ U 0 | U 1 | … | U d ] [ λ 0 I m 0 0 ⋯ 0 0 λ 1 I m 1 ⋯ 0 ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ 0 0 … λ d I m d ] [ U 0 ¯ ⊤ ¯ U 1 ¯ ⊤ ¯ ⋮ ¯ U d ¯ ⊤ ] absent 𝑈 Λ superscript ¯ 𝑈 top delimited-[] conditional subscript 𝑈 0 subscript 𝑈 1 … subscript 𝑈 𝑑 delimited-[] matrix subscript 𝜆 0 subscript 𝐼 subscript 𝑚 0 0 ⋯ 0 0 subscript 𝜆 1 subscript 𝐼 subscript 𝑚 1 ⋯ 0 ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ 0 0 … subscript 𝜆 𝑑 subscript 𝐼 subscript 𝑚 𝑑 delimited-[] matrix ¯ superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 0 top ¯ superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 1 top ¯ ⋮ superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 𝑑 top \displaystyle=U\Lambda\overline{U}^{\top}=[U_{0}|U_{1}|\ldots|U_{d}]\left[%
\begin{matrix}\lambda_{0}I_{m_{0}}&0&\cdots&0\\
0&\lambda_{1}I_{m_{1}}&\cdots&0\\
\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\
0&0&\ldots&\lambda_{d}I_{m_{d}}\\
\end{matrix}\right]\left[\begin{matrix}\underline{\overline{U_{0}}^{\top}}\\
\underline{\overline{U_{1}}^{\top}}\\
\underline{\,\,\,\vdots\,\,\,}\\
\overline{U_{d}}^{\top}\\
\end{matrix}\right] = italic_U roman_Λ over¯ start_ARG italic_U end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = [ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | … | italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋱ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL … end_CELL start_CELL italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL under¯ start_ARG over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL under¯ start_ARG over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL under¯ start_ARG ⋮ end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ]
= [ λ 0 U 0 | λ 1 U 1 | ⋯ | λ d U d ] [ U 0 ¯ ⊤ ¯ U 1 ¯ ⊤ ¯ ⋮ ¯ U d ¯ ⊤ ] absent delimited-[] conditional subscript 𝜆 0 subscript 𝑈 0 subscript 𝜆 1 subscript 𝑈 1 ⋯ subscript 𝜆 𝑑 subscript 𝑈 𝑑 delimited-[] matrix ¯ superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 0 top ¯ superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 1 top ¯ ⋮ superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 𝑑 top \displaystyle=[\lambda_{0}U_{0}|\lambda_{1}U_{1}|\cdots|\lambda_{d}U_{d}]\left%
[\begin{matrix}\underline{\overline{U_{0}}^{\top}}\\
\underline{\overline{U_{1}}^{\top}}\\
\underline{\,\,\,\vdots\,\,\,}\\
\overline{U_{d}}^{\top}\\
\end{matrix}\right] = [ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ⋯ | italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL under¯ start_ARG over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL under¯ start_ARG over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL under¯ start_ARG ⋮ end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ]
= λ 0 U 0 U 0 ¯ ⊤ + λ 1 U 1 U 1 ¯ ⊤ + ⋯ + λ d U d U d ¯ ⊤ absent subscript 𝜆 0 subscript 𝑈 0 superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 0 top subscript 𝜆 1 subscript 𝑈 1 superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 1 top ⋯ subscript 𝜆 𝑑 subscript 𝑈 𝑑 superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 𝑑 top \displaystyle=\lambda_{0}U_{0}\overline{U_{0}}^{\top}+\lambda_{1}U_{1}%
\overline{U_{1}}^{\top}+\cdots+\lambda_{d}U_{d}\overline{U_{d}}^{\top} = italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + ⋯ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
= λ 0 ⏟ ∈ ℂ E 0 + λ 1 ⏟ ∈ ℂ E 1 + ⋯ + λ d ⏟ ∈ ℂ E d ( where E i := U i U i ¯ ⊤ ) . absent subscript ⏟ subscript 𝜆 0 absent ℂ subscript 𝐸 0 subscript ⏟ subscript 𝜆 1 absent ℂ subscript 𝐸 1 ⋯ subscript ⏟ subscript 𝜆 𝑑 absent ℂ subscript 𝐸 𝑑 assign where subscript 𝐸 𝑖 subscript 𝑈 𝑖 superscript ¯ subscript 𝑈 𝑖 top
\displaystyle=\underbrace{\lambda_{0}}_{\in{\mathbb{C}}}E_{0}+\underbrace{%
\lambda_{1}}_{\in{\mathbb{C}}}E_{1}+\cdots+\underbrace{\lambda_{d}}_{\in{%
\mathbb{C}}}E_{d}\qquad(\mbox{where }E_{i}:=U_{i}\overline{U_{i}}^{\top}). = under⏟ start_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + under⏟ start_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + under⏟ start_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( where italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over¯ start_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) .
Since E i E j = δ i j E i subscript 𝐸 𝑖 subscript 𝐸 𝑗 subscript 𝛿 𝑖 𝑗 subscript 𝐸 𝑖 E_{i}E_{j}=\delta_{ij}E_{i} italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , E i ¯ ⊤ = E i superscript ¯ subscript 𝐸 𝑖 top subscript 𝐸 𝑖 \overline{E_{i}}^{\top}=E_{i} over¯ start_ARG italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and trace ( E i ) = m i trace subscript 𝐸 𝑖 subscript 𝑚 𝑖 \operatorname{trace}(E_{i})=m_{i} roman_trace ( italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) , for any polynomial p ∈ ℂ [ t ] 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t] italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] we have
p ( B ) 𝑝 𝐵 \displaystyle p(B) italic_p ( italic_B )
= p ( λ 0 ) ⏟ ∈ ℂ E 0 + ⋯ + p ( λ d ) ⏟ ∈ ℂ E d . absent subscript ⏟ 𝑝 subscript 𝜆 0 absent ℂ subscript 𝐸 0 ⋯ subscript ⏟ 𝑝 subscript 𝜆 𝑑 absent ℂ subscript 𝐸 𝑑 \displaystyle=\underbrace{p(\lambda_{0})}_{\in{\mathbb{C}}}E_{0}+\cdots+%
\underbrace{p(\lambda_{d})}_{\in{\mathbb{C}}}E_{d}. = under⏟ start_ARG italic_p ( italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + under⏟ start_ARG italic_p ( italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
The result follows.
(ii)–(iv) Routine. For (ii) and (iii), see, for example, [34 , Chapter 2] . For claim (iv), see, for example, [12 , Theorem 1] , or note that E i ¯ ⊤ = E i superscript ¯ subscript 𝐸 𝑖 top subscript 𝐸 𝑖 \overline{E_{i}}^{\top}=E_{i} over¯ start_ARG italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
2.7 Commutative association schemes
In Section 1 , we have already provided the definition of a commutative d 𝑑 d italic_d -class association scheme 𝔛 = { X , { R i } i = 0 d } 𝔛 𝑋 superscript subscript subscript 𝑅 𝑖 𝑖 0 𝑑 {\mathfrak{X}}=\{X,\{R_{i}\}_{i=0}^{d}\} fraktur_X = { italic_X , { italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } together with definitions of relations { R i } i = 0 d superscript subscript subscript 𝑅 𝑖 𝑖 0 𝑑 \{R_{i}\}_{i=0}^{d} { italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , relation matrices { B i } i = 0 d superscript subscript subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝑖 0 𝑑 \{B_{i}\}_{i=0}^{d} { italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Bose–Mesner algebra ℳ ℳ {\mathcal{M}} caligraphic_M of 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X . The meaning of a “matrix generates 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X ” has been given in Section 1 as well. Note that relation matrices { B i } i = 0 d superscript subscript subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝑖 0 𝑑 \{B_{i}\}_{i=0}^{d} { italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT form a standard basis of the Bose-Mesner algebra ℳ ℳ {\mathcal{M}} caligraphic_M . We say that the relation R i subscript 𝑅 𝑖 R_{i} italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT generates the association scheme 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X if every element of the Bose–Mesner algebra ℳ ℳ {\mathcal{M}} caligraphic_M of 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X can be writen as a polynomial in B i subscript 𝐵 𝑖 B_{i} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , where B i subscript 𝐵 𝑖 B_{i} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is adjacency matrix of the (di)graph ( X , R i ) 𝑋 subscript 𝑅 𝑖 (X,R_{i}) ( italic_X , italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) . We say that the association scheme 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X is P 𝑃 P italic_P -polynomial with respect to B 1 subscript 𝐵 1 B_{1} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , if it is generated by B 1 subscript 𝐵 1 B_{1} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and there exists an ordering ( B 0 , B 1 , … , B d ) subscript 𝐵 0 subscript 𝐵 1 … subscript 𝐵 𝑑 (B_{0},B_{1},\ldots,B_{d}) ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) and polynomials p j ( t ) subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝑡 p_{j}(t) italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) of degree j 𝑗 j italic_j , such that B j = p j ( B 1 ) subscript 𝐵 𝑗 subscript 𝑝 𝑗 subscript 𝐵 1 B_{j}=p_{j}(B_{1}) italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 0 ≤ j ≤ d ) 0 𝑗 𝑑 (0\leq j\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_j ≤ italic_d ) . It is well known that if ( B 0 , B 1 , … , B d ) subscript 𝐵 0 subscript 𝐵 1 … subscript 𝐵 𝑑 (B_{0},B_{1},\ldots,B_{d}) ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is a P 𝑃 P italic_P -polynomial ordering of 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X then Γ = Γ ( B 1 ) Γ Γ subscript 𝐵 1 \Gamma=\Gamma(B_{1}) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is a distance-regular (di)graph. Recall that the association scheme 𝔛 𝔛 {\mathfrak{X}} fraktur_X is polynomial (with respect to R i subscript 𝑅 𝑖 R_{i} italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) if it is generated by a relation R i subscript 𝑅 𝑖 R_{i} italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for some i 𝑖 i italic_i (we recommend articles [32 , 43 ] for interesting results in that direction).
3 The Hoffman polynomial of a nonnegative matrix
In this section, we prove Theorem 1.1 . Our proof is within the lines of [27 , Theorem 1] . Theorem 1.1 states: For a nonnegative matrix B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) there exists a polynomial p ∈ ℂ [ t ] 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t] italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] such that p ( B ) = J 𝑝 𝐵 𝐽 p(B)=J italic_p ( italic_B ) = italic_J if and only if B 𝐵 B italic_B is a λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix. Furthermore, it states that the unique polynomial of smallest degree satisfying p ( B ) = J 𝑝 𝐵 𝐽 p(B)=J italic_p ( italic_B ) = italic_J is h ( t ) = | X | q ( λ ) q ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 𝑋 𝑞 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 h(t)=\frac{|X|}{q(\lambda)}q(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG start_ARG italic_q ( italic_λ ) end_ARG italic_q ( italic_t ) , where q ( λ ) ≠ 0 𝑞 𝜆 0 q(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 and ( t − λ ) q ( t ) 𝑡 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 (t-\lambda)q(t) ( italic_t - italic_λ ) italic_q ( italic_t ) is the minimal polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B .
Hoffman polynomial is well-known polynomial in algebraic graph theory and can be found in many textbooks (see, for example, [3 , 5 , 8 , 14 , 39 , 40 ] ). There has been a great deal of work following this concept, for example: polynomials that sends a nonnegative irreducible matrix to a positive rank one matrix [41 ] , some Hoffman-type identities for the class of harmonic and semiharmonic graphs [18 ] , Hoffman identities of non-regular graphs through the use of the Laplacian [37 ] , Hoffman identities by means of main eigenvalues [29 ] , Hoffman polynomial of the tensor product of a cycle [11 ] , Hoffman polynomial of cycle prefix digraphs [13 ] , Hoffmn polynomials of some more general regular strongly connected digraphs [42 ] .
Proof of Theorem 1.1 . ( ⇐ ) ⇐ (\Leftarrow) ( ⇐ ) Assume that B 𝐵 B italic_B is a λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix. We use this assumption to show that there exists a polynomial p ∈ ℂ [ t ] 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t] italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] such that p ( B ) = J 𝑝 𝐵 𝐽 p(B)=J italic_p ( italic_B ) = italic_J . Note that, by assumption, B 𝐣 = λ 𝐣 = B ⊤ 𝐣 𝐵 𝐣 𝜆 𝐣 superscript 𝐵 top 𝐣 B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=\lambda\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=B^{\top}%
\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_B bold_j = italic_λ bold_j = italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT bold_j .
A square matrix is stochastic if all of its entries are nonnegative, and the entries of each column sum to 1 1 1 1 . From, for example, [30 , Subsection 5.6] , if M 𝑀 M italic_M is a stochastic matrix, then 1 1 1 1 is an eigenvalue of M 𝑀 M italic_M ; and if θ 𝜃 \theta italic_θ is a (real or complex) eigenvalue of M 𝑀 M italic_M , then | θ | ≤ 1 𝜃 1 |\theta|\leq 1 | italic_θ | ≤ 1 . In our case, we have that λ − 1 B superscript 𝜆 1 𝐵 \lambda^{-1}B italic_λ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_B is a stochastic matrix. It is routine to show that eig ( B ) = { λ , λ 1 , … , λ d } eig 𝐵 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 1 … subscript 𝜆 𝑑 \operatorname{eig}(B)=\{\lambda,\lambda_{1},\ldots,\lambda_{d}\} roman_eig ( italic_B ) = { italic_λ , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } are eigenvalues of B 𝐵 B italic_B if and only if λ − 1 eig ( B ) superscript 𝜆 1 eig 𝐵 \lambda^{-1}\operatorname{eig}(B) italic_λ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_eig ( italic_B ) are eigenvalues of λ − 1 B superscript 𝜆 1 𝐵 \lambda^{-1}B italic_λ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_B . It follows that λ = max θ ∈ eig ( B ) | θ | 𝜆 subscript 𝜃 eig 𝐵 𝜃 \lambda=\max_{\theta\in\operatorname{eig}(B)}|\theta| italic_λ = roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ ∈ roman_eig ( italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_θ | . By Theorem 2.1 , the algebraic multiplicity of λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ is equal to 1 1 1 1 and consequently
the geometric multiplicity of λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ is equal to 1 1 1 1
(7)
also. This implies that the minimal polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B is in the following form m ( t ) = ( t − λ ) s ( t ) 𝑚 𝑡 𝑡 𝜆 𝑠 𝑡 m(t)=(t-\lambda)s(t) italic_m ( italic_t ) = ( italic_t - italic_λ ) italic_s ( italic_t ) for some polynomial s ( t ) ∈ ℂ [ t ] 𝑠 𝑡 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 s(t)\in{\mathbb{C}}[t] italic_s ( italic_t ) ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] , where s ( λ ) ≠ 0 𝑠 𝜆 0 s(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_s ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 . Since ( B − λ I ) s ( B ) = 𝐎 𝐵 𝜆 𝐼 𝑠 𝐵 𝐎 (B-\lambda I)s(B)=\operatorname{\boldsymbol{O}} ( italic_B - italic_λ italic_I ) italic_s ( italic_B ) = bold_O , for any v ∈ ℂ | X | 𝑣 superscript ℂ 𝑋 v\in{\mathbb{C}}^{|X|} italic_v ∈ blackboard_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT we have ( B − λ I ) s ( B ) v = 𝟎 𝐵 𝜆 𝐼 𝑠 𝐵 𝑣 0 (B-\lambda I)s(B)v={\boldsymbol{0}} ( italic_B - italic_λ italic_I ) italic_s ( italic_B ) italic_v = bold_0 , which yields s ( B ) v ∈ ker ( B − λ I ) 𝑠 𝐵 𝑣 kernel 𝐵 𝜆 𝐼 s(B)v\in\ker(B-\lambda I) italic_s ( italic_B ) italic_v ∈ roman_ker ( italic_B - italic_λ italic_I ) . Thus,
for every v ∈ ℂ | X | there exists α v ∈ ℂ such that s ( B ) v = α v 𝐣 . for every v ∈ ℂ | X | there exists α v ∈ ℂ such that s ( B ) v = α v 𝐣 \mbox{for every $v\in{\mathbb{C}}^{|X|}$ there exists $\alpha_{v}\in{\mathbb{C%
}}$ such that $s(B)v=\alpha_{v}\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}$}. for every italic_v ∈ blackboard_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT there exists italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_C such that italic_s ( italic_B ) italic_v = italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_j .
(8)
Next we consider when equation (8 ) is possible. For the moment, assume that ⟨ v , 𝐣 ⟩ = 0 𝑣 𝐣
0 \langle v,\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}\rangle=0 ⟨ italic_v , bold_j ⟩ = 0 , where ⟨ ⋅ , ⋅ ⟩ ⋅ ⋅
\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle ⟨ ⋅ , ⋅ ⟩ stands for standard Hermitian inner product ⟨ u , v ⟩ = u v ¯ ⊤ 𝑢 𝑣
𝑢 superscript ¯ 𝑣 top \langle u,v\rangle=u\overline{v}^{\top} ⟨ italic_u , italic_v ⟩ = italic_u over¯ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . For every ℓ ∈ ℕ ℓ ℕ \ell\in{\mathbb{N}} roman_ℓ ∈ blackboard_N ,
⟨ B ℓ v , 𝐣 ⟩ superscript 𝐵 ℓ 𝑣 𝐣
\displaystyle\langle B^{\ell}v,\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}\rangle ⟨ italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_v , bold_j ⟩
= ⟨ v , B ℓ ¯ ⊤ 𝐣 ⟩ absent 𝑣 superscript ¯ superscript 𝐵 ℓ top 𝐣
\displaystyle=\langle v,\overline{B^{\ell}}^{\top}\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}\rangle = ⟨ italic_v , over¯ start_ARG italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT bold_j ⟩
= λ ℓ ⟨ v , 𝐣 ⟩ absent superscript 𝜆 ℓ 𝑣 𝐣
\displaystyle=\lambda^{\ell}\langle v,\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}\rangle = italic_λ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟨ italic_v , bold_j ⟩
= 0 . absent 0 \displaystyle=0. = 0 .
This yields that ⟨ s ( B ) v , j ⟩ = 0 𝑠 𝐵 𝑣 𝑗
0 \langle s(B)v,j\rangle=0 ⟨ italic_s ( italic_B ) italic_v , italic_j ⟩ = 0 , and by (8 ), ⟨ α v 𝐣 , 𝐣 ⟩ = 0 = α v ‖ 𝐣 ‖ 2 subscript 𝛼 𝑣 𝐣 𝐣
0 subscript 𝛼 𝑣 superscript norm 𝐣 2 \langle\alpha_{v}\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}},\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}%
\rangle=0=\alpha_{v}\|\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}\|^{2} ⟨ italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_j , bold_j ⟩ = 0 = italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ bold_j ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , which implies α v = 0 subscript 𝛼 𝑣 0 \alpha_{v}=0 italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 . Thus, for every vector v ∈ ℂ | X | 𝑣 superscript ℂ 𝑋 v\in{\mathbb{C}}^{|X|} italic_v ∈ blackboard_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for which ⟨ v , 𝐣 ⟩ = 0 𝑣 𝐣
0 \langle v,\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}\rangle=0 ⟨ italic_v , bold_j ⟩ = 0 , we also have s ( B ) v = 𝟎 𝑠 𝐵 𝑣 0 s(B)v={\boldsymbol{0}} italic_s ( italic_B ) italic_v = bold_0 . Since s ( B ) 𝐣 = s ( λ ) 𝐣 𝑠 𝐵 𝐣 𝑠 𝜆 𝐣 s(B)\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=s(\lambda)\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_s ( italic_B ) bold_j = italic_s ( italic_λ ) bold_j (as well as J 𝐣 = | X | 𝐣 𝐽 𝐣 𝑋 𝐣 J\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=|X|\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_J bold_j = | italic_X | bold_j ), and ℂ | X | = ⟨ 𝐣 ⟩ ⊕ ⟨ 𝐣 ⟩ ⊥ superscript ℂ 𝑋 direct-sum delimited-⟨⟩ 𝐣 superscript delimited-⟨⟩ 𝐣 bottom {\mathbb{C}}^{|X|}=\langle\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}\rangle\oplus\langle%
\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}\rangle^{\bot} blackboard_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_X | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ⟨ bold_j ⟩ ⊕ ⟨ bold_j ⟩ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊥ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (orthogonal direct sum), we can conclude that the polynomial
h ( t ) = | X | s ( λ ) s ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 𝑋 𝑠 𝜆 𝑠 𝑡 h(t)=\frac{|X|}{s(\lambda)}s(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG start_ARG italic_s ( italic_λ ) end_ARG italic_s ( italic_t )
has the property that h ( B ) = J ℎ 𝐵 𝐽 h(B)=J italic_h ( italic_B ) = italic_J .
( ⇒ ) ⇒ (\Rightarrow) ( ⇒ ) Assume now that for a nonnegative matrix B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) , there exists a polynomial p ∈ ℂ [ t ] 𝑝 ℂ delimited-[] 𝑡 p\in{\mathbb{C}}[t] italic_p ∈ blackboard_C [ italic_t ] such that p ( B ) = J 𝑝 𝐵 𝐽 p(B)=J italic_p ( italic_B ) = italic_J . We use this assumption to show that B 𝐵 B italic_B is a λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix, for some λ ∈ ℝ 𝜆 ℝ \lambda\in{\mathbb{R}} italic_λ ∈ blackboard_R .
Let y , z ∈ X 𝑦 𝑧
𝑋 y,z\in X italic_y , italic_z ∈ italic_X denote two arbitrary elements of X 𝑋 X italic_X , and A 𝐴 A italic_A denote the adjacency matrix of the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B . Since p ( B ) = J 𝑝 𝐵 𝐽 p(B)=J italic_p ( italic_B ) = italic_J , there exists ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ such that ( B ℓ ) z y ≠ 0 subscript superscript 𝐵 ℓ 𝑧 𝑦 0 (B^{\ell})_{zy}\neq 0 ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 , which is true if and only if ( A ℓ ) z y ≠ 0 subscript superscript 𝐴 ℓ 𝑧 𝑦 0 (A^{\ell})_{zy}\neq 0 ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 (see Lemma 2.9 ). Thus the digraph Γ = Γ ( A ) Γ Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) (digraph with adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A ) is strongly connected. Note that Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is strongly connected if and only if A 𝐴 A italic_A is an irreducible matrix (see Lemma 2.2 ). Therefore, our non-negative matrix B 𝐵 B italic_B is also irreducible (see Lemma 2.7 ).
To prove that B 𝐵 B italic_B is λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrix, for some λ ∈ ℝ 𝜆 ℝ \lambda\in{\mathbb{R}} italic_λ ∈ blackboard_R , we pick x ∈ X 𝑥 𝑋 x\in X italic_x ∈ italic_X , and we consider the out-edge-weight-sum Σ 1 → ( x ) superscript subscript Σ 1 → 𝑥 \Sigma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(x) roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) of the vertex x 𝑥 x italic_x , as well as the in-edge-weight-sum Σ 1 ← ( x ) superscript subscript Σ 1 ← 𝑥 \Sigma_{1}^{\leftarrow}(x) roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) of the same vertex:
Σ 1 → ( x ) = ∑ z ∈ X ( B ) x z = ( B 𝐣 ) x , superscript subscript Σ 1 → 𝑥 subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐵 𝑥 𝑧 subscript 𝐵 𝐣 𝑥 \Sigma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(x)=\sum_{z\in X}(B)_{xz}=(B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{%
j}})_{x}, roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_B bold_j ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,
Σ 1 ← ( x ) = ∑ z ∈ X ( B ) z x = ( B ⊤ 𝐣 ) x . superscript subscript Σ 1 ← 𝑥 subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐵 𝑧 𝑥 subscript superscript 𝐵 top 𝐣 𝑥 \Sigma_{1}^{\leftarrow}(x)=\sum_{z\in X}(B)_{zx}=(B^{\top}\operatorname{%
\boldsymbol{j}})_{x}. roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT bold_j ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Since J = p ( B ) 𝐽 𝑝 𝐵 J=p(B) italic_J = italic_p ( italic_B ) , we have J B = B J 𝐽 𝐵 𝐵 𝐽 JB=BJ italic_J italic_B = italic_B italic_J , and with it, for any y ∈ X 𝑦 𝑋 y\in X italic_y ∈ italic_X , we have
θ 𝜃 \displaystyle\theta italic_θ
= Σ 1 → ( x ) = ( B 𝐣 ) x absent superscript subscript Σ 1 → 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝐣 𝑥 \displaystyle=\Sigma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(x)=(B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}})_{x} = roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = ( italic_B bold_j ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ X ( B ) x z ( J ) z y = ( B J ) x y absent subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐵 𝑥 𝑧 subscript 𝐽 𝑧 𝑦 subscript 𝐵 𝐽 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in X}(B)_{xz}(J)_{zy}=(BJ)_{xy} = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_B italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( J B ) x y = ∑ z ∈ X ( J ) x z ( B ) z y absent subscript 𝐽 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐽 𝑥 𝑧 subscript 𝐵 𝑧 𝑦 \displaystyle=(JB)_{xy}=\sum_{z\in X}(J)_{xz}(B)_{zy} = ( italic_J italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ X ( B ⊤ ) y z ( J ) z x = ( B ⊤ 𝐣 ) y absent subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript superscript 𝐵 top 𝑦 𝑧 subscript 𝐽 𝑧 𝑥 subscript superscript 𝐵 top 𝐣 𝑦 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in X}(B^{\top})_{yz}(J)_{zx}=(B^{\top}\operatorname{%
\boldsymbol{j}})_{y} = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT bold_j ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= Σ 1 ← ( y ) . absent superscript subscript Σ 1 ← 𝑦 \displaystyle=\Sigma_{1}^{\leftarrow}(y). = roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) .
From above, we have that every y ∈ X 𝑦 𝑋 y\in X italic_y ∈ italic_X (including our fixed x 𝑥 x italic_x ) has the same in-edge-weight-sum, i.e., Σ 1 ← ( y ) = θ superscript subscript Σ 1 ← 𝑦 𝜃 \Sigma_{1}^{\leftarrow}(y)=\theta roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) = italic_θ ( ∀ y ∈ X ) for-all 𝑦 𝑋 (\forall y\in X) ( ∀ italic_y ∈ italic_X ) . Again, considering J B = B J 𝐽 𝐵 𝐵 𝐽 JB=BJ italic_J italic_B = italic_B italic_J , for any y ∈ X 𝑦 𝑋 y\in X italic_y ∈ italic_X , we have
θ 𝜃 \displaystyle\theta italic_θ
= Σ 1 ← ( x ) = ( B ⊤ 𝐣 ) x absent superscript subscript Σ 1 ← 𝑥 subscript superscript 𝐵 top 𝐣 𝑥 \displaystyle=\Sigma_{1}^{\leftarrow}(x)=(B^{\top}\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}%
})_{x} = roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ← end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT bold_j ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ X ( B ⊤ ) x z ( J ) z y = ∑ z ∈ X ( J ) y z ( B ) z x absent subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑧 subscript 𝐽 𝑧 𝑦 subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐽 𝑦 𝑧 subscript 𝐵 𝑧 𝑥 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in X}(B^{\top})_{xz}(J)_{zy}=\sum_{z\in X}(J)_{yz}(B)_{zx} = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( J B ) y x = ( B J ) y x absent subscript 𝐽 𝐵 𝑦 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝐽 𝑦 𝑥 \displaystyle=(JB)_{yx}=(BJ)_{yx} = ( italic_J italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_B italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ X ( B ) y z ( J ) z x = ( B 𝐣 ) y absent subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 subscript 𝐽 𝑧 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝐣 𝑦 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in X}(B)_{yz}(J)_{zx}=(B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}})_{y} = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_B bold_j ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= Σ 1 → ( y ) . absent superscript subscript Σ 1 → 𝑦 \displaystyle=\Sigma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(y). = roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) .
Thus, every y ∈ X 𝑦 𝑋 y\in X italic_y ∈ italic_X has the same out-edge-weight-sum θ 𝜃 \theta italic_θ also, i.e., Σ 1 → ( y ) = θ superscript subscript Σ 1 → 𝑦 𝜃 \Sigma_{1}^{\rightarrow}(y)=\theta roman_Σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_y ) = italic_θ ( ∀ y ∈ X ) for-all 𝑦 𝑋 (\forall y\in X) ( ∀ italic_y ∈ italic_X ) . This conclude the proof that B 𝐵 B italic_B is a λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix, for some λ ∈ ℝ 𝜆 ℝ \lambda\in{\mathbb{R}} italic_λ ∈ blackboard_R .
It is left to prove that the unique polynomial of smallest degree satisfying p ( B ) = J 𝑝 𝐵 𝐽 p(B)=J italic_p ( italic_B ) = italic_J is h ( t ) = | X | q ( λ ) q ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 𝑋 𝑞 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 h(t)=\frac{|X|}{q(\lambda)}q(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG start_ARG italic_q ( italic_λ ) end_ARG italic_q ( italic_t ) where q ( λ ) ≠ 0 𝑞 𝜆 0 q(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 and ( t − λ ) q ( t ) 𝑡 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 (t-\lambda)q(t) ( italic_t - italic_λ ) italic_q ( italic_t ) is the minimal polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B .
We had already shown that h ( B ) = J ℎ 𝐵 𝐽 h(B)=J italic_h ( italic_B ) = italic_J for h ( t ) = | X | q ( λ ) q ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 𝑋 𝑞 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 h(t)=\frac{|X|}{q(\lambda)}q(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG start_ARG italic_q ( italic_λ ) end_ARG italic_q ( italic_t ) , where q ( λ ) ≠ 0 𝑞 𝜆 0 q(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 and m ( t ) = ( t − λ ) q ( t ) 𝑚 𝑡 𝑡 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 m(t)=(t-\lambda)q(t) italic_m ( italic_t ) = ( italic_t - italic_λ ) italic_q ( italic_t ) is the minimal polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B . Assume that degree of q ( t ) 𝑞 𝑡 q(t) italic_q ( italic_t ) is ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ , and note that ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ is smaller than the degree of the minimal polynomial m ( t ) 𝑚 𝑡 m(t) italic_m ( italic_t ) of B 𝐵 B italic_B . We first prove that h ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 h(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) is the unique polynomial of degree ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ such that h ( B ) = J ℎ 𝐵 𝐽 h(B)=J italic_h ( italic_B ) = italic_J ; our proof is by a contradiction. Assume that r ( t ) 𝑟 𝑡 r(t) italic_r ( italic_t ) is a polynomial of degree m 𝑚 m italic_m (in particular for this case m = ℓ 𝑚 ℓ m=\ell italic_m = roman_ℓ ) such that r ( B ) = J 𝑟 𝐵 𝐽 r(B)=J italic_r ( italic_B ) = italic_J , and that r ( t ) ≠ h ( t ) 𝑟 𝑡 ℎ 𝑡 r(t)\neq h(t) italic_r ( italic_t ) ≠ italic_h ( italic_t ) . We have ( r − h ) ( B ) = 𝐎 𝑟 ℎ 𝐵 𝐎 (r-h)(B)=\operatorname{\boldsymbol{O}} ( italic_r - italic_h ) ( italic_B ) = bold_O , and since degree of r ( t ) − h ( t ) 𝑟 𝑡 ℎ 𝑡 r(t)-h(t) italic_r ( italic_t ) - italic_h ( italic_t ) is less or equal to ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ , this is possible if and only if r ( t ) − h ( t ) = 0 𝑟 𝑡 ℎ 𝑡 0 r(t)-h(t)=0 italic_r ( italic_t ) - italic_h ( italic_t ) = 0 , a contradiction. Thus, h ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 h(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) is the unique such polynomial of degree ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ . In a similar way we show that there are no polynomials r ( t ) 𝑟 𝑡 r(t) italic_r ( italic_t ) of degree smaller than ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ that satisfy r ( B ) = J 𝑟 𝐵 𝐽 r(B)=J italic_r ( italic_B ) = italic_J . The result follows.
Corollary 3.1
Assume that B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) is a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix, and let eig ( B ) = { λ , λ 1 , … , λ d } normal-eig 𝐵 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 1 normal-… subscript 𝜆 𝑑 \operatorname{eig}(B)=\{\lambda,\lambda_{1},\ldots,\lambda_{d}\} roman_eig ( italic_B ) = { italic_λ , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denote the set of distinct eigenvalues of B 𝐵 B italic_B . Then, the Hoffman polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B is
h ( t ) = | X | π 0 ∏ i = 1 d ( t − λ i ) , ℎ 𝑡 𝑋 subscript 𝜋 0 superscript subscript product 𝑖 1 𝑑 𝑡 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 h(t)=\frac{|X|}{\pi_{0}}\prod_{i=1}^{d}(t-\lambda_{i}), italic_h ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG start_ARG italic_π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ,
where π 0 = ∏ i = 1 d ( λ − λ i ) subscript 𝜋 0 superscript subscript product 𝑖 1 𝑑 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 \pi_{0}=\prod_{i=1}^{d}(\lambda-\lambda_{i}) italic_π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_λ - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) .
Proof.
Define θ = max μ ∈ eig ( B ) | μ | 𝜃 subscript 𝜇 eig 𝐵 𝜇 \theta=\max\limits_{\mu\in\operatorname{eig}(B)}|\mu| italic_θ = roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ ∈ roman_eig ( italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_μ | . Since B 𝐵 B italic_B is a nonnegative irreducible matrix, by Theorem 2.1 , θ ∈ eig ( B ) 𝜃 eig 𝐵 \theta\in\operatorname{eig}(B) italic_θ ∈ roman_eig ( italic_B ) , θ > 0 𝜃 0 \theta>0 italic_θ > 0 , the algebraic multiplicity of θ 𝜃 \theta italic_θ is 1 1 1 1 , and there exists an eigenvector 𝝂 𝝂 {\boldsymbol{\nu}} bold_italic_ν with all positive entries (normalized in such a way that the smallest entry is equal to 1 1 1 1 ), such that B 𝝂 = θ 𝝂 𝐵 𝝂 𝜃 𝝂 B{\boldsymbol{\nu}}=\theta{\boldsymbol{\nu}} italic_B bold_italic_ν = italic_θ bold_italic_ν . On the other hand, since B 𝐵 B italic_B is λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic, we have B 𝐣 = λ 𝐣 𝐵 𝐣 𝜆 𝐣 B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=\lambda\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_B bold_j = italic_λ bold_j . By definition of θ 𝜃 \theta italic_θ we have λ ≤ θ 𝜆 𝜃 \lambda\leq\theta italic_λ ≤ italic_θ . Next, we prove that θ ≤ λ 𝜃 𝜆 \theta\leq\lambda italic_θ ≤ italic_λ . Let 𝝂 = ( ν x , … , ν w ) ⊤ 𝝂 superscript subscript 𝜈 𝑥 … subscript 𝜈 𝑤 top {\boldsymbol{\nu}}=(\nu_{x},\ldots,\nu_{w})^{\top} bold_italic_ν = ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and define ν y = max z ∈ X { ν z } subscript 𝜈 𝑦 subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝜈 𝑧 \nu_{y}=\max\limits_{z\in X}\{\nu_{z}\} italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT { italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } . We have
θ ν y = ( θ 𝝂 ) y = ( B 𝝂 ) y = ∑ z ∈ X ( B ) y z ν z ≤ ν y ∑ z ∈ X ( B ) y z = ν y λ . 𝜃 subscript 𝜈 𝑦 subscript 𝜃 𝝂 𝑦 subscript 𝐵 𝝂 𝑦 subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 subscript 𝜈 𝑧 subscript 𝜈 𝑦 subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 subscript 𝜈 𝑦 𝜆 \theta\nu_{y}=(\theta{\boldsymbol{\nu}})_{y}=(B{\boldsymbol{\nu}})_{y}=\sum_{z%
\in X}(B)_{yz}\nu_{z}\leq\nu_{y}\sum_{z\in X}(B)_{yz}=\nu_{y}\lambda. italic_θ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_θ bold_italic_ν ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_B bold_italic_ν ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≤ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_λ .
As consequence, θ = λ 𝜃 𝜆 \theta=\lambda italic_θ = italic_λ and 𝝂 = 𝐣 𝝂 𝐣 {\boldsymbol{\nu}}=\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} bold_italic_ν = bold_j .
From the above observation, now we can let m ( t ) = ( t − λ ) q ( t ) 𝑚 𝑡 𝑡 𝜆 𝑞 𝑡 m(t)=(t-\lambda)q(t) italic_m ( italic_t ) = ( italic_t - italic_λ ) italic_q ( italic_t ) denote the minimal polynomial of B 𝐵 B italic_B . In the end, since B 𝐵 B italic_B is a normal matrix, m ( t ) = ( t − λ ) ∏ i = 1 d ( t − λ i ) 𝑚 𝑡 𝑡 𝜆 superscript subscript product 𝑖 1 𝑑 𝑡 subscript 𝜆 𝑖 m(t)=(t-\lambda)\prod_{i=1}^{d}(t-\lambda_{i}) italic_m ( italic_t ) = ( italic_t - italic_λ ) ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) (see, for example, [31 , Section 7.11] ). The result follows from Theorem 1.1 .
4 On predistance polynomials
In this section, we define predistance polynomials, the set of orthogonal polynomials that we use for the rest of the paper. The term “predistance polynomial” is taken from the theory of distance-regular graphs (see, for example, [15 , 16 , 17 , 20 , 38 ] ).
We define an inner product on Mat X ( ℂ ) subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ \mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) in the following way:
⟨ B , C ⟩ = 1 | X | trace ( B C ¯ ⊤ ) ( B , C ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) ) . 𝐵 𝐶
1 𝑋 trace 𝐵 superscript ¯ 𝐶 top 𝐵 𝐶
subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ
\langle B,C\rangle=\frac{1}{|X|}\operatorname{trace}(B\overline{C}^{\top})%
\qquad(B,C\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}})). ⟨ italic_B , italic_C ⟩ = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_B over¯ start_ARG italic_C end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ( italic_B , italic_C ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) ) .
(9)
Let
‖ C ‖ 2 = ⟨ C , C ⟩ for all C ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) , superscript norm 𝐶 2 𝐶 𝐶
for all C ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) ,
\|C\|^{2}=\langle C,C\rangle\qquad\mbox{ for all $C\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({%
\mathbb{C}})$,} ∥ italic_C ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ⟨ italic_C , italic_C ⟩ for all italic_C ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) ,
and note that for any R , S ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝑅 𝑆
subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ R,S\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_R , italic_S ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) ,
⟨ R , S ⟩ = 1 | X | ∑ u ∈ X ( R S ¯ ⊤ ) u u = 1 | X | ∑ u ∈ X ∑ v ∈ X ( R ) u v ( S ¯ ) u v = 1 | X | ∑ u , v ∈ X ( R ∘ S ¯ ) u v , 𝑅 𝑆
1 𝑋 subscript 𝑢 𝑋 subscript 𝑅 superscript ¯ 𝑆 top 𝑢 𝑢 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑢 𝑋 subscript 𝑣 𝑋 subscript 𝑅 𝑢 𝑣 subscript ¯ 𝑆 𝑢 𝑣 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑢 𝑣
𝑋 subscript 𝑅 ¯ 𝑆 𝑢 𝑣 \langle R,S\rangle=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum\limits_{u\in X}(R\overline{S}^{\top})_{uu%
}=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum\limits_{u\in X}\sum\limits_{v\in X}(R)_{uv}(\overline{S})_%
{uv}=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum\limits_{u,v\in X}(R\circ\overline{S})_{uv}, ⟨ italic_R , italic_S ⟩ = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_R over¯ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_R ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( over¯ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u , italic_v ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_R ∘ over¯ start_ARG italic_S end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,
(10)
(where ∘ \circ ∘ is the elementwise-Hadamard product).
Now, let B ∈ Mat X ( ℂ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℂ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{C}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_C ) denote a normal matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues. Let ℂ d [ t ] = { a 0 + a 1 t + … + a d t d ∣ a i ∈ ℂ , 0 ≤ i ≤ d } subscript ℂ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 conditional-set subscript 𝑎 0 subscript 𝑎 1 𝑡 … subscript 𝑎 𝑑 superscript 𝑡 𝑑 formulae-sequence subscript 𝑎 𝑖 ℂ 0 𝑖 𝑑 \mathbb{C}_{d}[t]=\{a_{0}+a_{1}t+\ldots+a_{d}t^{d}\mid a_{i}\in\mathbb{C},\,0%
\leq i\leq d\} blackboard_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] = { italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t + … + italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∣ italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_C , 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d } denote the ring of all polynomials of degree at most d 𝑑 d italic_d with coefficients in ℂ ℂ \mathbb{C} blackboard_C . For every p , q ∈ ℂ d [ t ] 𝑝 𝑞
subscript ℂ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 p,q\in{\mathbb{C}}_{d}[t] italic_p , italic_q ∈ blackboard_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] we define
⟨ p , q ⟩ = 1 | X | trace ( p ( B ) q ( B ) ¯ ⊤ ) , 𝑝 𝑞
1 𝑋 trace 𝑝 𝐵 superscript ¯ 𝑞 𝐵 top \langle p,q\rangle={1\over|X|}\operatorname{trace}(p(B)\overline{q(B)}^{\top}), ⟨ italic_p , italic_q ⟩ = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_p ( italic_B ) over¯ start_ARG italic_q ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ,
(11)
and let ‖ p ‖ 2 = ⟨ p , p ⟩ superscript norm 𝑝 2 𝑝 𝑝
\|p\|^{2}=\langle p,p\rangle ∥ italic_p ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ⟨ italic_p , italic_p ⟩ . We also have that (11 ) is an inner product in ℂ d [ t ] subscript ℂ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 \mathbb{C}_{d}[t] blackboard_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] .
Lemma 4.1
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal real matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues { λ , λ 1 , … , λ d } ⊆ ℂ 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 1 normal-… subscript 𝜆 𝑑 ℂ \{\lambda,\lambda_{1},\ldots,\lambda_{d}\}\subseteq{\mathbb{C}} { italic_λ , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } ⊆ blackboard_C (real or complex) and let ℝ d [ t ] = { a 0 + a 1 t + … + a d t d ∣ a i ∈ ℝ , 0 ≤ i ≤ d } subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 conditional-set subscript 𝑎 0 subscript 𝑎 1 𝑡 normal-… subscript 𝑎 𝑑 superscript 𝑡 𝑑 formulae-sequence subscript 𝑎 𝑖 ℝ 0 𝑖 𝑑 \mathbb{R}_{d}[t]=\{a_{0}+a_{1}t+\ldots+a_{d}t^{d}\mid a_{i}\in\mathbb{R},\,0%
\leq i\leq d\} blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] = { italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t + … + italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∣ italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_R , 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d } denote the ring of all polynomials of degree at most d 𝑑 d italic_d with coefficients in ℝ ℝ \mathbb{R} blackboard_R . The minimal polynomial m ( t ) 𝑚 𝑡 m(t) italic_m ( italic_t ) of B 𝐵 B italic_B is of degree d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 and m ( t ) ∈ ℝ d [ t ] 𝑚 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 m(t)\in{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] italic_m ( italic_t ) ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] .
Proof.
Since B 𝐵 B italic_B is diagonalizable (see Theorem 2.4 ), the minimal polynomial m ( t ) 𝑚 𝑡 m(t) italic_m ( italic_t ) of B 𝐵 B italic_B is
m ( t ) = ( t − λ ) ( t − λ 1 ) ⋅ ⋯ ⋅ ( t − λ d ) 𝑚 𝑡 ⋅ 𝑡 𝜆 𝑡 subscript 𝜆 1 ⋯ 𝑡 subscript 𝜆 𝑑 m(t)=(t-\lambda)(t-\lambda_{1})\cdot\cdots\cdot(t-\lambda_{d}) italic_m ( italic_t ) = ( italic_t - italic_λ ) ( italic_t - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⋅ ⋯ ⋅ ( italic_t - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
(12)
(see, for example, [31 , Subchapter 7.11] ). As B 𝐵 B italic_B has real entries, its characteristic polynomial c ( t ) = det ( B − t I ) 𝑐 𝑡 𝐵 𝑡 𝐼 c(t)=\det(B-tI) italic_c ( italic_t ) = roman_det ( italic_B - italic_t italic_I ) will only have real coefficients. The complex roots of c ( t ) = 0 𝑐 𝑡 0 c(t)=0 italic_c ( italic_t ) = 0 come in conjugate complex pairs, yielding m ( t ) ∈ ℝ d [ t ] 𝑚 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 m(t)\in{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] italic_m ( italic_t ) ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] from (12 ).
Lemma 4.2
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal real matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues { λ , λ 1 , … , λ d } ⊆ ℂ 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 1 normal-… subscript 𝜆 𝑑 ℂ \{\lambda,\lambda_{1},\ldots,\lambda_{d}\}\subseteq{\mathbb{C}} { italic_λ , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } ⊆ blackboard_C (real or complex), and let ℝ d [ t ] = { a 0 + a 1 t + … + a d t d ∣ a i ∈ ℝ , 0 ≤ i ≤ d } subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 conditional-set subscript 𝑎 0 subscript 𝑎 1 𝑡 normal-… subscript 𝑎 𝑑 superscript 𝑡 𝑑 formulae-sequence subscript 𝑎 𝑖 ℝ 0 𝑖 𝑑 \mathbb{R}_{d}[t]=\{a_{0}+a_{1}t+\ldots+a_{d}t^{d}\mid a_{i}\in\mathbb{R},\,0%
\leq i\leq d\} blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] = { italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t + … + italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∣ italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ blackboard_R , 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d } denote the ring of all polynomials of degree at most d 𝑑 d italic_d with coefficients in ℝ ℝ \mathbb{R} blackboard_R . For every p , q ∈ ℝ d [ t ] 𝑝 𝑞
subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 p,q\in{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] italic_p , italic_q ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] we define an inner product ⟨ p , q ⟩ 𝑝 𝑞
\langle p,q\rangle ⟨ italic_p , italic_q ⟩ on ℝ d [ x ] subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑥 {\mathbb{R}}_{d}[x] blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_x ] as in (11 ). If λ ≠ 0 𝜆 0 \lambda\neq 0 italic_λ ≠ 0 , then there exists an orthogonal system of polynomials { q 0 ( t ) , q 1 ( t ) , … , q d ( t ) } ⊆ ℝ d [ t ] subscript 𝑞 0 𝑡 subscript 𝑞 1 𝑡 normal-… subscript 𝑞 𝑑 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 \{q_{0}(t),q_{1}(t),\ldots,q_{d}(t)\}\subseteq{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] { italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , … , italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) } ⊆ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] such that every q i ( t ) subscript 𝑞 𝑖 𝑡 q_{i}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) has degree i 𝑖 i italic_i and q i ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑞 𝑖 𝜆 0 q_{i}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) (i.e., λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ is not a root of q i ( t ) subscript 𝑞 𝑖 𝑡 q_{i}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) ).
Proof.
Our proof is by construction. Using the inner product (11 ), we apply the Gram–Schmidt orthogonalization algorithm to the set { s 0 ( t ) = 1 , s 1 ( t ) = t , … , s d ( t ) = t d } formulae-sequence subscript 𝑠 0 𝑡 1 formulae-sequence subscript 𝑠 1 𝑡 𝑡 …
subscript 𝑠 𝑑 𝑡 superscript 𝑡 𝑑 \{s_{0}(t)=1,s_{1}(t)=t,\ldots,s_{d}(t)=t^{d}\} { italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = 1 , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = italic_t , … , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } , modifying it in such a way to meet our conditions.
Note that, since B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) and p , q ∈ ℝ d [ t ] 𝑝 𝑞
subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 p,q\in{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] italic_p , italic_q ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] , by (11 ) we have ⟨ p , q ⟩ ∈ ℝ 𝑝 𝑞
ℝ \langle p,q\rangle\in{\mathbb{R}} ⟨ italic_p , italic_q ⟩ ∈ blackboard_R . To construct the q i subscript 𝑞 𝑖 q_{i} italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ’s, we use mathematical induction on i 𝑖 i italic_i .
Base of induction. Since s 0 ( t ) = 1 subscript 𝑠 0 𝑡 1 s_{0}(t)=1 italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = 1 is a constant function, λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ is not a root of s 0 ( t ) subscript 𝑠 0 𝑡 s_{0}(t) italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) . So, we can define q 0 ( t ) := s 0 ( t ) assign subscript 𝑞 0 𝑡 subscript 𝑠 0 𝑡 q_{0}(t):=s_{0}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) := italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) . Next, define r 1 ( t ) subscript 𝑟 1 𝑡 r_{1}(t) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) in the following way
r 1 ( t ) subscript 𝑟 1 𝑡 \displaystyle r_{1}(t) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t )
:= s 1 ( t ) − ∑ ℓ = 0 0 ⟨ q ℓ , s 1 ⟩ ‖ q ℓ ‖ 2 q ℓ ( t ) assign absent subscript 𝑠 1 𝑡 superscript subscript ℓ 0 0 subscript 𝑞 ℓ subscript 𝑠 1
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 ℓ 2 subscript 𝑞 ℓ 𝑡 \displaystyle:=s_{1}(t)-\sum_{\ell=0}^{0}\frac{\langle q_{\ell},s_{1}\rangle}{%
\|q_{\ell}\|^{2}}q_{\ell}(t) := italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t )
= s 1 ( t ) − ⟨ q 0 , s 1 ⟩ ‖ q 0 ‖ 2 q 0 ( t ) . absent subscript 𝑠 1 𝑡 subscript 𝑞 0 subscript 𝑠 1
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 0 2 subscript 𝑞 0 𝑡 \displaystyle=s_{1}(t)-\frac{\langle q_{0},s_{1}\rangle}{\|q_{0}\|^{2}}q_{0}(t). = italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) - divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) .
For the polynomial r 1 ( t ) subscript 𝑟 1 𝑡 r_{1}(t) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) two cases are possible: either r 1 ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑟 1 𝜆 0 r_{1}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 or r 1 ( λ ) = 0 subscript 𝑟 1 𝜆 0 r_{1}(\lambda)=0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) = 0 .
In the first case (i.e., r 1 ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑟 1 𝜆 0 r_{1}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 ), we let q 1 ( t ) := r 1 ( t ) assign subscript 𝑞 1 𝑡 subscript 𝑟 1 𝑡 q_{1}(t):=r_{1}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) := italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) .
In the second case (i.e., r 1 ( λ ) = 0 subscript 𝑟 1 𝜆 0 r_{1}(\lambda)=0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) = 0 ), we have λ = s 1 ( λ ) = ⟨ q 0 , s 1 ⟩ ‖ q 0 ‖ 2 q 0 ( λ ) 𝜆 subscript 𝑠 1 𝜆 subscript 𝑞 0 subscript 𝑠 1
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 0 2 subscript 𝑞 0 𝜆 \lambda=s_{1}(\lambda)=\frac{\langle q_{0},s_{1}\rangle}{\|q_{0}\|^{2}}q_{0}(\lambda) italic_λ = italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) = divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) , which yields, for example, 2 λ ≠ ⟨ q 0 , s 1 ⟩ ‖ q 0 ‖ 2 q 0 ( λ ) 2 𝜆 subscript 𝑞 0 subscript 𝑠 1
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 0 2 subscript 𝑞 0 𝜆 2\lambda\neq\frac{\langle q_{0},s_{1}\rangle}{\|q_{0}\|^{2}}q_{0}(\lambda) 2 italic_λ ≠ divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) . Thus, we define q 1 ( t ) subscript 𝑞 1 𝑡 q_{1}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) in the following way
q 1 ( t ) := 2 s 1 ( t ) − ⟨ q 0 , s 1 ⟩ ‖ q 0 ‖ 2 q 0 ( t ) . assign subscript 𝑞 1 𝑡 2 subscript 𝑠 1 𝑡 subscript 𝑞 0 subscript 𝑠 1
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 0 2 subscript 𝑞 0 𝑡 q_{1}(t):=2s_{1}(t)-\frac{\langle q_{0},s_{1}\rangle}{\|q_{0}\|^{2}}q_{0}(t). italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) := 2 italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) - divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) .
In both cases, q 1 ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑞 1 𝜆 0 q_{1}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 and q 1 ( t ) subscript 𝑞 1 𝑡 q_{1}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) is a polynomial of degree 1 1 1 1 .
Induction step. Assume that we found an orthogonal set of polynomials{ q 0 ( t ) , q 1 ( t ) , … , q j − 1 ( t ) } ⊆ ℝ d [ t ] subscript 𝑞 0 𝑡 subscript 𝑞 1 𝑡 … subscript 𝑞 𝑗 1 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 \{q_{0}(t),q_{1}(t),\ldots,q_{j-1}(t)\}\subseteq{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] { italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , … , italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) } ⊆ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] such that q i ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑞 𝑖 𝜆 0 q_{i}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 (0 ≤ i ≤ j − 1 0 𝑖 𝑗 1 0\leq i\leq j-1 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_j - 1 , j ≥ 2 𝑗 2 j\geq 2 italic_j ≥ 2 ), i.e., such that λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ is not a root of q i ( t ) subscript 𝑞 𝑖 𝑡 q_{i}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) (and assume that each q i subscript 𝑞 𝑖 q_{i} italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT has degree i 𝑖 i italic_i ). Now, we define r j ( t ) subscript 𝑟 𝑗 𝑡 r_{j}(t) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) in the following way
r j ( t ) subscript 𝑟 𝑗 𝑡 \displaystyle r_{j}(t) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t )
:= s j ( t ) − ∑ ℓ = 0 j − 1 ⟨ q ℓ , s j ⟩ ‖ q ℓ ‖ 2 q ℓ ( t ) assign absent subscript 𝑠 𝑗 𝑡 superscript subscript ℓ 0 𝑗 1 subscript 𝑞 ℓ subscript 𝑠 𝑗
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 ℓ 2 subscript 𝑞 ℓ 𝑡 \displaystyle:=s_{j}(t)-\sum_{\ell=0}^{j-1}\frac{\langle q_{\ell},s_{j}\rangle%
}{\|q_{\ell}\|^{2}}q_{\ell}(t) := italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t )
For the polynomial r j ( t ) subscript 𝑟 𝑗 𝑡 r_{j}(t) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) two cases are possible: either r j ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑟 𝑗 𝜆 0 r_{j}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 or r j ( λ ) = 0 subscript 𝑟 𝑗 𝜆 0 r_{j}(\lambda)=0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) = 0 .
In the first case (i.e., r j ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑟 𝑗 𝜆 0 r_{j}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 ), we let q j ( t ) := r j ( t ) assign subscript 𝑞 𝑗 𝑡 subscript 𝑟 𝑗 𝑡 q_{j}(t):=r_{j}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) := italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) .
In the second case (i.e., r j ( λ ) = 0 subscript 𝑟 𝑗 𝜆 0 r_{j}(\lambda)=0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) = 0 ), we have
λ j = s j ( λ ) = ∑ ℓ = 0 j − 1 ⟨ q ℓ , s j ⟩ ‖ q ℓ ‖ 2 q ℓ ( λ ) , superscript 𝜆 𝑗 subscript 𝑠 𝑗 𝜆 superscript subscript ℓ 0 𝑗 1 subscript 𝑞 ℓ subscript 𝑠 𝑗
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 ℓ 2 subscript 𝑞 ℓ 𝜆 \lambda^{j}=s_{j}(\lambda)=\sum_{\ell=0}^{j-1}\frac{\langle q_{\ell},s_{j}%
\rangle}{\|q_{\ell}\|^{2}}q_{\ell}(\lambda), italic_λ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ,
which yields, for example, 2 λ j ≠ ∑ ℓ = 0 j − 1 ⟨ q ℓ , s j ⟩ ‖ q ℓ ‖ 2 q ℓ ( λ ) 2 superscript 𝜆 𝑗 superscript subscript ℓ 0 𝑗 1 subscript 𝑞 ℓ subscript 𝑠 𝑗
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 ℓ 2 subscript 𝑞 ℓ 𝜆 2\lambda^{j}\neq\sum_{\ell=0}^{j-1}\frac{\langle q_{\ell},s_{j}\rangle}{\|q_{%
\ell}\|^{2}}q_{\ell}(\lambda) 2 italic_λ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ≠ ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) . Thus, we define q j ( t ) subscript 𝑞 𝑗 𝑡 q_{j}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) in the following way
q j ( t ) := 2 s j ( t ) − ∑ ℓ = 0 j − 1 ⟨ q ℓ , s j ⟩ ‖ q ℓ ‖ 2 q ℓ ( t ) assign subscript 𝑞 𝑗 𝑡 2 subscript 𝑠 𝑗 𝑡 superscript subscript ℓ 0 𝑗 1 subscript 𝑞 ℓ subscript 𝑠 𝑗
superscript norm subscript 𝑞 ℓ 2 subscript 𝑞 ℓ 𝑡 q_{j}(t):=2s_{j}(t)-\sum_{\ell=0}^{j-1}\frac{\langle q_{\ell},s_{j}\rangle}{\|%
q_{\ell}\|^{2}}q_{\ell}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) := 2 italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t )
In both cases, q j ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑞 𝑗 𝜆 0 q_{j}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 and q j ( t ) subscript 𝑞 𝑗 𝑡 q_{j}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) is a polynomial of degree j 𝑗 j italic_j (by construction).
Lemma 4.3
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal irreducible matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues { λ , λ 1 , … , λ d } 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 1 normal-… subscript 𝜆 𝑑 \{\lambda,\lambda_{1},\ldots,\lambda_{d}\} { italic_λ , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , such that B 𝐣 = λ 𝐣 𝐵 𝐣 𝜆 𝐣 B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=\lambda\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_B bold_j = italic_λ bold_j ( λ ≠ 0 ) 𝜆 0 (\lambda\neq 0) ( italic_λ ≠ 0 ) . For every p , q ∈ ℝ d [ t ] 𝑝 𝑞
subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 p,q\in{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] italic_p , italic_q ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] we define an inner product ⟨ p , q ⟩ 𝑝 𝑞
\langle p,q\rangle ⟨ italic_p , italic_q ⟩ on ℝ d [ x ] subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑥 {\mathbb{R}}_{d}[x] blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_x ] as in (11 ), and let ‖ p ‖ 2 = ⟨ p , p ⟩ superscript norm 𝑝 2 𝑝 𝑝
\|p\|^{2}=\langle p,p\rangle ∥ italic_p ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ⟨ italic_p , italic_p ⟩ . Then, there exists a set of orthogonal polynomials with respect to (11 ), such that deg ( p i ) = i degree subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝑖 \deg(p_{i})=i roman_deg ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_i ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) and they are normalized in such a way that ‖ p i ‖ 2 = p i ( λ ) ∈ ℝ + superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝜆 superscript ℝ \|p_{i}\|^{2}=p_{i}(\lambda)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{+} ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) .
Proof. Our proof is by construction. By Lemma 4.2 , we always can find an orthogonal system of polynomials { q 0 ( t ) , q 1 ( t ) , … , q d ( t ) } ⊆ ℝ d [ t ] subscript 𝑞 0 𝑡 subscript 𝑞 1 𝑡 … subscript 𝑞 𝑑 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 \{q_{0}(t),q_{1}(t),\ldots,q_{d}(t)\}\subseteq{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] { italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , … , italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) } ⊆ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] such that q i ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑞 𝑖 𝜆 0 q_{i}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) (i.e., that λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ is not a root of any q i ( t ) subscript 𝑞 𝑖 𝑡 q_{i}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ) and that each q i subscript 𝑞 𝑖 q_{i} italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is of degree i 𝑖 i italic_i . Next, we first define polynomial r i ( t ) subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝑡 r_{i}(t) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) on the following way
r i ( t ) subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝑡 \displaystyle r_{i}(t) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t )
= 1 ‖ q i ‖ q i ( t ) ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) . absent 1 norm subscript 𝑞 𝑖 subscript 𝑞 𝑖 𝑡 0 𝑖 𝑑
\displaystyle=\frac{1}{\|q_{i}\|}q_{i}(t)\qquad(0\leq i\leq d). = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) .
Note that { r 0 ( t ) , r 1 ( t ) , … , r d ( t ) } ⊆ ℝ d [ t ] subscript 𝑟 0 𝑡 subscript 𝑟 1 𝑡 … subscript 𝑟 𝑑 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 \{r_{0}(t),r_{1}(t),\ldots,r_{d}(t)\}\subseteq{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] { italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , … , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) } ⊆ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] orthonormal system of polynomials, and that we have deg r i = i deg subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝑖 \operatorname{deg}r_{i}=i roman_deg italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_i , ‖ r i ‖ = 1 norm subscript 𝑟 𝑖 1 \|r_{i}\|=1 ∥ italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ = 1 ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) , and by our choice of the q i subscript 𝑞 𝑖 q_{i} italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ’s, we also have r i ( λ ) ≠ 0 subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝜆 0 r_{i}(\lambda)\neq 0 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ≠ 0 ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) . For arbitrary nonzero real numbers α 0 , α 1 , … , α d subscript 𝛼 0 subscript 𝛼 1 … subscript 𝛼 𝑑
\alpha_{0},\alpha_{1},\ldots,\alpha_{d} italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , the set { α 0 r 0 , α 1 r 1 , … , α d r r } subscript 𝛼 0 subscript 𝑟 0 subscript 𝛼 1 subscript 𝑟 1 … subscript 𝛼 𝑑 subscript 𝑟 𝑟 \{\alpha_{0}r_{0},\alpha_{1}r_{1},\ldots,\alpha_{d}r_{r}\} { italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } is again an orthogonal set. For any r i ( t ) ∈ ℝ d [ t ] subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 r_{i}(t)\in{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) , define c := r i ( λ ) assign 𝑐 subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝜆 c:=r_{i}(\lambda) italic_c := italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) and p i ( t ) := c r i ( t ) assign subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝑡 𝑐 subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝑡 p_{i}(t):=cr_{i}(t) italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) := italic_c italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) (note that c ≠ 0 𝑐 0 c\neq 0 italic_c ≠ 0 by our construction). We have
‖ p i ‖ 2 = ⟨ c r i , c r i ⟩ = c 2 ‖ r i ‖ ⏟ = 1 = c ⋅ c = c r i ( λ ) = p i ( λ ) . superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 𝑐 subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝑐 subscript 𝑟 𝑖
superscript 𝑐 2 subscript ⏟ norm subscript 𝑟 𝑖 absent 1 ⋅ 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 subscript 𝑟 𝑖 𝜆 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝜆 \|p_{i}\|^{2}=\langle cr_{i},cr_{i}\rangle=c^{2}\underbrace{\|r_{i}\|}_{=1}=c%
\cdot c=cr_{i}(\lambda)=p_{i}(\lambda). ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ⟨ italic_c italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_c italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ = italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT under⏟ start_ARG ∥ italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_c ⋅ italic_c = italic_c italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) .
Thus, ‖ p i ‖ 2 = p i ( λ ) superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝜆 \|p_{i}\|^{2}=p_{i}(\lambda) ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) . Note that the set { p 0 ( t ) , p 1 ( t ) , … , p d ( t ) } subscript 𝑝 0 𝑡 subscript 𝑝 1 𝑡 … subscript 𝑝 𝑑 𝑡 \{p_{0}(t),p_{1}(t),\ldots,p_{d}(t)\} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , … , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) } is an orthogonal system and p 0 ( t ) = 1 subscript 𝑝 0 𝑡 1 p_{0}(t)=1 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = 1 .
Definition 4.4
Let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal irreducible matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues { λ , λ 1 , … , λ d } 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 1 … subscript 𝜆 𝑑 \{\lambda,\lambda_{1},\ldots,\lambda_{d}\} { italic_λ , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , such that B 𝐣 = λ 𝐣 𝐵 𝐣 𝜆 𝐣 B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=\lambda\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_B bold_j = italic_λ bold_j . For every p , q ∈ ℝ d [ t ] 𝑝 𝑞
subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 p,q\in{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] italic_p , italic_q ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] we define ⟨ p , q ⟩ 𝑝 𝑞
\langle p,q\rangle ⟨ italic_p , italic_q ⟩ as in (11 ) (i.e., ⟨ p , q ⟩ = 1 | X | trace ( p ( B ) q ( B ) ¯ ⊤ ) 𝑝 𝑞
1 𝑋 trace 𝑝 𝐵 superscript ¯ 𝑞 𝐵 top \langle p,q\rangle={1\over|X|}\operatorname{trace}(p(B)\overline{q(B)}^{\top}) ⟨ italic_p , italic_q ⟩ = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_p ( italic_B ) over¯ start_ARG italic_q ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ), and let ‖ p ‖ 2 = ⟨ p , p ⟩ superscript norm 𝑝 2 𝑝 𝑝
\|p\|^{2}=\langle p,p\rangle ∥ italic_p ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ⟨ italic_p , italic_p ⟩ . With reference to Lemma 4.3 , the set of so-called predistance polynomials { p 0 , p 1 , … , p d } ⊆ ℝ d [ t ] subscript 𝑝 0 subscript 𝑝 1 … subscript 𝑝 𝑑 subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 \{p_{0},p_{1},\ldots,p_{d}\}\subseteq{\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } ⊆ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] , is a set of orthogonal polynomials with respect to the inner product (11 ) (defined on the vector space ℝ d [ t ] subscript ℝ 𝑑 delimited-[] 𝑡 {\mathbb{R}}_{d}[t] blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ), such that deg ( p i ) = i degree subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝑖 \deg(p_{i})=i roman_deg ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_i ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) and they are normalized in such a way that ‖ p i ‖ 2 = p i ( λ ) superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝜆 \|p_{i}\|^{2}=p_{i}(\lambda) ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) . Note that p i ( λ ) ∈ ℝ + subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝜆 superscript ℝ p_{i}(\lambda)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{+} italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) .
Lemma 4.5
With reference to Definition 4.4 , let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues. If { p 0 , p 1 , … , p d } subscript 𝑝 0 subscript 𝑝 1 normal-… subscript 𝑝 𝑑 \{p_{0},p_{1},\ldots,p_{d}\} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denotes the set of the predistance polynomials, then
∑ i = 0 d p i ( B ) = J . superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝑑 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 𝐽 \sum_{i=0}^{d}p_{i}(B)=J. ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_J .
Proof.
Our proof uses the same technique that implicitly can be found, for example, in [9 , 10 , 23 , 26 ] .
Let h ( t ) ℎ 𝑡 h(t) italic_h ( italic_t ) denote the Hoffman polynomial, i.e., h ( B ) = J ℎ 𝐵 𝐽 h(B)=J italic_h ( italic_B ) = italic_J (see Theorem 1.1 ). If we denote by { λ , λ 1 , λ 2 , … , λ d } 𝜆 subscript 𝜆 1 subscript 𝜆 2 … subscript 𝜆 𝑑 \{\lambda,\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2},\ldots,\lambda_{d}\} { italic_λ , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } the set of the distinct eigenvalues of B 𝐵 B italic_B , then h ( λ ) = | X | ℎ 𝜆 𝑋 h(\lambda)=|X| italic_h ( italic_λ ) = | italic_X | and h ( μ ) = 0 ℎ 𝜇 0 h(\mu)=0 italic_h ( italic_μ ) = 0 for μ ∈ { λ 1 , λ 2 , … , λ d } 𝜇 subscript 𝜆 1 subscript 𝜆 2 … subscript 𝜆 𝑑 \mu\in\{\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2},...,\lambda_{d}\} italic_μ ∈ { italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } (see Theorem 1.1 ). Since B 𝐵 B italic_B is a normal matrix, there exists a unitary matrix U 𝑈 U italic_U such that B = U Λ U ¯ ⊤ 𝐵 𝑈 Λ superscript ¯ 𝑈 top B=U\Lambda\overline{U}^{\top} italic_B = italic_U roman_Λ over¯ start_ARG italic_U end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , where Λ Λ \Lambda roman_Λ is diagonal matrix in which the diagonal entries are the eigenvalues of B 𝐵 B italic_B . Let diag ( Λ ) diag Λ \operatorname{diag}(\Lambda) roman_diag ( roman_Λ ) denote the list of all diagonal entries of Λ Λ \Lambda roman_Λ . Then, we have
⟨ h , p j ⟩ ℎ subscript 𝑝 𝑗
\displaystyle\langle h,p_{j}\rangle ⟨ italic_h , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩
= 1 | X | trace ( h ( B ) p j ( B ) ¯ ⊤ ) absent 1 𝑋 trace ℎ 𝐵 superscript ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝐵 top \displaystyle={1\over|X|}\operatorname{trace}(h(B)\overline{p_{j}(B)}^{\top}) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_h ( italic_B ) over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
= 1 | X | trace ( U h ( Λ ) p j ( Λ ) ¯ ⊤ U ¯ ⊤ ) absent 1 𝑋 trace 𝑈 ℎ Λ superscript ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑗 Λ top superscript ¯ 𝑈 top \displaystyle={1\over|X|}\operatorname{trace}(Uh(\Lambda)\overline{p_{j}(%
\Lambda)}^{\top}\overline{U}^{\top}) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_U italic_h ( roman_Λ ) over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Λ ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over¯ start_ARG italic_U end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
= 1 | X | trace ( h ( Λ ) p j ( Λ ) ¯ ⊤ ) absent 1 𝑋 trace ℎ Λ superscript ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑗 Λ top \displaystyle={1\over|X|}\operatorname{trace}(h(\Lambda)\overline{p_{j}(%
\Lambda)}^{\top}) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_h ( roman_Λ ) over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Λ ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
= 1 | X | trace ( h ( Λ ) p j ( Λ ) ¯ ) absent 1 𝑋 trace ℎ Λ ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑗 Λ \displaystyle={1\over|X|}\operatorname{trace}(h(\Lambda)\overline{p_{j}(%
\Lambda)}) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_h ( roman_Λ ) over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Λ ) end_ARG )
= 1 | X | ∑ μ ∈ diag ( Λ ) h ( μ ) p j ( μ ) ¯ absent 1 𝑋 subscript 𝜇 diag Λ ℎ 𝜇 ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝜇 \displaystyle={1\over|X|}\sum_{\mu\in\operatorname{diag}(\Lambda)}h(\mu)%
\overline{p_{j}(\mu)} = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ ∈ roman_diag ( roman_Λ ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_μ ) over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_μ ) end_ARG
= 1 | X | ⋅ h ( λ ) ⋅ p j ( λ ) absent ⋅ ⋅ 1 𝑋 ℎ 𝜆 subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝜆 \displaystyle={1\over|X|}\cdot h(\lambda)\cdot{p_{j}(\lambda)} = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ⋅ italic_h ( italic_λ ) ⋅ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ )
which yields
⟨ h , p j ⟩ = ‖ p j ‖ 2 ( 0 ≤ j ≤ d ) . ℎ subscript 𝑝 𝑗
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑗 2 0 𝑗 𝑑
\langle h,p_{j}\rangle=\|p_{j}\|^{2}\qquad(0\leq j\leq d). ⟨ italic_h , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ = ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ italic_j ≤ italic_d ) .
(13)
On the other hand, the Fourier expansion of h ℎ h italic_h is
h = ⟨ h , p 0 ⟩ ‖ p 0 ‖ 2 p 0 + ⟨ h , p 1 ⟩ ‖ p 1 ‖ 2 p 1 + ⋯ + ⟨ h , p d ⟩ ‖ p d ‖ 2 p d . ℎ ℎ subscript 𝑝 0
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 0 2 subscript 𝑝 0 ℎ subscript 𝑝 1
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 1 2 subscript 𝑝 1 ⋯ ℎ subscript 𝑝 𝑑
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑑 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑑 h=\frac{\langle h,p_{0}\rangle}{\|p_{0}\|^{2}}p_{0}+\frac{\langle h,p_{1}%
\rangle}{\|p_{1}\|^{2}}p_{1}+\cdots+\frac{\langle h,p_{d}\rangle}{\|p_{d}\|^{2%
}}p_{d}. italic_h = divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_h , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_h , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_h , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
(14)
By (13 ) and (14 ), the result follows.
Proposition 4.6
With reference to Definition 4.4 , let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues.
Let Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B , with adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A , diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D , and let A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denote the distance-D 𝐷 D italic_D matrix of Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ .
Assume that d = D 𝑑 𝐷 d=D italic_d = italic_D , and let { p 0 , p 1 , … , p D } subscript 𝑝 0 subscript 𝑝 1 normal-… subscript 𝑝 𝐷 \{p_{0},p_{1},\ldots,p_{D}\} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denote the set of the predistance polynomials. If there exists a polynomial q ( t ) ∈ ℝ D [ t ] 𝑞 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝐷 delimited-[] 𝑡 q(t)\in{\mathbb{R}}_{D}[t] italic_q ( italic_t ) ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] such that A D = q ( B ) subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑞 𝐵 A_{D}=q(B) italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_q ( italic_B ) , then
q ( t ) = p D ( t ) . 𝑞 𝑡 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝑡 q(t)=p_{D}(t). italic_q ( italic_t ) = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) .
Proof. By our assumption, B 𝐣 = λ 𝐣 𝐵 𝐣 𝜆 𝐣 B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=\lambda\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_B bold_j = italic_λ bold_j . We first show that ‖ q ‖ 2 = q ( λ ) superscript norm 𝑞 2 𝑞 𝜆 \|q\|^{2}=q(\lambda) ∥ italic_q ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_q ( italic_λ ) . Note that A D 𝐣 = q ( B ) 𝐣 = q ( λ ) 𝐣 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝐣 𝑞 𝐵 𝐣 𝑞 𝜆 𝐣 A_{D}\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=q(B)\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=q(\lambda%
)\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_j = italic_q ( italic_B ) bold_j = italic_q ( italic_λ ) bold_j , and from (10 )
‖ q ‖ 2 superscript norm 𝑞 2 \displaystyle\|q\|^{2} ∥ italic_q ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
= 1 | X | trace ( q ( B ) q ( B ) ¯ ⊤ ) absent 1 𝑋 trace 𝑞 𝐵 superscript ¯ 𝑞 𝐵 top \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\operatorname{trace}(q(B)\overline{q(B)}^{\top}) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_q ( italic_B ) over¯ start_ARG italic_q ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
= 1 | X | ∑ x , y ∈ X ( A D ) x y = 1 | X | ∑ x ∈ X ( A D 𝐣 ) x absent 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑥 𝑦 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑥 𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝐣 𝑥 \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum_{x,y\in X}(A_{D})_{xy}=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum_{x\in
X%
}(A_{D}\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}})_{x} = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_j ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= 1 | X | ⋅ | X | ⋅ q ( λ ) absent ⋅ 1 𝑋 𝑋 𝑞 𝜆 \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\cdot|X|\cdot q(\lambda) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ⋅ | italic_X | ⋅ italic_q ( italic_λ )
= q ( λ ) . absent 𝑞 𝜆 \displaystyle=q(\lambda). = italic_q ( italic_λ ) .
Recall that { p 0 , p 1 , … , p D } subscript 𝑝 0 subscript 𝑝 1 … subscript 𝑝 𝐷 \{p_{0},p_{1},\ldots,p_{D}\} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } is a set of orthogonal polynomials such that deg ( p i ) = i degree subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝑖 \deg(p_{i})=i roman_deg ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_i and ‖ p i ‖ 2 = p i ( λ ) superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝜆 \|p_{i}\|^{2}=p_{i}(\lambda) ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ( 0 ≤ i ≤ D ) 0 𝑖 𝐷 (0\leq i\leq D) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_D ) . Next note that
⟨ q , p i ⟩ 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑖
\displaystyle\langle q,p_{i}\rangle ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩
= 1 | X | trace ( q ( B ) p i ( B ) ¯ ⊤ ) absent 1 𝑋 trace 𝑞 𝐵 superscript ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 top \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\operatorname{trace}(q(B)\overline{p_{i}(B)}^{\top}) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_q ( italic_B ) over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
= 1 | X | ∑ x , y ∈ X ( A D ∘ p i ( B ) ¯ ) x y absent 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum_{x,y\in X}\left(A_{D}\circ\overline{p_{i}(B)}%
\right)_{xy} = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= { 0 , if 0 ≤ i ≤ D − 1 , 1 | X | ∑ x , y ∈ X ( A D ∘ p D ( B ) ¯ ) x y , if i = D ( by Lemmas 2.8 , 2.9 ) . absent cases 0 if 0 ≤ i ≤ D − 1 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 if i = D by Lemmas 2.8 , 2.9 \displaystyle=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}0,&\mbox{ if $0\leq i\leq D-1$},\\
\frac{1}{|X|}\displaystyle\sum_{x,y\in X}\left(A_{D}\circ\overline{p_{D}(B)}%
\right)_{xy},&\mbox{ if $i=D$}\end{array}\right.(\mbox{by Lemmas~{}\ref{hB}, %
\ref{hC}}). = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 0 , end_CELL start_CELL if 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_D - 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , end_CELL start_CELL if italic_i = italic_D end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ( by Lemmas , ) .
This yields that the Fourier expansion of q = ∑ i = 0 D ⟨ q , p i ⟩ ‖ p i ‖ 2 p i 𝑞 superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝐷 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑖
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 q=\sum_{i=0}^{D}\frac{\langle q,p_{i}\rangle}{\|p_{i}\|^{2}}p_{i} italic_q = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is equal to
q = ⟨ q , p D ⟩ ‖ p D ‖ 2 p D and ⟨ q , p D ⟩ ≠ 0 formulae-sequence 𝑞 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝐷
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝐷 2 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 and
𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝐷
0 q=\frac{\langle q,p_{D}\rangle}{\|p_{D}\|^{2}}p_{D}\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad%
\langle q,p_{D}\rangle\neq 0 italic_q = divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ≠ 0
which implies p D = c ⋅ q subscript 𝑝 𝐷 ⋅ 𝑐 𝑞 p_{D}=c\cdot q italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_c ⋅ italic_q where c = ‖ p D ‖ 2 ⟨ q , p D ⟩ 𝑐 superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝐷 2 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝐷
c=\frac{\|p_{D}\|^{2}}{\langle q,p_{D}\rangle} italic_c = divide start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG . To conclude, we show that c = 1 𝑐 1 c=1 italic_c = 1 :
q ( λ ) 𝑞 𝜆 \displaystyle q(\lambda) italic_q ( italic_λ )
= ⟨ q , p D ⟩ ‖ p D ‖ 2 p D ( λ ) ⏟ = ‖ p D ‖ 2 absent 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝐷
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝐷 2 subscript ⏟ subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝜆 absent superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝐷 2 \displaystyle=\frac{\langle q,p_{D}\rangle}{\|p_{D}\|^{2}}\underbrace{p_{D}(%
\lambda)}_{=\|p_{D}\|^{2}} = divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG under⏟ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ⟨ q , p D ⟩ = ⟨ q , c q ⟩ absent 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝐷
𝑞 𝑐 𝑞
\displaystyle=\langle q,p_{D}\rangle=\langle q,cq\rangle = ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ = ⟨ italic_q , italic_c italic_q ⟩
= c ¯ ⟨ q , q ⟩ = c ¯ ‖ q ‖ 2 absent ¯ 𝑐 𝑞 𝑞
¯ 𝑐 superscript norm 𝑞 2 \displaystyle=\overline{c}\langle q,q\rangle=\overline{c}\|q\|^{2} = over¯ start_ARG italic_c end_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_q ⟩ = over¯ start_ARG italic_c end_ARG ∥ italic_q ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
= c ¯ q ( λ ) . absent ¯ 𝑐 𝑞 𝜆 \displaystyle=\overline{c}q(\lambda). = over¯ start_ARG italic_c end_ARG italic_q ( italic_λ ) .
The result follows.
Lemma 4.7
With reference to Definition 4.4 , let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues.
Let Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B with diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D , and let A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denote the distance-D 𝐷 D italic_D matrix of Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ . Assume that D ≥ 3 𝐷 3 D\geq 3 italic_D ≥ 3 . For any x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X , if ∂ ( x , y ) ≤ D − 2 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 2 \partial(x,y)\leq D-2 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ≤ italic_D - 2 in Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ , then
( A D B ⊤ ) x y = 0 . subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 0 (A_{D}B^{\top})_{xy}=0. ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 .
Proof.
For any x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X , we have
( A D B ⊤ ) x y subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle(A_{D}B^{\top})_{xy} ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ X ( A D ) x z ( B ⊤ ) z y absent subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑥 𝑧 subscript superscript 𝐵 top 𝑧 𝑦 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in X}(A_{D})_{xz}(B^{\top})_{zy} = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ Γ D → ( x ) ( B ) y z . absent subscript 𝑧 superscript subscript Γ 𝐷 → 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in\Gamma_{D}^{\rightarrow}(x)}(B)_{yz}. = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Our proof is by a contradiction. Assume that there exists x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X such that ∂ ( x , y ) ≤ D − 2 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 2 \partial(x,y)\leq D-2 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ≤ italic_D - 2 , and ( A D B ⊤ ) x y ≠ 0 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 0 (A_{D}B^{\top})_{xy}\neq 0 ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 . This yields ∑ z ∈ Γ D → ( x ) ( B ) y z ≠ 0 subscript 𝑧 superscript subscript Γ 𝐷 → 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 0 \sum_{z\in\Gamma_{D}^{\rightarrow}(x)}(B)_{yz}\neq 0 ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 , i.e., there exists z ∈ Γ D → ( x ) 𝑧 subscript superscript Γ → 𝐷 𝑥 z\in\Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{D}(x) italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) such that ( B ) y z ≠ 0 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 0 (B)_{yz}\neq 0 ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 , or equivalently ( A ) y z = 1 subscript 𝐴 𝑦 𝑧 1 (A)_{yz}=1 ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 . Now consider the distance-i 𝑖 i italic_i partition { Γ i → ( x ) } i = 0 D superscript subscript subscript superscript Γ → 𝑖 𝑥 𝑖 0 𝐷 \{\Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{i}(x)\}_{i=0}^{D} { roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT of the vertex set X 𝑋 X italic_X (for our choice of x ∈ X 𝑥 𝑋 x\in X italic_x ∈ italic_X ). Since ∂ ( x , y ) ≤ D − 2 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 2 \partial(x,y)\leq D-2 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ≤ italic_D - 2 and ( A ) y z = 1 subscript 𝐴 𝑦 𝑧 1 (A)_{yz}=1 ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 , it follows that ∂ ( x , z ) ≤ D − 1 𝑥 𝑧 𝐷 1 \partial(x,z)\leq D-1 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_z ) ≤ italic_D - 1 , a contradiction with z ∈ Γ D → ( x ) 𝑧 subscript superscript Γ → 𝐷 𝑥 z\in\Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{D}(x) italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) . The result follows.
5 Case when 𝑨 𝑫 subscript 𝑨 𝑫 \boldsymbol{A_{D}} bold_italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is polynomial in 𝑩 𝑩 \boldsymbol{B} bold_italic_B
In this section, we prove Theorem 1.2 . For this purpose, we need Proposition 5.1 and Lemma 5.2 .
Proposition 5.1
With reference to Definition 4.4 , let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues.
Let Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B , with adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A , diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D , and let { A 0 , A 1 , … , A D } subscript 𝐴 0 subscript 𝐴 1 normal-… subscript 𝐴 𝐷 \{A_{0},A_{1},\ldots,A_{D}\} { italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denote the distance-i 𝑖 i italic_i matrices of Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ .
Assume that d = D 𝑑 𝐷 d=D italic_d = italic_D , and let { p 0 , p 1 , … , p D } subscript 𝑝 0 subscript 𝑝 1 normal-… subscript 𝑝 𝐷 \{p_{0},p_{1},\ldots,p_{D}\} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denote the set of predistance polynomials.
If A D = p D ( B ) subscript 𝐴 𝐷 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝐵 A_{D}=p_{D}(B) italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) , A D − 1 = p D − 1 ( B ) , … , A i + 1 = p i + 1 ( B ) formulae-sequence subscript 𝐴 𝐷 1 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 1 𝐵 normal-…
subscript 𝐴 𝑖 1 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 1 𝐵 A_{D-1}=p_{D-1}(B),\ldots,A_{i+1}=p_{i+1}(B) italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) , … , italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) , and if there exists a polynomial q ( t ) ∈ ℝ i [ t ] 𝑞 𝑡 subscript ℝ 𝑖 delimited-[] 𝑡 q(t)\in{\mathbb{R}}_{i}[t] italic_q ( italic_t ) ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] such that A i = q ( B ) subscript 𝐴 𝑖 𝑞 𝐵 A_{i}=q(B) italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_q ( italic_B ) , then
q ( t ) = p i ( t ) . 𝑞 𝑡 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝑡 q(t)=p_{i}(t). italic_q ( italic_t ) = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) .
Proof. The proof is similar to the proof of Proposition 4.6 . By assumption B 𝐣 = λ 𝐣 𝐵 𝐣 𝜆 𝐣 B\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=\lambda\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_B bold_j = italic_λ bold_j . We first show that ‖ q ‖ 2 = q ( λ ) superscript norm 𝑞 2 𝑞 𝜆 \|q\|^{2}=q(\lambda) ∥ italic_q ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_q ( italic_λ ) . Note that A i 𝐣 = q ( B ) 𝐣 = q ( λ ) 𝐣 subscript 𝐴 𝑖 𝐣 𝑞 𝐵 𝐣 𝑞 𝜆 𝐣 A_{i}\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=q(B)\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}}=q(\lambda%
)\operatorname{\boldsymbol{j}} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_j = italic_q ( italic_B ) bold_j = italic_q ( italic_λ ) bold_j , and from (10 )
‖ q ‖ 2 superscript norm 𝑞 2 \displaystyle\|q\|^{2} ∥ italic_q ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
= 1 | X | trace ( q ( B ) q ( B ) ¯ ⊤ ) absent 1 𝑋 trace 𝑞 𝐵 superscript ¯ 𝑞 𝐵 top \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\operatorname{trace}(q(B)\overline{q(B)}^{\top}) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_q ( italic_B ) over¯ start_ARG italic_q ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
= 1 | X | ∑ x , y ∈ X ( A i ) x y absent 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝑖 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum_{x,y\in X}(A_{i})_{xy} = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= 1 | X | ⋅ | X | ⋅ q ( λ ) absent ⋅ 1 𝑋 𝑋 𝑞 𝜆 \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\cdot|X|\cdot q(\lambda) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ⋅ | italic_X | ⋅ italic_q ( italic_λ )
= q ( λ ) . absent 𝑞 𝜆 \displaystyle=q(\lambda). = italic_q ( italic_λ ) .
Recall that { p 0 , p 1 , … , p D } subscript 𝑝 0 subscript 𝑝 1 … subscript 𝑝 𝐷 \{p_{0},p_{1},\ldots,p_{D}\} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } is a set of orthogonal polynomials such that deg ( p j ) = j degree subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝑗 \deg(p_{j})=j roman_deg ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_j and ‖ p j ‖ 2 = p j ( λ ) superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑗 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝜆 \|p_{j}\|^{2}=p_{j}(\lambda) ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) ( 0 ≤ j ≤ D ) 0 𝑗 𝐷 (0\leq j\leq D) ( 0 ≤ italic_j ≤ italic_D ) . Next note that
⟨ q , p j ⟩ 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑗
\displaystyle\langle q,p_{j}\rangle ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩
= 1 | X | trace ( q ( B ) p j ( B ) ¯ ⊤ ) absent 1 𝑋 trace 𝑞 𝐵 superscript ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝐵 top \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\operatorname{trace}(q(B)\overline{p_{j}(B)}^{\top}) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG roman_trace ( italic_q ( italic_B ) over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
= 1 | X | ∑ x , y ∈ X ( A i ∘ p j ( B ) ¯ ) x y absent 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝑖 ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum_{x,y\in X}\left(A_{i}\circ\overline{p_{j}(B)}%
\right)_{xy} = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= 1 | X | ∑ x , y ∈ X ( A i ∘ p j ( B ) ) x y absent 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝑖 subscript 𝑝 𝑗 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=\frac{1}{|X|}\sum_{x,y\in X}\left(A_{i}\circ{p_{j}(B)}\right)_{xy} = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= { 0 , if 0 ≤ j ≤ i − 1 , 1 | X | ∑ x , y ∈ X ( A i ∘ p i ( B ) ¯ ) x y , if j = i , 0 , if i + 1 ≤ j ≤ D ( by Lemmas 2.8 , 2.9 ) . absent cases 0 if 0 ≤ j ≤ i − 1 1 𝑋 subscript 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝑖 ¯ subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 if j = i , 0 if i + 1 ≤ j ≤ D by Lemmas 2.8 , 2.9 \displaystyle=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}0,&\mbox{ if $0\leq j\leq i-1$},\\
\displaystyle\frac{1}{|X|}\displaystyle\sum_{x,y\in X}\left(A_{i}\circ%
\overline{p_{i}(B)}\right)_{xy},&\mbox{ if $j=i$,}\\
0,&\mbox{ if $i+1\leq j\leq D$}\\
\end{array}\right.(\mbox{by Lemmas~{}\ref{hB}, \ref{hC}}). = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 0 , end_CELL start_CELL if 0 ≤ italic_j ≤ italic_i - 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG | italic_X | end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ over¯ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) end_ARG ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , end_CELL start_CELL if italic_j = italic_i , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 , end_CELL start_CELL if italic_i + 1 ≤ italic_j ≤ italic_D end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ( by Lemmas , ) .
This yields that the Fourier expansion of q = ∑ j = 0 D ⟨ q , p j ⟩ ‖ p j ‖ 2 p j 𝑞 superscript subscript 𝑗 0 𝐷 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑗
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑗 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑗 q=\sum_{j=0}^{D}\frac{\langle q,p_{j}\rangle}{\|p_{j}\|^{2}}p_{j} italic_q = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is equal to
q = ⟨ q , p i ⟩ ‖ p i ‖ 2 p i and ⟨ q , p i ⟩ ≠ 0 formulae-sequence 𝑞 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑖
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 and
𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑖
0 q=\frac{\langle q,p_{i}\rangle}{\|p_{i}\|^{2}}p_{i}\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad%
\langle q,p_{i}\rangle\neq 0 italic_q = divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ≠ 0
which implies p i = c ⋅ q subscript 𝑝 𝑖 ⋅ 𝑐 𝑞 p_{i}=c\cdot q italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_c ⋅ italic_q where c = ‖ p i ‖ 2 ⟨ q , p i ⟩ 𝑐 superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑖
c=\frac{\|p_{i}\|^{2}}{\langle q,p_{i}\rangle} italic_c = divide start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG . To conclude, we show that c = 1 𝑐 1 c=1 italic_c = 1 :
q ( λ ) 𝑞 𝜆 \displaystyle q(\lambda) italic_q ( italic_λ )
= ⟨ q , p i ⟩ ‖ p i ‖ 2 p i ( λ ) ⏟ = ‖ p i ‖ 2 absent 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑖
superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 subscript ⏟ subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝜆 absent superscript norm subscript 𝑝 𝑖 2 \displaystyle=\frac{\langle q,p_{i}\rangle}{\|p_{i}\|^{2}}\underbrace{p_{i}(%
\lambda)}_{=\|p_{i}\|^{2}} = divide start_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG start_ARG ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG under⏟ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∥ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ⟨ q , p i ⟩ = ⟨ q , c q ⟩ absent 𝑞 subscript 𝑝 𝑖
𝑞 𝑐 𝑞
\displaystyle=\langle q,p_{i}\rangle=\langle q,cq\rangle = ⟨ italic_q , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ = ⟨ italic_q , italic_c italic_q ⟩
= c ¯ ⟨ q , q ⟩ = c ¯ ‖ q ‖ 2 absent ¯ 𝑐 𝑞 𝑞
¯ 𝑐 superscript norm 𝑞 2 \displaystyle=\overline{c}\langle q,q\rangle=\overline{c}\|q\|^{2} = over¯ start_ARG italic_c end_ARG ⟨ italic_q , italic_q ⟩ = over¯ start_ARG italic_c end_ARG ∥ italic_q ∥ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
= c ¯ q ( λ ) . absent ¯ 𝑐 𝑞 𝜆 \displaystyle=\overline{c}q(\lambda). = over¯ start_ARG italic_c end_ARG italic_q ( italic_λ ) .
The result follows.
Lemma 5.2
With reference to Definition 4.4 , let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues.
Let Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B with diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D , and let { A 0 , A 1 , … , A D } subscript 𝐴 0 subscript 𝐴 1 normal-… subscript 𝐴 𝐷 \{A_{0},A_{1},\ldots,A_{D}\} { italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denote the distance-i 𝑖 i italic_i matrices of Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ . Assume that D − j − 1 ≥ 2 𝐷 𝑗 1 2 D-j-1\geq 2 italic_D - italic_j - 1 ≥ 2 . For any x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X , if ∂ ( x , y ) < D − j − 1 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 𝑗 1 \partial(x,y)<D-j-1 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) < italic_D - italic_j - 1 in Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ then
( A D − j B ⊤ ) x y = 0 . subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 0 (A_{D-j}B^{\top})_{xy}=0. ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 .
Proof.
The proof is similar to the proof of Lemma 4.7 . For any x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X , we have
( A D − j B ⊤ ) x y subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle(A_{D-j}B^{\top})_{xy} ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ X ( A D − j ) x z ( B ⊤ ) z y absent subscript 𝑧 𝑋 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 𝑥 𝑧 subscript superscript 𝐵 top 𝑧 𝑦 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in X}(A_{D-j})_{xz}(B^{\top})_{zy} = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ∑ z ∈ Γ D − j → ( x ) ( B ) y z . absent subscript 𝑧 superscript subscript Γ 𝐷 𝑗 → 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 \displaystyle=\sum_{z\in\Gamma_{D-j}^{\rightarrow}(x)}(B)_{yz}. = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Our proof is by a contradiction. Assume that there exists x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X such that ∂ ( x , y ) ≤ D − j − 2 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 𝑗 2 \partial(x,y)\leq D-j-2 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ≤ italic_D - italic_j - 2 , and ( A D − j B ⊤ ) x y ≠ 0 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 0 (A_{D-j}B^{\top})_{xy}\neq 0 ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 . This yields ∑ z ∈ Γ D − j → ( x ) ( B ) y z ≠ 0 subscript 𝑧 superscript subscript Γ 𝐷 𝑗 → 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 0 \sum_{z\in\Gamma_{D-j}^{\rightarrow}(x)}(B)_{yz}\neq 0 ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 , i.e., there exists z ∈ Γ D − j → ( x ) 𝑧 subscript superscript Γ → 𝐷 𝑗 𝑥 z\in\Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{D-j}(x) italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) such that ( B ) y z ≠ 0 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 0 (B)_{yz}\neq 0 ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 , or equivalently ( A ) y z = 1 subscript 𝐴 𝑦 𝑧 1 (A)_{yz}=1 ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 . Now consider the distance-i 𝑖 i italic_i partition { Γ i → ( x ) } i = 0 D superscript subscript subscript superscript Γ → 𝑖 𝑥 𝑖 0 𝐷 \{\Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{i}(x)\}_{i=0}^{D} { roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT of the vertex set X 𝑋 X italic_X (for our choice of x ∈ X 𝑥 𝑋 x\in X italic_x ∈ italic_X ). Since ∂ ( x , y ) ≤ D − j − 2 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 𝑗 2 \partial(x,y)\leq D-j-2 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ≤ italic_D - italic_j - 2 and ( A ) y z = 1 subscript 𝐴 𝑦 𝑧 1 (A)_{yz}=1 ( italic_A ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 , we have ∂ ( x , z ) ≤ D − j − 1 𝑥 𝑧 𝐷 𝑗 1 \partial(x,z)\leq D-j-1 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_z ) ≤ italic_D - italic_j - 1 , a contradiction with z ∈ Γ D − j → ( x ) 𝑧 subscript superscript Γ → 𝐷 𝑗 𝑥 z\in\Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{D-j}(x) italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) . The result follows.
Proposition 5.3
With reference to Definition 4.4 , let B ∈ Mat X ( ℝ ) 𝐵 subscript Mat 𝑋 ℝ B\in\mbox{\rm Mat}_{X}({\mathbb{R}}) italic_B ∈ Mat start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( blackboard_R ) denote a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic irreducible matrix with d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues.
Let Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) denote the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B , with adjacency matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A , diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D , and let A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denote the distance-D 𝐷 D italic_D matrix of Γ normal-Γ \Gamma roman_Γ .
Assume that d = D 𝑑 𝐷 d=D italic_d = italic_D , and let { p 0 , p 1 , … , p D } subscript 𝑝 0 subscript 𝑝 1 normal-… subscript 𝑝 𝐷 \{p_{0},p_{1},\ldots,p_{D}\} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denote the set of predistance polynomials.
If A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B , then
A i = p i ( B ) ( 0 ≤ i ≤ D ) . subscript 𝐴 𝑖 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 0 𝑖 𝐷
A_{i}=p_{i}(B)\qquad(0\leq i\leq D). italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_D ) .
Proof.
For the moment, let q m ( t ) = ∑ i = 0 m p i ( t ) subscript 𝑞 𝑚 𝑡 superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝑚 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝑡 q_{m}(t)=\sum_{i=0}^{m}p_{i}(t) italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ( 0 ≤ m ≤ D ) 0 𝑚 𝐷 (0\leq m\leq D) ( 0 ≤ italic_m ≤ italic_D ) , and note that deg ( q m ) = m degree subscript 𝑞 𝑚 𝑚 \deg(q_{m})=m roman_deg ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_m ( 0 ≤ m ≤ D ) 0 𝑚 𝐷 (0\leq m\leq D) ( 0 ≤ italic_m ≤ italic_D ) . Since A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B , by Proposition 4.6 , p D ( B ) = A D subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝐵 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 p_{D}(B)=A_{D} italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
We first prove that A D − 1 = p D − 1 ( B ) subscript 𝐴 𝐷 1 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 1 𝐵 A_{D-1}=p_{D-1}(B) italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) . If D = 2 𝐷 2 D=2 italic_D = 2 , the result follows (because p 0 ( t ) = 1 subscript 𝑝 0 𝑡 1 p_{0}(t)=1 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = 1 , by assumption p 2 ( B ) = A 2 subscript 𝑝 2 𝐵 subscript 𝐴 2 p_{2}(B)=A_{2} italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , and J = ∑ i = 0 2 p i ( B ) 𝐽 superscript subscript 𝑖 0 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 J=\sum_{i=0}^{2}p_{i}(B) italic_J = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) yields p 1 ( B ) = A subscript 𝑝 1 𝐵 𝐴 p_{1}(B)=A italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_A ). Assume that D ≥ 3 𝐷 3 D\geq 3 italic_D ≥ 3 . Pick x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X such that ∂ ( x , y ) = D − 1 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 1 \partial(x,y)=D-1 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) = italic_D - 1 , and note that ( q D − 2 ( B ) ) x y = 0 subscript subscript 𝑞 𝐷 2 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 0 (q_{D-2}(B))_{xy}=0 ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 . By Lemma 4.5 , we have
1 = ( J ) x y 1 subscript 𝐽 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle 1=(J)_{xy} 1 = ( italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( q D ( B ) ) x y absent subscript subscript 𝑞 𝐷 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=(q_{D}(B))_{xy} = ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( q D − 2 ( B ) + p D − 1 ( B ) + p D ( B ) ) x y absent subscript subscript 𝑞 𝐷 2 𝐵 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 1 𝐵 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=\left(q_{D-2}(B)+p_{D-1}(B)+p_{D}(B)\right)_{xy} = ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) + italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) + italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( q D − 2 ( B ) ) x y ⏟ = 0 + ( p D − 1 ( B ) ) x y + ( A D ) x y ⏟ = 0 absent subscript ⏟ subscript subscript 𝑞 𝐷 2 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 absent 0 subscript subscript 𝑝 𝐷 1 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 subscript ⏟ subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑥 𝑦 absent 0 \displaystyle=\underbrace{(q_{D-2}(B))_{xy}}_{=0}+(p_{D-1}(B))_{xy}+%
\underbrace{(A_{D})_{xy}}_{=0} = under⏟ start_ARG ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + under⏟ start_ARG ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( p D − 1 ( B ) ) x y . absent subscript subscript 𝑝 𝐷 1 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=(p_{D-1}(B))_{xy}. = ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
(15)
We can conclude that,
if ∂ ( x , y ) = D − 1 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 1 \partial(x,y)=D-1 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) = italic_D - 1 , then ( p D − 1 ( B ) ) x y = 1 subscript subscript 𝑝 𝐷 1 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 1 (p_{D-1}(B))_{xy}=1 ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 .
(16)
Using (16 ), we show that A D − 1 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 1 A_{D-1} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B .
Since A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B , by Proposition 4.6 , p D ( B ) = A D subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝐵 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 p_{D}(B)=A_{D} italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . By Lemma 4.7 , for any x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X ,
( A D B ⊤ ) x y = { 0 , if ∂ ( x , y ) ≤ D − 2 , ∑ z ∈ Γ D → ( x ) ( B ) y z , if ∂ ( x , y ) ∈ { D − 1 , D } ( x , y ∈ X ) . subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 cases 0 if 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 2 subscript 𝑧 superscript subscript Γ 𝐷 → 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 if 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 1 𝐷 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋
(A_{D}B^{\top})_{xy}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}0,&\mbox{if }\partial(x,y)\leq D%
-2,\\
\sum_{z\in\Gamma_{D}^{\rightarrow}(x)}(B)_{yz},&\mbox{if }\partial(x,y)\in\{D-%
1,D\}\end{array}\right.\quad(x,y\in X). ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 0 , end_CELL start_CELL if ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ≤ italic_D - 2 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , end_CELL start_CELL if ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ∈ { italic_D - 1 , italic_D } end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ( italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X ) .
(17)
Let ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B denote the vector space of all polynomials in B 𝐵 B italic_B . Since { p i ( B ) } i = 0 D superscript subscript subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 𝑖 0 𝐷 \{p_{i}(B)\}_{i=0}^{D} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a basis of ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B , and B ⊤ ∈ ℬ superscript 𝐵 top ℬ B^{\top}\in{\mathcal{B}} italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ caligraphic_B (see Proposition 2.11 (iv)), there exist complex scalars α h subscript 𝛼 ℎ \alpha_{h} italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ h ≤ D ) 0 ℎ 𝐷 (0\leq h\leq D) ( 0 ≤ italic_h ≤ italic_D ) such that
A D B ⊤ = ∑ h = 0 D α h p h ( B ) = ∑ h = 0 D − 1 α h p h ( B ) + α D p D ( B ) ⏟ A D . subscript 𝐴 𝐷 superscript 𝐵 top superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝐷 subscript 𝛼 ℎ subscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝐵 superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝐷 1 subscript 𝛼 ℎ subscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝐵 subscript 𝛼 𝐷 subscript ⏟ subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝐵 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D}B^{\top}=\sum_{h=0}^{D}\alpha_{h}p_{h}(B)=\sum_{h=0}^{D-1}\alpha_{h}p_{h}%
(B)+\alpha_{D}\underbrace{p_{D}(B)}_{A_{D}}. italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) + italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT under⏟ start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
(18)
By (17 ) and (18 ), note that
( ∑ h = 0 D α h p h ( B ) ) x y = 0 if ∂ ( x , y ) ≤ D − 2 . formulae-sequence subscript superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝐷 subscript 𝛼 ℎ subscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 0 if 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 2 \left(\sum_{h=0}^{D}\alpha_{h}p_{h}(B)\right)_{xy}=0\qquad\mbox{if }\partial(x%
,y)\leq D-2. ( ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 if ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ≤ italic_D - 2 .
(19)
Now, from (15 ), (16 ) and (19 ), we have
( ∑ h = 0 D − 1 α h p h ( B ) + α D A D ) x y = { 0 , if ∂ ( x , y ) ≤ D − 2 , α D − 1 , if ∂ ( x , y ) = D − 1 α D , if ∂ ( x , y ) = D ( x , y ∈ X ) , subscript superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝐷 1 subscript 𝛼 ℎ subscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝐵 subscript 𝛼 𝐷 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑥 𝑦 cases 0 if 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 2 subscript 𝛼 𝐷 1 if 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 1 subscript 𝛼 𝐷 if 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋
\left(\sum_{h=0}^{D-1}\alpha_{h}p_{h}(B)+\alpha_{D}A_{D}\right)_{xy}=\left\{%
\begin{array}[]{ll}0,&\mbox{if }\partial(x,y)\leq D-2,\\
\alpha_{D-1},&\mbox{if }\partial(x,y)=D-1\\
\alpha_{D},&\mbox{if }\partial(x,y)=D\end{array}\right.\quad(x,y\in X), ( ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) + italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 0 , end_CELL start_CELL if ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) ≤ italic_D - 2 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , end_CELL start_CELL if ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) = italic_D - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , end_CELL start_CELL if ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) = italic_D end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ( italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X ) ,
or, in other words,
∑ h = 0 D − 1 α h p h ( B ) = α D − 1 A D − 1 . superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝐷 1 subscript 𝛼 ℎ subscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝐵 subscript 𝛼 𝐷 1 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 1 \sum_{h=0}^{D-1}\alpha_{h}p_{h}(B)=\alpha_{D-1}A_{D-1}. ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
(20)
If α D − 1 = 0 subscript 𝛼 𝐷 1 0 \alpha_{D-1}=0 italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 then by (18 ) and (20 ), A D B ⊤ = α D A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 superscript 𝐵 top subscript 𝛼 𝐷 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D}B^{\top}=\alpha_{D}A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , a contradiction (see (17 )). Thus (20 ) yields that A D − 1 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 1 A_{D-1} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B . By Proposition 5.1 , p D − 1 ( B ) = A D − 1 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 1 𝐵 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 1 p_{D-1}(B)=A_{D-1} italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
If D = 3 𝐷 3 D=3 italic_D = 3 , the result follows. Assume that D ≥ 4 𝐷 4 D\geq 4 italic_D ≥ 4 , and that we executed j ≥ 1 𝑗 1 j\geq 1 italic_j ≥ 1 steps from above (where D − j − 1 ≥ 1 𝐷 𝑗 1 1 D-j-1\geq 1 italic_D - italic_j - 1 ≥ 1 ), i.e.,
A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 \displaystyle A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= p D ( B ) , A D − 1 = p D − 1 ( B ) , … , A D − j = p D − j ( B ) . formulae-sequence absent subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝐵 formulae-sequence subscript 𝐴 𝐷 1 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 1 𝐵 …
subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝑗 𝐵 \displaystyle=p_{D}(B),\qquad A_{D-1}=p_{D-1}(B),\qquad\ldots,\qquad A_{D-j}=p%
_{D-j}(B). = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) , italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) , … , italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) .
We now show that A D − j − 1 = p D − j − 1 ( B ) subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 1 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝑗 1 𝐵 A_{D-j-1}=p_{D-j-1}(B) italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) . Pick x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X such that ∂ ( x , y ) = D − j − 1 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 𝑗 1 \partial(x,y)=D-j-1 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) = italic_D - italic_j - 1 , and note that ( q D − j − 2 ( B ) ) x y = 0 subscript subscript 𝑞 𝐷 𝑗 2 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 0 (q_{D-j-2}(B))_{xy}=0 ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 (by Lemma 2.8 ). By Lemma 4.5 ,
1 = ( J ) x y 1 subscript 𝐽 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle 1=(J)_{xy} 1 = ( italic_J ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( q D ( B ) ) x y absent subscript subscript 𝑞 𝐷 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=(q_{D}(B))_{xy} = ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( q D − j − 2 ( B ) + p D − j − 1 ( B ) + ∑ i = D − j D p i ( B ) ) x y absent subscript subscript 𝑞 𝐷 𝑗 2 𝐵 subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝑗 1 𝐵 superscript subscript 𝑖 𝐷 𝑗 𝐷 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=\left(q_{D-j-2}(B)+p_{D-j-1}(B)+\sum_{i=D-j}^{D}p_{i}(B)\right)_%
{xy} = ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) + italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) + ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( q D − j − 2 ( B ) ) x y ⏟ = 0 + ( p D − j − 1 ( B ) ) x y + ( ∑ i = D − j D p i ( B ) ) x y ⏟ ( A D − j + ⋯ + A D ) x y = 0 absent subscript ⏟ subscript subscript 𝑞 𝐷 𝑗 2 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 absent 0 subscript subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝑗 1 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 subscript ⏟ subscript superscript subscript 𝑖 𝐷 𝑗 𝐷 subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 ⋯ subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑥 𝑦 0 \displaystyle=\underbrace{(q_{D-j-2}(B))_{xy}}_{=0}+(p_{D-j-1}(B))_{xy}+%
\underbrace{\left(\sum_{i=D-j}^{D}p_{i}(B)\right)_{xy}}_{(A_{D-j}+\cdots+A_{D}%
)_{xy}=0} = under⏟ start_ARG ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + under⏟ start_ARG ( ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= ( p D − j − 1 ( B ) ) x y . absent subscript subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝑗 1 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 \displaystyle=(p_{D-j-1}(B))_{xy}. = ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
We can conclude that,
if ∂ ( x , y ) = D − j − 1 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 𝑗 1 \partial(x,y)=D-j-1 ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) = italic_D - italic_j - 1 , then ( p D − j − 1 ( B ) ) x y = 1 subscript subscript 𝑝 𝐷 𝑗 1 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 1 (p_{D-j-1}(B))_{xy}=1 ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 .
(21)
Using (21 ), we prove that A D − j − 1 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 1 A_{D-j-1} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B .
Consider the product A D − j B ⊤ subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top A_{D-j}B^{\top} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . For arbitrary x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X , by Lemma 5.2 , we have
( A D − j B ⊤ ) x y = 0 , if ∂ ( x , y ) < D − j − 1 . formulae-sequence subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 0 if 𝑥 𝑦 𝐷 𝑗 1 (A_{D-j}B^{\top})_{xy}=0,\qquad\mbox{if }\partial(x,y)<D-j-1. ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 , if ∂ ( italic_x , italic_y ) < italic_D - italic_j - 1 .
(22)
Since { p i ( B ) } i = 0 D superscript subscript subscript 𝑝 𝑖 𝐵 𝑖 0 𝐷 \{p_{i}(B)\}_{i=0}^{D} { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a linearly independent set and B ⊤ ∈ ℬ superscript 𝐵 top ℬ B^{\top}\in{\mathcal{B}} italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ caligraphic_B , there exist complex scalars β h subscript 𝛽 ℎ \beta_{h} italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ h ≤ D ) 0 ℎ 𝐷 (0\leq h\leq D) ( 0 ≤ italic_h ≤ italic_D ) such that
A D − j B ⊤ = ∑ h = 0 D β h p h ( B ) = ∑ h = 0 D − j − 1 β h p h ( B ) + β D − j A D − j + ⋯ + β D A D . subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝐷 subscript 𝛽 ℎ subscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝐵 superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝐷 𝑗 1 subscript 𝛽 ℎ subscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝐵 subscript 𝛽 𝐷 𝑗 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 ⋯ subscript 𝛽 𝐷 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D-j}B^{\top}=\sum_{h=0}^{D}\beta_{h}p_{h}(B)=\sum_{h=0}^{D-j-1}\beta_{h}p_{%
h}(B)+\beta_{D-j}A_{D-j}+\cdots+\beta_{D}A_{D}. italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) + italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
(23)
By (21 ), (22 ) and (23 ) we have
∑ h = 0 D − j − 1 β h p h ( B ) = β D − j − 1 A D − j − 1 . superscript subscript ℎ 0 𝐷 𝑗 1 subscript 𝛽 ℎ subscript 𝑝 ℎ 𝐵 subscript 𝛽 𝐷 𝑗 1 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 1 \sum_{h=0}^{D-j-1}\beta_{h}p_{h}(B)=\beta_{D-j-1}A_{D-j-1}. ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) = italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Next we prove that β D − j − 1 ≠ 0 subscript 𝛽 𝐷 𝑗 1 0 \beta_{D-j-1}\neq 0 italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 . The proof is by contradiction. If β D − j − 1 = 0 subscript 𝛽 𝐷 𝑗 1 0 \beta_{D-j-1}=0 italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 , then (23 ) becomes
A D − j B ⊤ = β D − j A D − j + β D − j + 1 A D − j + 1 + ⋯ + β D A D . subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top subscript 𝛽 𝐷 𝑗 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 subscript 𝛽 𝐷 𝑗 1 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 1 ⋯ subscript 𝛽 𝐷 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D-j}B^{\top}=\beta_{D-j}A_{D-j}+\beta_{D-j+1}A_{D-j+1}+\cdots+\beta_{D}A_{D}. italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⋯ + italic_β start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
This yields that ( A D − j B ⊤ ) x y = 0 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 0 (A_{D-j}B^{\top})_{xy}=0 ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 for all x ∈ X 𝑥 𝑋 x\in X italic_x ∈ italic_X and y ∈ Γ D − j − 1 → ( x ) 𝑦 subscript superscript Γ → 𝐷 𝑗 1 𝑥 y\in\Gamma^{\rightarrow}_{D-j-1}(x) italic_y ∈ roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) , a contradiction (note that ( A D − j B ⊤ ) x y = ∑ z ∈ Γ D − j → ( x ) ( B ) y z subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 superscript 𝐵 top 𝑥 𝑦 subscript subscript 𝑧 superscript subscript Γ 𝐷 𝑗 → 𝑥 subscript 𝐵 𝑦 𝑧 (A_{D-j}B^{\top})_{xy}=\sum_{z_{\in}\Gamma_{D-j}^{\rightarrow}(x)}(B)_{yz} ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_x ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Thus, A D − j − 1 subscript 𝐴 𝐷 𝑗 1 A_{D-j-1} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D - italic_j - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B . By Proposition 5.1 , the result follows.
In some sense, our Theorem 1.2 is similar to the following result from the theory of distance-regular graphs.
Proposition 5.4 ([22 , Proposition 2] or [24 ] )
An undirected regular graph Γ = Γ ( A ) normal-Γ normal-Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) with diameter D 𝐷 D italic_D and d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues is distance-regular if and only if D = d 𝐷 𝑑 D=d italic_D = italic_d and the distance-D 𝐷 D italic_D matrix A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in A 𝐴 A italic_A .
5.1 Proof of Theorem 1.2
In this subsection we prove Theorem 1.2 .
( ⇐ ) ⇐ (\Leftarrow) ( ⇐ ) Assume that B 𝐵 B italic_B is a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrix with D + 1 𝐷 1 D+1 italic_D + 1 distinct eigenvalues and that A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B . We use this assumption to show that ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B is the Bose–Mesner algebra of a commutative D 𝐷 D italic_D -class association scheme.
Since B 𝐵 B italic_B is a normal matrix with D + 1 𝐷 1 D+1 italic_D + 1 distinct eigenvalues, by Proposition 2.11 , { I , B , B 2 , … , B D } 𝐼 𝐵 superscript 𝐵 2 … superscript 𝐵 𝐷 \{I,B,B^{2},\ldots,\break B^{D}\} { italic_I , italic_B , italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } is a basis of ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B . Since A D ∈ ℬ subscript 𝐴 𝐷 ℬ A_{D}\in{\mathcal{B}} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ caligraphic_B , from Proposition 5.3 it follows that the distance-i 𝑖 i italic_i matrices A i subscript 𝐴 𝑖 A_{i} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ i ≤ D ) 0 𝑖 𝐷 (0\leq i\leq D) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_D ) belong to ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B . Furthermore since { A i } i = 0 D superscript subscript subscript 𝐴 𝑖 𝑖 0 𝐷 \{A_{i}\}_{i=0}^{D} { italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a linearly independent set of matrices, it also forms a basis of ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B . As B 𝐵 B italic_B is a normal matrix, note that B ¯ ⊤ ∈ ℬ superscript ¯ 𝐵 top ℬ \overline{B}^{\top}\in{\mathcal{B}} over¯ start_ARG italic_B end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊤ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ caligraphic_B by Proposition 2.11 (iv). Now it is routine to check that the distance-i 𝑖 i italic_i matrices satisfy all properties (AS1)–(AS5) of a commutative association scheme.
( ⇒ ) ⇒ (\Rightarrow) ( ⇒ ) Assume that ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B is the Bose–Mesner algebra of a commutative D 𝐷 D italic_D -class association scheme. We use this assumption to show that B 𝐵 B italic_B is a normal λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrix (for some λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ ) with D + 1 𝐷 1 D+1 italic_D + 1 distinct eigenvalues and that the distance-D 𝐷 D italic_D matrix A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of Γ = Γ ( A ) Γ Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) is a polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B , where A 𝐴 A italic_A is the adjacency matrix of the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B .
The fact that B 𝐵 B italic_B belongs to a commutative association scheme implies that B 𝐵 B italic_B is a normal matrix. Since B 𝐵 B italic_B generates a commutative association scheme and J 𝐽 J italic_J belongs to the algebra of this scheme, by Theorem 1.1 , B 𝐵 B italic_B is a (normal) λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ -doubly stochastic matrix (for some λ 𝜆 \lambda italic_λ ). For a moment, assume that B 𝐵 B italic_B has d + 1 𝑑 1 d+1 italic_d + 1 distinct eigenvalues; then, by Proposition 2.11 , { I , B , B 2 , … , B d } 𝐼 𝐵 superscript 𝐵 2 … superscript 𝐵 𝑑 \{I,B,B^{2},\ldots,B^{d}\} { italic_I , italic_B , italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } is a basis of ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B . This is possible only if d = D 𝑑 𝐷 d=D italic_d = italic_D , and thus B 𝐵 B italic_B has D + 1 𝐷 1 D+1 italic_D + 1 distinct eigenvalues (see also, for example, [32 , Corollary 3.5] ).
It is left to show that the distance-D 𝐷 D italic_D matrix A D subscript 𝐴 𝐷 A_{D} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is polynomial in B 𝐵 B italic_B . Let { B 0 , B 1 , … , B D } subscript 𝐵 0 subscript 𝐵 1 … subscript 𝐵 𝐷 \{B_{0},B_{1},\ldots,B_{D}\} { italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } denote the standard basis of ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B (the basis of ∘ \circ ∘ -idempotent 01 01 01 01 -matrices), and let θ i subscript 𝜃 𝑖 \theta_{i} italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ’s denote the nonzero scalars such that
B = ∑ i ∈ Φ θ i B i . 𝐵 subscript 𝑖 Φ subscript 𝜃 𝑖 subscript 𝐵 𝑖 B=\sum_{i\in\Phi}\theta_{i}B_{i}. italic_B = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ∈ roman_Φ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
for some nonempty set of indices Φ Φ \Phi roman_Φ . Note that, by definition, A = ∑ i ∈ Φ B i 𝐴 subscript 𝑖 Φ subscript 𝐵 𝑖 A=\sum_{i\in\Phi}B_{i} italic_A = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ∈ roman_Φ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the adjacency matrix of the underlying digraph of B 𝐵 B italic_B . Since B 𝐵 B italic_B is an irreducible matrix, the matrix A 𝐴 A italic_A is irreducible too (Lemma 2.7 ). Then, by Lemma 2.2 , Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ is a strongly connected digraph, it is also a regular graph since A ∈ ℬ 𝐴 ℬ A\in{\mathcal{B}} italic_A ∈ caligraphic_B .
We consider Γ = Γ ( A ) Γ Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) and we finish the proof by proving Claims 1 and 2 below.
Claim 1. For any i 𝑖 i italic_i ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) and y , z , u , v ∈ X 𝑦 𝑧 𝑢 𝑣
𝑋 y,z,u,v\in X italic_y , italic_z , italic_u , italic_v ∈ italic_X , if ( B i ) z y = ( B i ) u v = 1 subscript subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝑧 𝑦 subscript subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝑢 𝑣 1 (B_{i})_{zy}=(B_{i})_{uv}=1 ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 , then ∂ ( z , y ) = ∂ ( u , v ) 𝑧 𝑦 𝑢 𝑣 \partial(z,y)=\partial(u,v) ∂ ( italic_z , italic_y ) = ∂ ( italic_u , italic_v ) in Γ Γ \Gamma roman_Γ .
Proof of Claim 1. For every ℓ ∈ ℕ ℓ ℕ \ell\in{\mathbb{N}} roman_ℓ ∈ blackboard_N , there exist complex scalars α i ( ℓ ) subscript superscript 𝛼 ℓ 𝑖 \alpha^{(\ell)}_{i} italic_α start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ℓ ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) such that A ℓ = ∑ i = 0 d α i ( ℓ ) B i superscript 𝐴 ℓ superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝑑 subscript superscript 𝛼 ℓ 𝑖 subscript 𝐵 𝑖 A^{\ell}=\sum_{i=0}^{d}\alpha^{(\ell)}_{i}B_{i} italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ℓ ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Recall that ∑ i = 0 d B i = J superscript subscript 𝑖 0 𝑑 subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝐽 \sum_{i=0}^{d}B_{i}=J ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_J and B i ∘ B j = δ i j B i subscript 𝐵 𝑖 subscript 𝐵 𝑗 subscript 𝛿 𝑖 𝑗 subscript 𝐵 𝑖 B_{i}\circ B_{j}=\delta_{ij}B_{i} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ i , j ≤ d ) formulae-sequence 0 𝑖 𝑗 𝑑 (0\leq i,j\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_d ) . This yields that, for any y , z , u , v ∈ X 𝑦 𝑧 𝑢 𝑣
𝑋 y,z,u,v\in X italic_y , italic_z , italic_u , italic_v ∈ italic_X and i 𝑖 i italic_i ( 0 ≤ i ≤ d ) 0 𝑖 𝑑 (0\leq i\leq d) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_d ) , if ( B i ) z y ≠ 0 subscript subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝑧 𝑦 0 (B_{i})_{zy}\neq 0 ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 and ( B i ) u v ≠ 0 subscript subscript 𝐵 𝑖 𝑢 𝑣 0 (B_{i})_{uv}\neq 0 ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 , then ( A ℓ ) z y = ( A ℓ ) u v = α i ( ℓ ) subscript superscript 𝐴 ℓ 𝑧 𝑦 subscript superscript 𝐴 ℓ 𝑢 𝑣 subscript superscript 𝛼 ℓ 𝑖 (A^{\ell})_{zy}=(A^{\ell})_{uv}=\alpha^{(\ell)}_{i} ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_α start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ℓ ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , i.e., the number of walks of length ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ from z 𝑧 z italic_z to y 𝑦 y italic_y is equal to the the number of walks of length ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ from u 𝑢 u italic_u to v 𝑣 v italic_v (see Lemma 2.8 ). Moreover, ( A ℓ ) z y = ( A ℓ ) u v subscript superscript 𝐴 ℓ 𝑧 𝑦 subscript superscript 𝐴 ℓ 𝑢 𝑣 (A^{\ell})_{zy}=(A^{\ell})_{uv} ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT holds for any ℓ ℓ \ell roman_ℓ ( ℓ ∈ ℕ ) ℓ ℕ (\ell\in{\mathbb{N}}) ( roman_ℓ ∈ blackboard_N ) . We proceed by a contradiction, in the same spirit as in [21 , Lemma 2.3] , where the author has an undirected graph. Assume that ∂ ( z , y ) > ∂ ( u , v ) = m 𝑧 𝑦 𝑢 𝑣 𝑚 \partial(z,y)>\partial(u,v)=m ∂ ( italic_z , italic_y ) > ∂ ( italic_u , italic_v ) = italic_m . Then, ( A m ) u v ≠ 0 subscript superscript 𝐴 𝑚 𝑢 𝑣 0 (A^{m})_{uv}\neq 0 ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 and ( A m ) z y = 0 subscript superscript 𝐴 𝑚 𝑧 𝑦 0 (A^{m})_{zy}=0 ( italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 , a contradiction. The claim follows.
Next we show that Claim 2 holds.
Claim 2. Every distance-i 𝑖 i italic_i matrix A i subscript 𝐴 𝑖 A_{i} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of Γ = Γ ( A ) Γ Γ 𝐴 \Gamma=\Gamma(A) roman_Γ = roman_Γ ( italic_A ) belongs to ℬ ℬ {\mathcal{B}} caligraphic_B , i.e., A i ∈ ℬ subscript 𝐴 𝑖 ℬ A_{i}\in{\mathcal{B}} italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ caligraphic_B ( 0 ≤ i ≤ D ) 0 𝑖 𝐷 (0\leq i\leq D) ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_D ) .
Proof of Claim 2. From the proof of Claim 1 it follows that, if y , z ∈ X 𝑦 𝑧
𝑋 y,z\in X italic_y , italic_z ∈ italic_X are two arbitrary vertices such that ∂ ( z , y ) = i 𝑧 𝑦 𝑖 \partial(z,y)=i ∂ ( italic_z , italic_y ) = italic_i , then there exists B j subscript 𝐵 𝑗 B_{j} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (for some 0 ≤ j ≤ d 0 𝑗 𝑑 0\leq j\leq d 0 ≤ italic_j ≤ italic_d ) such that ( B j ) z y = 1 subscript subscript 𝐵 𝑗 𝑧 𝑦 1 (B_{j})_{zy}=1 ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 . Recall also that ( A i ) z y = 1 subscript subscript 𝐴 𝑖 𝑧 𝑦 1 (A_{i})_{zy}=1 ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 . In fact, for such an index j 𝑗 j italic_j and any nonzero ( u , v ) 𝑢 𝑣 (u,v) ( italic_u , italic_v ) -entry of B j subscript 𝐵 𝑗 B_{j} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , we have ∂ ( u , v ) = i 𝑢 𝑣 𝑖 \partial(u,v)=i ∂ ( italic_u , italic_v ) = italic_i . This yields
A i = ∑ j : A i ∘ B j ≠ 𝑶 B j ( 0 ≤ i ≤ D ) . subscript 𝐴 𝑖 subscript : 𝑗 subscript 𝐴 𝑖 subscript 𝐵 𝑗 𝑶 subscript 𝐵 𝑗 0 𝑖 𝐷
A_{i}=\sum_{j:A_{i}\circ B_{j}\neq{\boldsymbol{O}}}B_{j}\qquad(0\leq i\leq D). italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j : italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ bold_italic_O end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_D ) .
The result follows.