Factorizations for a Class of Multivariate Polynomial Matrices
Dong Lu
[email protected]
Dingkang Wang
[email protected]
Fanghui Xiao
[email protected]
KLMM, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China
School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
Abstract
Following the works by Lin et al. (Circuits Syst. Signal Process. 20(6): 601-618, 2001) and Liu et al. (Circuits Syst. Signal Process. 30(3): 553-566, 2011), we investigate how to factorize a class of multivariate polynomial matrices. The main theorem in this paper shows that an l×m polynomial matrix admits a factorization with respect to a polynomial if the polynomial and all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of the matrix generate the unit ideal. This result is a further generalization of previous works, and based on this, we give an algorithm which can be used to factorize more polonomial matrices. In addition, an illustrate example is given to show that our main theorem is non-trivial and valuable.
keywords:
Multivariate polynomial matrices, Matrix factorizations, Reduced minors, Reduced Gröbner basis
††journal: Multidimensional Systems and Signal Processing
1 Introduction
The study of factorizations for multivariate polynomial matrices began with the development of multidimensional system theory in the late 1970s (Youla and Gnavi, 1979), and the problem of matrix factorizations was considered to be one of the basic problems of this subject. Since then, great progress has been made on multivariate polynomial matrix factorizations.
Bose (1982) introduced some basic concepts of multivariate polynomial matrices and the problem of matrix factorizations. After that, Bose et al. (2003) presented factorization algorithms of bivariate polynomial matrices, and introduced the latest research trends of matrix factorizations with three or more variables. The factorization problem for bivariate polynomial matrices has been completely solved in (Guiver and Bose, 1982; Liu and Wang, 2013; Morf et al., 1977), but for the cases of more than two variables is still open.
Charoenlarpnopparut and
Bose (1999) used Gröbner bases of modules to compute zero prime matrix factorizations of multivariate polynomial matrices. For some polynomial matrices with special properties, Lin (1999a, 2001) proposed some methods to compute zero prime matrix factorizations of matrices. Meanwhile, Lin and Bose (2001) presented the Lin-Bose’s conjecture: a matrix admits a zero prime matrix factorization if its all maximal reduced minors generate the unit ideal. This conjecture was proved in (Liu et al., 2014; Pommaret, 2001; Wang and Feng, 2004), so the problem of zero prime matrix factorizations have been completely solved. Subsequently, Wang and Kwong (2005) put forward an algorithm based on module theory to solve the problem of minor prime matrix factorizations. Guan et al. (2018, 2019) studied the problem of factor prime matrix factorizations under the condition that matrices are not of full rank, and they generalized the main results in (Wang and Kwong, 2005). So far, some achievements in (Liu and Wang, 2010, 2015; Wang, 2007) have been made on the problem of factor prime matrix factorizations. Although the problems of zero prime matrix factorizations and minor prime matrix factorizations have been completely solved, the problem of factor prime matrix factorizations remains to be studied.
Let k[z] and k[z2] be the ring of polynomials in variables z1,z2,…,zn and z2,…,zn with coefficients in an algebraically closed field k, respectively. Let F be an l×m polynomial matrix with entries in k[z] and l≤m, dl(F) be the greatest common divisor of all the l×l minors of F, and d=z1−f(z2) be a divisor of dl(F), where f(z2)∈k[z2]. Lin et al. (2001) proved that F admits a matrix factorization with respect to d if for each (z2)∈k1×(n−1) the rank of F(f(z2),z2) is (l−1). Moreover, they proposed a constructive algorithm to factorize this class of multivariate polynomial matrices. Liu et al. (2011) focused on the relationship between d and all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of F, and showed that F admits a matrix factorization with respect to d if d and all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of F generate k[z]. They proved that their main theorem is a generalization of the result in (Lin et al., 2001). However, we find that there are still many of multivariate polynomial matrices that can be factorized with respect to d without satisfying the main theorem in (Liu et al., 2011). This implies that it would be significant to generalize the theorems and algorithms in (Lin et al., 2001; Liu et al., 2011).
In this paper, we still study the condition under which F admits a matrix factorization with respect to d. We focus on the relationship between d and all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F, and prove that F admits a matrix factorization with respect to d if d and all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F generate the unit ideal. Compared with the main theorems in (Lin et al., 2001; Liu et al., 2011), our main theorem has a wider range of applications. Combining our main theorem and the constructive algorithm in (Lin et al., 2001), we obtain the matrix factorization algorithm.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we outline some knowledge about multivariate polynomial matrix factorizations and propose a problem that we shall consider. Main theorem and some generalizations are presented in Section 3 to help us summarize which types of polynomial matrices can be factorized. The matrix factorization algorithm is given in Section 4, and an example is given to illustrate the calculation process of the algorithm. Further remarks are provided in Section 5.
2 Preliminaries and Problem
In the following, we denote by k an algebraically closed field, z the n variables z1,z2,…,zn, z2 the (n−1) variables z2,…,zn, where n≥3. Let k[z] and k[z2] be the ring of polynomials in variables z and z2 with coefficients in k, respectively, k(z) be the fraction field of k[z], and k[z]l×m be the set of l×m matrices with entries in k[z]. Without loss of generality, we assume that l≤m, and for convenience we use uppercase bold letters to denote polynomial matrices.
Throughout this paper, the argument (z) is omitted whenever its omission does not cause confusion. For any given F∈k[z]l×m and f(z2)∈k[z2], FT represents the transposed matrix of F, and F(f(z2),z2) denotes an l×m polynomial matrix in k[z2]l×m, which is formed by transforming z1 in F into f(z2). If l=m, we denote by det(F) the determinant of F, and if F is of full rank, we use F−1∈k(z)l×l to stand for the inverse matrix of F. Assume that f1,…,fs∈k[z], we use ⟨f1,…,fs⟩ to denote the ideal generated by f1,…,fs in k[z]. Let f,g∈k[z], then f∣g means that f is a divisor of g. In addition, “w.r.t.” and “GCD” stand for “with respect to” and “greatest common divisor”, respectively.
2.1 Previous Works
We first introduce two basic concepts in matrix theory.
Definition 2.1**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m, and given 2r positive integers arbitrarily such that 1≤i1<⋯<ir≤l and 1≤j1<⋯<jr≤m. Let F(i1⋯irj1⋯jr) denotes an r×r matrix consisting of the i1,…,ir rows and j1,…,jr columns of F, then {\rm det}\Bigl{(}\mathbf{F}\begin{pmatrix}\begin{smallmatrix}i_{1}\cdots i_{r}\\
j_{1}\cdots j_{r}\end{smallmatrix}\end{pmatrix}\Bigr{)} is called an r×r minor of F.
Definition 2.2**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m, the rank of F is r (1≤r≤l) if there exists a nonzero r×r minor of F, and all the i×i (i>r) minors of F vanish identically. For convenience, we denote the rank of F by rank(F).
The following lemma is a generalization of Binet-Cauchy formula in (Strang, 2010).
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let F=G1F1∈k[z]l×m, where G1∈k[z]l×l and F1∈k[z]l×m. Then an r×r (r≤l) minor of F is
[TABLE]
In particular, when r=l, we have
[TABLE]
To make the description simpler, we use the notations and concepts in the paper (Lin, 1988).
Definition 2.4**.**
For any given F∈k[z]l×m,
-
let dl(F) and dl−1(F) be the GCD of all the l×l minors and all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of F, respectively;
2. 2.
let a1,…,aη∈k[z] be all the l×l minors of F, where η=(lm), and extracting dl(F) from a1,…,aη yields
[TABLE]
then b1,…,bη are called the l×l reduced minors of F;
3. 3.
let c1,…,cγ∈k[z] be all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of F, where γ=(l−1l)⋅(l−1m), and extracting dl−1(F) from c1,…,cγ yields
[TABLE]
then h1,…,hγ are called the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F.
Now, we introduce two important lemmas in matrix theory.
Lemma 2.5** (Lin (1993, 1999b)).**
Let F1=[F11,F12]∈k[z]l×(m+l) be of full row rank and F2=[F21T,−F22T]T ∈k[z](m+l)×m be of full column rank, where F11,F22∈k[z]l×m, F12∈k[z]l×l and F21∈k[z]m×m. If F1F2=0l×m, then det(F12)=0 if and only if det(F21)=0.
Lemma 2.6** (Lin (1988)).**
Assume that F12−1F11=F22F21−1, where F11,F22∈k[z]l×m, F12−1∈k(z)l×l and F21−1∈k(z)m×m. Let pˉ1,…,pˉξ1 be all the l×l reduced minors of [F11,F12], and p1,…,pξ2 be all the m×m reduced minors of [F21T,−F22T]T, where ξ1=(lm+l)=ξ2=(mm+l). Then, pˉi=±pi for i=1,…,ξ1, and the sign depends on the index i.
The general matrix factorization problem is now formulated as follows.
Definition 2.7**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m and d∈k[z] be a divisor of dl(F). We say that F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d if F can be factorized as
[TABLE]
such that G1∈k[z]l×l, F1∈k[z]l×m, and det(G1)=d.
Next we recall the concept of zero left prime matrix from multidimensional systems theory.
Definition 2.8**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m be of full row rank. If all the l×l minors of F generate k[z], then F is said to be a zero left prime (ZLP) matrix.
In Definition 2.7 if F1 is a ZLP matrix, then we say that F admits a ZLP matrix factorization. Let I be an ideal generated by all the l×l minors of F, then we can compute the reduced Gröbner basis G of I w.r.t. a term order to check I=k[z]. That is, if G={1}, then I=k[z]. The definition of reduced Gröbner basis and how to compute a reduced Gröbner basis of an ideal can be found in (Buchberger, 1965; Cox et al., 2007).
Serre (1955) raised the question whether any finitely generated projective module over a polynomial ring is free. This question was solved positively and independently by Quillen (1976) and Suslin (1976), and the result is called Quillen-Suslin theorem. For Quillen-Suslin theorem, there are two descriptions as follows.
Lemma 2.9**.**
If w∈k[z]1×l is a ZLP vector, then the set M⊂k[z]l×1 constructed by all solutions q∈k[z]l×1 of wq=0 is free.
Lemma 2.10**.**
If w∈k[z]1×l is a ZLP vector, then an unimodular matrix U∈k[z]l×l can be constructed such that w is its first row.
In Lemma 2.9, M is called the syzygy module of w. Fabiańska and Quadrat (2006) gave an algorithm to compute free bases of free modules over polynomial rings, and the algorithm was implemented in QuillenSuslin package (Fabiańska and Quadrat, 2007). In Lemma 2.10, U is an unimodular matrix if and only if det(U) is a nonzero constant in k. There are many methods to construct U such that w is its first row, we refer to (Logar and Sturmfels, 1992; Lu et al., 2017; Park, 1995; Youla and Pickel, 1984) for more details.
2.2 Problem
In order to raise the problem we are going to consider, let us first introduce the works in (Lin et al., 2001) and (Liu et al., 2011).
Lemma 2.11** (Lin et al. (2001)).**
Let F∈k[z]l×m, and d=z1−f(z2) be a common divisor of a1,…,aη, i.e., ai=dei with ei∈k[z] (i=1,…,η). If ⟨d,e1,…,eη⟩=k[z], then rank(F(f(z2),z2))=l−1 for every (z2)∈k1×(n−1) and F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d.
Liu et al. (2011) proved that rank(F(f(z2),z2))=l−1 for every (z2)∈k1×(n−1) if and only if ⟨d,c1,…,cγ⟩=k[z]. Therefore, they generalized Lemma 2.11 and obtained the following result.
Lemma 2.12** (Liu et al. (2011)).**
Let F∈k[z]l×m, and d=z1−f(z2) be a divisor of dl(F). If ⟨d,c1,…,cγ⟩=k[z], then rank(F(f(z2),z2))=l−1 for every (z2)∈k1×(n−1) and F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d.
In the following, let d=z1−f(z2) with f(z2)∈k[z2]. According to Lemma 2.11 and Lemma 2.12, we construct two sets of multivariate polynomial matrices:
[TABLE]
Then, we have S1⊂S2 and F∈S2 admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d. Example 1 in the Section 4 of (Lin et al., 2001) shows that S1 is not empty, and Example 4.1 in the Section 4 of (Liu et al., 2011) shows that S1⫋S2.
Lemma 2.12 tell us that for any given F∈S2, rank(F(f(z2),z2))=l−1. This implies that GCD(d,dl−1(F))=1. Otherwise, it follows from d is an irreducible polynomial that GCD(d,dl−1(F)) =d, then ci(f(z2),z2)=0 (i=1,…,γ) and rank(F(f(z2),z2))<l−1, which leads to a contradiction. Now, we construct a new set of multivariate polynomial matrices:
[TABLE]
Then, ∅=S1⫋S2⊂S. As we know, dl−1(F) is the GCD of c1,…,cγ, then we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, it follows that ⟨d,c1,…,cγ⟩=k[z] if ⟨d,dl−1(F)⟩=k[z]. Although GCD(d,dl−1(F))=1 for F∈S, d and dl−1(F) may have common zeros. Next, we give an example to show that there exits F∈S∖S2 such that F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d.
Example 2.13**.**
*Let
*
[TABLE]
where F[1,3]=−z1z2+z1z3+2z1+z22−z2−z32−2z3−1.
It is easy to compute that d3(F)=(z1−z2)(z2+z3)2 and d2(F)=z2+z3. Let d=z1−z2, then d∣d3(F) and GCD(d,d2(F))=1. Hence, F∈S.
a1=(z1−z2)(z2+z3)2* is the 3×3 minor of F, and extracting d from a1 yields e1=(z2+z3)2. It is easy to check that the reduced Gröbner basis of ⟨d,e1⟩ w.r.t. the lexicographic order is {z1−z2,(z2+z3)2}, then F∈/S1.*
Since the reduced Gröbner basis of ⟨d,d2(F)⟩ w.r.t. the lexicographic order is {z1+z3,z2+z3}, we have ⟨d,c1,…,c9⟩⊆⟨d,d2(F)⟩=k[z]. Then, F∈/S2.
*However, we can get a matrix factorization of F w.r.t. d:
*
[TABLE]
In Example 2.13, we find that the reduced Gröbner basis of ⟨d,h1,…,h9⟩ w.r.t. the lexicographic order is {1}. In spire of it, we consider the following question.
Question 2.14**.**
Let F∈S. If ⟨d,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], does F have a matrix factorization w.r.t. d?
3 Main Results
Before giving the main theorem, we introduce two important lemmas.
Lemma 3.1** (Lin et al. (2001)).**
Let g∈k[z] and f(z2)∈k[z2]. If g(f,z2,…,zn) is a zero polynomial in k[z2], then (z1−f(z2)) is a divisor of g.
The following lemma is a generalization of Lemma 2 in (Lin et al., 2001).
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m with rank(F)=l−1. If ⟨h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], then there is a ZLP vector w∈k[z]1×l such that wF=01×m.
Proof.
In view of rank(F)=l−1, we could assume that the first (l−1) row vectors f1,…,fl−1 of F are k[z]-linearly independent. This implies that f1,…,fl−1 and fl are k[z]-linearly dependent. Thus wF=01×m for some nonzero row vector w=[w1,…,wl]∈k[z]1×l, where wl=0 and GCD(w1,…,wl)=1. Obviously, w1,…,wl are all the 1×1 reduced minors of w.
The next thing is to prove that w1,…,wl generate k[z]. Let F1,…,Fβ∈k[z]l×(l−1) be all the l×(l−1) submatrices of F, where β=(l−1m). For each 1≤i≤β, let ci1,…,cil and hi1,…,hil be all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors and all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of Fi respectively, then cij=dl−1(Fi)⋅hij, where 1≤j≤l. Let w=[w1,wl], where w1=[w1,…,wl−1]∈k[z]1×(l−1). Let Fi=[Fi1T,−Fi2T]T, where Fi1∈k[z](l−1)×(l−1) and Fi2∈k[z]1×(l−1). If Fi is not of full column rank, then cij=0 and hij=0, j=1,…,l. If Fi is of full column rank, then it follows from wF=01×m that
[TABLE]
Since wl=0, det(Fi1)=0 by Lemma 2.5. From equation (3.1) we have
[TABLE]
According to Lemma 2.6, all the 1×1 reduced minors of w are equal to all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of Fi without considering the sign, i.e., wj=hij for j=1,…,l. Therefore, all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of F are as follows:
[TABLE]
Let dˉ∈k[z] be the GCD of dl−1(F1),…,dl−1(Fβ), then there exists dˉi∈k[z] such that dl−1(Fi)=dˉ⋅dˉi, where i=1,…,β. In the following we prove that the polynomials
[TABLE]
are all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F. It follows from GCD(w1,…,wl)=1 and GCD(dˉ1,⋯,dˉβ)=1 that
[TABLE]
Therefore, dˉ1w1,…,dˉ1wl,⋯,dˉβw1,…,dˉβwl are all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F, i.e., they are equal to h1,…,hγ. Since ⟨h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], w1,…,wl generate k[z].
∎
Combining Lemma 3.1 and Lemma 3.2, we can answer Question 2.14.
Theorem 3.3**.**
Let F∈S. If ⟨d,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], then F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d.
Proof.
We divide our proof into three steps.
First, let F^=F(f(z2),z2)∈k[z2]l×m, and we prove that rank(F^)=l−1. Let a^1,…,a^η∈k[z2] and c^1,…,c^γ∈k[z2] be all the l×l minors and all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of F^, respectively. Then, a^i=ai(f(z2),z2) and c^j=cj(f(z2),z2), where 1≤i≤η and 1≤j≤γ. Since F∈S, we have d∣dl(F) and GCD(d,dl−1(F))=1. d∣dl(F) implies that a^i=ai(f(z2),z2)=0 (i=1,…,η) and rank(F^)≤l−1. If rank(F^)<l−1, then cj(f(z2),z2)=c^j=0 (j=1,…,γ). It follows from Lemma 3.1 that d is a common divisor of c1,…,cγ, then d∣dl−1(F), which contradicts GCD(d,dl−1(F))=1. Therefore, rank(F^)=l−1.
Second, we prove that all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F^ generate k[z2]. Let hˉ∈k[z2] be the GCD of h1(f(z2),z2),…,hγ(f(z2),z2), then for each 1≤j≤γ there exits h^j∈k[z2] such that hj(f(z2),z2)=hˉ⋅h^j, and GCD(h^1,…,h^γ)=1. Let g=dl−1(F), then it follows from c^j=g(f(z2),z2)⋅hj(f(z2),z2) that dl−1(F^)=g(f(z2),z2)⋅hˉ, and h^1,…,h^γ are all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F^. Assume that ⟨h^1,…,h^γ⟩=k[z2], then there exists a point (α2,…,αn)∈k1×(n−1) such that h^j(α2,…,αn)=0, where j=1,…,γ. Let α1=f(α2,…,αn), then for each j we have hj(α1,α2,…,αn)=hˉ(α2,…,αn)⋅h^j(α2,…,αn)=0. This implies that (α1,α2,…,αn)∈k1×n is a common zero of d,h1,…,hγ, which contradicts the fact that ⟨d,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z].
Finally, we remark that F has a matrix factorization w.r.t. d. Using Lemma 3.2, we get wF^=01×m, where w∈k[z2]1×l is a ZLP vector. Meanwhile, according to Lemma 2.10, a unimodular matrix U∈k[z2]l×l can be constructed such that w is its first row. Let F0=UF, then the first row of F0(f(z2),z2)=UF^ is a zero vector. By Lemma 3.1, d is a common divisor of the polynomials in the first row of F0, thus
[TABLE]
Consequently, we can now derive the matrix factorization of F w.r.t. d:
[TABLE]
where G1=U−1D∈k[z]l×l, F1∈k[z]l×m and det(G1)=d.
∎
Remark 3.4**.**
In Theorem 3.3, we have that rank(F^)=l−1 and ⟨h^1,…,h^γ⟩=k[z2]. Hence, Theorem 3.3 is a generalization of Lemma 2.12.
According to Theorem 3.3, we construct a set of multivariate polynomial matrices:
[TABLE]
Then, S2⊂S3⊂S and F∈S3 admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d. Example 2.13 in Section 2.2 shows that S2⫋S3.
Let F∈k[z]l×m, and d0=∏t=1s(z1−ft(z2)) be a divisor of dl(F), where f1(z2),…,fs(z2)∈k[z2]. Liu et al. (2011) proved that if ⟨d0,c1,…,cγ⟩=k[z], then F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d0. It would be interesting to know whether Theorem 3.3 can be generalized to the case with t>1. Without loss of generality, we consider the case of t=2.
Theorem 3.5**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m and d0=(z1−f1(z2))(z1−f2(z2)) be a divisor of dl(F). If GCD(d0,dl−1(F))=1 and ⟨d0,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], then F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d0.
Proof.
Let d1=z1−f1(z2) and d2=z1−f2(z2). Obviously, GCD(d1,dl−1(F))=1 and ⟨d1,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z]. By Theorem 3.3, there exist G1∈k[z]l×l and F1∈k[z]l×m such that
[TABLE]
where G1=U1−1D1, det(G1)=d1, U1∈k[z2]l×l is a unimodular matrix and D1=diag(d1,1,…,1). According the Equation (2.2) in Lemma 2.3, d2=z1−f2(z2) is a divisor of dl(F1). Next we prove that F1 admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d2.
We first prove that GCD(d2,dl−1(F1))=1. Otherwise, it follows from d2 is an irreducible polynomial that GCD(d2,dl−1(F1))=d2. Then dl−1(F1)∣dl−1(F) implies that d2∣dl−1(F), which contradicts the condition GCD(d,dl−1(F))=1. Second, we prove that d2 and all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F1 generate the unit ideal k[z].
Let Fi1∈k[z](l−1)×m be a submatrix obtained by removing the i-th row of F1, and cˉi1,…,cˉiβ be all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of Fi1, where i=1,…,l. Then, cˉ11,…,cˉ1β,…,cˉl1,…,cˉlβ are all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of F1. Extracting dl−1(F1) from cˉij yields cˉij=dl−1(F1)⋅hˉij, then hˉ11,…,hˉ1β,…,hˉl1,…,hˉlβ are all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F1. Hence, we only need to prove that ⟨d2,hˉ11,…,hˉlβ⟩=k[z].
Since D1=diag(d1,1,…,1), all the (l−1)×(l−1) minors of D1F1 are
[TABLE]
Obviously, there is at least one integer j∈{1,…,β} such that d1∤cˉ1j. Otherwise, d1∣dl−1(D1F1). It follows form F=U1−1D1F1 and the Equation (2.1) in Lemma 2.3 that dl−1(D1F1)∣dl−1(F). So d1∣dl−1(F), which leads to a contradiction. Since d1=z1−f1(z2) is an irreducible polynomial, we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, dl−1(D1F1)=dl−1(F1). It follows from U1F=D1F1 that dl−1(F)∣dl−1(D1F1) and dl−1(F)=dl−1(F1). The Equation (2.1) in Lemma 2.3 implies that each ci is a k[z]-linear combination of cˉ11,…,cˉlβ, where i=1,…,γ. Since dl−1(F)=dl−1(F1), we can obtain that each hi (1≤i≤γ) is a k[z]-linear combination of hˉ11,…,hˉlβ. By ⟨d0,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], ⟨d2,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z]. If ⟨d2,hˉ11,…,hˉlβ⟩=k[z], then there exits a point (α1,…,αn)∈k1×n such that hˉij(α1,…,αn)=0 for each i and j, where α1=f2(α2,…,αn). This implies that (α1,…,αn) is a common zero of d2,h1,…,hγ, which leads to a contradiction.
According to Theorem 3.3 again, there exits G2∈k[z]l×l and F2∈k[z]l×m such that F1=G2F2, where G2=U2−1D2, det(G2)=d2, U2∈k[z2]l×l is an unimodular matrix and D2=diag(d2,1,…,1).
Finally, we can get a matrix factorization of F w.r.t. d0:
[TABLE]
where G0=G1G2∈k[z]l×l, and det(G0)=d0=(z1−f1(z2))(z1−f2(z2)).
∎
Remark 3.6**.**
In the above theorem, we can factorize F1 w.r.t. d2 without checking whether GCD(d2,dl−1(F1))=1 and the ideal generated by d2 and all the (l−1)×(l−1) reduced minors of F1 is k[z], which can help us improve the computational efficiency of matrix factorizations.
It is worth noting that if f1(z2)=f2(z2) in Theorem 3.5, we have the following corollary.
Corollary 3.7**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m and d0=(z1−f1(z2))r be a divisor of dl(F). If GCD(d0,dl−1(F))=1 and ⟨d0,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], then F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d0.
Further, if f1(z2)=f2(z2) in Theorem 3.5, we have another corollary.
Corollary 3.8**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m and d0=∏t=1s(z1−ft(z2))qt be a divisor of dl(F). If GCD(d0,dl−1(F)) =1 and ⟨d0,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], then F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d0.
Let f(i)(z) be a polynomial in k[z1,…,zi−1,zi+1,…,zn], where 1≤i≤n. Similarly, we can get the following corollaries.
Corollary 3.9**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m and d0=(zi−f(i)(z))r be a divisor of dl(F). If GCD(d0,dl−1(F))=1 and ⟨d0,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], then F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d0.
Corollary 3.10**.**
Let F∈k[z]l×m and d0=∏i=1n∏t=1si(zi−ft(i)(z))qit be a divisor of dl(F). If GCD(d0,dl−1(F))=1 and ⟨d0,h1,…,hγ⟩=k[z], then F admits a matrix factorization w.r.t. d0.
4 Algorithm and Example
According to Theorem 3.3, we get the following algorithm for computing a matrix factorization of F∈S3 w.r.t. d.
In the following, we show how to compute w and U in Algorithm 1. Let F^=F(f(z2),z2)∈k[z2]l×m and Syzl(F^) be the left syzygy module of F^, i.e., Syzl(F^)={p∈k[z2]1×l∣pF^=01×m}. Since rank(F^)=l−1, we have rank(Syzl(F^))=1. Then, we compute a reduced Gröbner basis of Syzl(F^) w.r.t. a term order, and select a nonzero vector from the Gröbner basis. Let w1=[w11,…,w1l]∈k[z2]1×l be the nonzero vector, and w∈k[z2] be the GCD of w11,…,w1l, then w=ww1.
Since w is a ZLP vector, there exists a column vector q1∈k[z2]l×1 such that wq1=1. This calculation problem is equivalent to a lifting homomorphism problem in (Decker and Lossen, 2006) (see Problem 4.1, page 129), and the command “lift” of the computer algebra system Singular in (Decker et al., 2016) can help us compute q1. Let Syzr(w)={q∈k[z2]l×1∣wq=0}, then Syzr(w) is a free module with rank(Syzr(w))=(l−1) by Lemma 2.9. Let q2,…,ql∈k[z2]l×1 be a free basis of Syzr(w), then V=[q1,q2,…,ql]∈k[z2]l×l is a unimodular matrix and U=V−1 is one that we want by Theorem 4.4 in (Lu et al., 2017).
Now, we use an example to illustrate the calculation process of Algorithm 1. We return to Example 2.13, and let F be the same matrix in Example 2.13.
Example 4.1**.**
*Let
*
[TABLE]
where F[1,3]=−z1z2+z1z3+2z1+z22−z2−z32−2z3−1.
As already noted in Example 2.13, ⟨d,h1,…,h9⟩=k[z1,z2,z3] implies that F∈S3. Then, we can use Algorithm 1 to factorize F w.r.t. d.
Step 1:* Let F^=F(z2,z2,z3)∈k[z2,z3]3×3, we compute a ZLP vector w∈k[z2,z3]1×3 such that wF^=01×3, where*
[TABLE]
We use Singular command “syz” to compute a reduced Gröbner basis of Syzl(F^) w.r.t. the lexicographic order, and obtain w=[1,0,z3+1].
Step 2:* Construct a unimodular matrix U∈k[z2,z3]3×3 such that w is its first row. According to the instruction of the construction for unimodular matrix U below Algorithm 1, we divide it into three small steps.*
Step 2.1: Using Singular command “lift” to compute q1∈k[z2,z3]3×1 such that wq1=1, we get q1=[1,0,0]T.
Step 2.2: Using QuillenSuslin package to compute a free basis of Syzr(w), we have q2=[0,1,0]T and q3=[−(z3+1),0,1]T.
Step 2.3: Let V=[q1,q2,q3], then
[TABLE]
Step 3.* Extracting d from the first row of UF, we get UF=DF1, where D=diag(d,1,1) and*
[TABLE]
*Then, we obtain a matrix factorization of F w.r.t. d:
*
[TABLE]
where G=U−1D and det(G1)=d=z1−z2.
5 Conclusions
We have studied the problem of matrix factorizations for multivariate polynomial matrices in S, and the results presented in this paper greatly extend those of (Lin et al., 2001; Liu et al., 2011). The matrix factorizations for an arbitrary multivariate polynomial matrix remains a challenging and an important open problem. Although the new results can only deal with the class of multivariate polynomial matrices discussed in S, we hope that the new results will motivate new progress in this important research topic.
**Acknowledgements **
This research was supported by the CAS Project QYZDJ-SSW-SYS022.