Some Remarks on Random Vectors and $O(n)$-Invariants
Alexander Kushkuley

TL;DR
This paper explores the relationship between invariant random vectors and the theory of invariants, highlighting a specific connection involving the sum of basis elements and the expectation of a Veronese tensor.
Contribution
It presents new observations linking invariant random vectors to classical invariant theory, particularly relating sums of basis elements to expectations of Veronese tensors.
Findings
Sum of basis elements equals expectation of a Veronese tensor scaled by a known factor
Provides insights into the structure of $O(n)$-invariants
Connects invariant theory with probabilistic computations
Abstract
Computations involving invariant random vectors are directly related to the theory of invariants (cf. e.g \cite{Weing_1}). Some simple observations along these lines are presented in this paper. We note in particular that sum of elements of the standard basis of -invariants is equal to the expectation of a random Veronese tensor up to a known scalar multiplier.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsTensor decomposition and applications
Some Remarks on Random Vectors and -Invariants
Alexander Kushkuley
Abstract
Computations involving invariant random vectors are directly related to the theory of invariants (cf. e.g [1]). Some simple observations along these lines are presented in this paper. We note in particular that sum of elements of the standard basis of -invariants is equal to the expectation of a random Veronese tensor up to a known scalar multiplier.
1 Introduction
We start with a brief overview of objects we will be dealing with (similar scenario was introduced in [5]). Let a compact Lie group act on a real vector space . We will always assume that standard Euclidean scalar product on is -invariant (cf. e.g [6]).
Let be a -invariant subset. A probability measure defined on is called -invariant if for any measurable and any (cf. e.g. [7], [8]). will be called an invariant probability subspace of if such a measure exists.
A random vector distributed on according to the invariant measure will be called -invariant random vector or just invariant random vector.
The expectation of a random vector defined on a probability space will be denoted by or just . It is clear from definitions that for invariant random vectors .
Let be a normalized Haar measure on (cf. e.g. [6]-[8]). An invariant projector onto the subspace of -fixed points in can be thus written as
[TABLE]
for any (cf. e.g. [6]).
The following well known statement is a starting point for this discussion (cf. e.g [1] or [5])
Lemma 1**.**
If is a random vector defined on any invariant probability subspace of a real representation of a compact (Lie) group , then
[TABLE]
1.1 Tensors and Invariants
Let be a compact Lie group and be a (linear space of) real -representation of dimension . Let be a space of -tensors over . Vector space has a natural -invariant dot-product defined by a rule :
[TABLE]
where are any two decomposable tensors in . We fix once and for all an orthonormal basis in .
Definition 1**.**
Let be a partition of the set of indexes . For denote by
[TABLE]
a decomposable tensor in that has vector at indexes enumerated by , vector at positions enumerated by and so on.
For example, if and then denotes the tensor .
Remark 1**.**
The expression (1) should not be understood as a tensor product. It is used for notational purposes only. More standard way to specify tensors of this kind could employ Young tableau and permutation group, but the definition given above is sufficient for our purposes. In any case, assigning a meaning to an expression (1) is beyond the scope of this paper
We will always assume that all the parts of a partition are non-trivial () and we will use the notation for the number of parts of the partition . If and all the part sizes are equal, the partition is called pairing (cf. e.g. [1]- [4]). In case of there is just one pairing and there is a -invariant tensor
[TABLE]
In general, for a pairing on there is a corresponding -invariant tensor
[TABLE]
Let denotes the set of all pairings on the set of indexes . For the full orthogonal group the classical First Fundamental Theorem (FFT) of Invariant Theory (see [2] for example) actually states that
Theorem** **(FFT for Orthogonal Group).
There are no non-trivial invariants in if is odd and if , the invariants span the linear space of invariants in .
There are pairings on the set of size . Take any pairing, e.g. . The permutation group of the index set naturally acts on the set of pairings and it is clear that is an orbit of . It should be also clear that
Lemma 2**.**
Given two pairings
[TABLE]
for any .
Let be a (sub)group of permutations of even-numbered indexes. It is easy to see, that if then
[TABLE]
where is a sign of a permutation. All linear relations between invariants are described by the classical Second Fundamental Theorem (SFT) (see for example a concise exposition in [2])
Theorem** **(SFT for Orthogonal Group).
The elements of the set of invariants are linearly independent if . For all linear relations between elements of this set are linear combinations of the identities of the form (2) above.
Definition 2**.**
Call the generating set of -invariants the s̱tandard set (basis if ) of the space of invariants. The elements of this set will be called standard invariants
1.2 Random Tensors and Veronese Surface
For a unit sphere one has an equivariant Veronese map
[TABLE]
The image of the map is called Veronese surface (cf. e.g. [11]). If is a -invariant probability subspace in then is an invariant probability subspace of the Veronese surface (cf. e.g. [5]) and for an invariant random unit vector there is a corresponding invariant random Veronese tensor . As in [5] we have
Lemma 3**.**
For independent invariant random vectors defined on any invariant probability subspace
[TABLE]
Proof. By Lemma 1 and independence of and
[TABLE]
From Lemma 1 (see [5] for details), we have also
Lemma 4**.**
If the representation of in is irreducible then for a random vector defined on any invariant probability subspace
[TABLE]
Moreover, in accordance with Definition 1 (cf. (1)), for any partition of the set of indexes and for any invariant probability subspace there is a generalized Veronese surface defined as an image of the map
[TABLE]
and applying Lemmas 1 and 4 we get
Lemma 5**.**
For any set of independent random vectors defined on any invariant probability subspace and for any pairing , let be a random Veronese tensor defined by a right hand side of (4). If representation of in is irreducible then
[TABLE]
2 Expectations and Invariants
From now on, unless explicitly stated otherwise, we assume that the group is a full orthogonal group . For obvious reasons, everything that was said above remains valid in this special case. Note that is an orbit of and hence the -invariant probability measure on a unit sphere is uniquely inherited from the Haar measure on (cf. e.g. [8]). By direct computation (see for example [9], [10]) one gets
Lemma 6**.**
For independent invariant random vectors defined on
[TABLE]
Let . Recall, that the space is spanned by the set of standard invariants . Let
[TABLE]
be the average of the set of standard invariants in . Denote the denominator on the right hand side of (5) by and let denote the Gram matrix of the ordered standard set of invariants .
Theorem 1**.**
()
- (i)
The orthogonal projection of the Veronese surface onto is just one point . 2. (ii)
Sum of the elements of any row of is equal to and the average of elements of is equal to 3. (iii)
Therefore, the expectation of a random Veronese tensor is an average of elements of the standard basis of -invariants divided by the average of the matrix elements of , in other words
[TABLE]
Proof. Since is an orbit of , its (equivariant) orthogonal projection onto consists of just one point. To find this point, let
[TABLE]
be a projection of Veronese tensor onto where are real numbers that must satisfy the ”normal” equations
[TABLE]
It is obvious that for all . Using an appropriate order on the set of pairings rewrite this system of linear equations as
[TABLE]
where is an unknown vector with coordinates and is the -dimensional vector of ones. Since is an -orbit, all row-sums of are equal to each other by Lemma 2. Denoting the unique row-sum of by we see that vector is a solution of the system of equations (6). The value of can be easily found by comparing (3) and (5). Indeed, from Lemma 3 (with ) and (5), (6) one gets
[TABLE]
It follows that and that the number is the average of elements of the Gram matrix . That proves (i) and (ii) while (iii) is equivalent to (i) by Lemma 1.
It is now a straightforward exercise to verify the following corollary
Theorem 2**.**
Let be a partition of the set of indexes , let be independent -invariant random vectors and let be a generalized random Veronese tensor as in (4)
- (i)
If cardinality of at least one of the sets is odd then 2. (ii)
If , let be the set of all pairings on the set and let . Then in notation of Definition 1 (cf. Remark 1)
[TABLE]
Corollary 1**.**
Let be an ordered basis of and let be the corresponding Gram matrix of . Let be the sum of elements of the -th row of . Then the following identity holds
[TABLE]
Proof. Following the proof of Theorem bear in mind that: (a) projection of the Veronese surface onto belongs to the linear span of , and (b), that
Remark 2**.**
Finding explicit values of in case of is probably a non-trivial problem. A method for selecting a basis from the standard set of invariants can be found in [3]
2.1 Gram Matrix of the Standard Set of Invariants
For any two partitions denote their least upper bound by . The following useful statement is well known (cf. e.g. [1] and [4]).
Lemma 7**.**
Let and be two pairings of the index set , let and set . Then
[TABLE]
It is not hard to come up with a combinatorial proof of this statement. We prefer, however, to verify this fact by computing expectations. By Lemma 5, there are generalized random Veronese tensors and such that
[TABLE]
One can further assume that random unit vectors are pairwise independent. By separating variables we have
[TABLE]
where sets of variables are pairwise disjoint, and every variable occurs exactly twice in each of the integrals over a product of unit spheres (denoted by ). In vector coordinates, the -th integral splits into a sum of integrals of monomials. Among these monomials there are exactly that are products of squares and the rest of the monomials will have at least one independent multiple of the form (two different coordinates of the same vector). It is easy to see (cf. Lemma 4 and [5]) that square terms will contribute a value of each, while all other terms will vanish. Hence, the right hand side of (9) evaluates to and then it follows from (8) that
[TABLE]
which is the same as (7).
By Lemma 7 every entry of the Gram matrix is a power of and by Theorem 1 (ii), the sum of entries of every row of is equal to which is a value of the polynomial of with fixed integer coefficients (that do not depend on ). Therefore, every row of has exactly one element equal to , elements equal to and so on. It is easy to see, therefore, that the following statement is true
Corollary 2**.**
For let be a matrix with all its diagonal elements equal to and all its off-diagonal elements equal to one. Let be the Kronecker product of matrices .Then, the rows of and are the same up-to a (row dependent) permutation.
Another straightforward application of Lemmas 1, 5 and 7 yields
Corollary 3**.**
Let be a compact Lie group and let be a real -representation. For any set of independent random -invariant vectors
[TABLE]
defined on any -invariant probability subspace and for any pairings , let be corresponding generalized random Veronese tensors in defined as in (4). If representation of in is irreducible then
[TABLE]
2.2 Weingarten Calculus
Let be a random Haar-distributed matrix in . One of the standard problems addressed by Weingarten calculus (see e.g. [1] and references therein) is computation of moments where is an -entry of . To apply Theorem 2 in this context, recall that and hence (cf. e.g. [1])
[TABLE]
Let’s be the set of all distinct first indices in (10). Suppose that occurs in the sequence times, . Let be a partition of the set of indexes such that consists of the first elements of consists of the next elements of and so on. Rearranging first indexes on the right hand side of (10) in accordance with the partition gives rise to a permutation of the corresponding sequence of second indexes in dot-product terms. Let thus permuted second index sequence be . Split the sequence into subsequences of so that contains first elements of , contains next elements of and so on. Further, for set . The next step is to form a random -invariant Veronese tensor (cf. (4))
[TABLE]
The columns of the matrix are not independent as random vectors. However, these columns are pairwise orthogonal and hence for any pairing on that is not a refinement of the partition . Therefore, applying the equivariant projector from Lemma 1 to the generalized random Veronese tensor (11) and arguing as in the proof of Theorem 1, we get
[TABLE]
where is an equivariant projector , and by Lemma 1 the right hand side of (12) is equal to
[TABLE]
Assuming introduced notation we have a computational recipe.
Theorem 3**.**
(Cf. Theorem 2). Expectation in (10) can be computed as follows:
- (i)
If is odd for at least one of the sets then 2. (ii)
If , let be an average of standard -invariants defined by pairings of the set . Then
[TABLE]
Corollary 4**.**
If indexes are pairwise distinct then
[TABLE]
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Benoît Collins , Sho Matsumoto , Jonathan Novak, ”The Weingarten Calculus”, ar Xiv:2109.14890 v 1, 2021
- 2[2] GUSTAV LEHRER AND RUIBIN ZHANG, ”THE SECOND FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF INVARIANT THEORY FOR THE ORTHOGONAL GROUP”, ar Xiv:1102.3221 v 1, 2011
- 3[3] Jinho Bike, Eric M. Rains, ”Algebraic aspects of increasing subsequences”, Duke Math. J., 109, 1:1-65, 2001
- 4[4] JAMES A. MINGO AND MIHAI POPA, ”REAL SECOND ORDER FREENESS AND HAAR ORTHOGONAL MATRICES”, ar Xiv:1210.6097 v 3, 2013
- 5[5] Alexander Kushkuley, ”A Remark on Random Vectors and Irreducible Representations”, ar Xiv:2110.15504 v 2, 2022
- 6[6] J. Frank Adams, Lectures on Lie Groups, New York, W.A. Benjamin, 1969
- 7[7] Herbert Federer, Geometric Measure Theory, Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, 153, Springer-Verlag, 1969
- 8[8] Serge Leng, S L 2 ( ℝ ) 𝑆 subscript 𝐿 2 ℝ SL_{2}(\mathbb{R}) , Addison-Wesley, 1975
