Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A variant of Gaussian elimination called Gauss–Jordan elimination can be used for finding the inverse of a matrix, if it exists. If A is an n × n square matrix, then one can use row reduction to compute its inverse matrix, if it exists. First, the n × n identity matrix is augmented to the right of A, forming an n × 2n block matrix [A | I].
The following algorithm is essentially a modified form of Gaussian elimination. Computing an LU decomposition using this algorithm requires floating-point operations, ignoring lower-order terms. Partial pivoting adds only a quadratic term; this is not the case for full pivoting. [13]
This system has the exact solution of x 1 = 10.00 and x 2 = 1.000, but when the elimination algorithm and backwards substitution are performed using four-digit arithmetic, the small value of a 11 causes small round-off errors to be propagated. The algorithm without pivoting yields the approximation of x 1 ≈ 9873.3 and x 2 ≈ 4.
No (partial) pivoting is necessary for a strictly column diagonally dominant matrix when performing Gaussian elimination (LU factorization). The Jacobi and Gauss–Seidel methods for solving a linear system converge if the matrix is strictly (or irreducibly) diagonally dominant. Many matrices that arise in finite element methods are diagonally ...
The reduced row echelon form of a matrix is unique and does not depend on the sequence of elementary row operations used to obtain it. The variant of Gaussian elimination that transforms a matrix to reduced row echelon form is sometimes called Gauss–Jordan elimination. A matrix is in column echelon form if its transpose is in row echelon form.
Simplified forms of Gaussian elimination have been developed for these situations. [ 6 ] The textbook Numerical Mathematics by Alfio Quarteroni , Sacco and Saleri, lists a modified version of the algorithm which avoids some of the divisions (using instead multiplications), which is beneficial on some computer architectures.
Once the eigenvalues are computed, the eigenvectors could be calculated by solving the equation (), = using Gaussian elimination or any other method for solving matrix equations. However, in practical large-scale eigenvalue methods, the eigenvectors are usually computed in other ways, as a byproduct of the eigenvalue computation.
In the case of n equations in n unknowns, it requires computation of n + 1 determinants, while Gaussian elimination produces the result with the same computational complexity as the computation of a single determinant. [8] [9] [verification needed] Cramer's rule can also be numerically unstable even for 2×2 systems. [10]