The determinant of a square matrix
obeys a large number of important identities, the most basic of which is the multiplicativity property
are square matrices of the same dimension. This identity then generates many other important identities. For instance, if
is an
matrix and
is an
matrix, then by applying the previous identity to equate the determinants of
and
(where we will adopt the convention that
denotes an identity matrix of whatever dimension is needed to make sense of the expressions being computed, and similarly for
) we obtain the Sylvester determinant identity
determinant with an
determinant, is very useful in random matrix theory (a point emphasised in particular by Deift), particularly in regimes in which
is much smaller than
.
Another identity generated from (1) arises when trying to compute the determinant of a block matrix
where is an
matrix,
is an
matrix,
is an
matrix, and
is an
matrix. If
is invertible, then we can manipulate this matrix via block Gaussian elimination as
and on taking determinants using (1) we obtain the Schur determinant identity
of the upper left block
. This identity can be viewed as the correct way to generalise the
determinant formula
It is also possible to use determinant identities to deduce other matrix identities that do not involve the determinant, by the technique of matrix differentiation (or equivalently, matrix linearisation). The key observation is that near the identity, the determinant behaves like the trace, or more precisely one has
and infinitesimal
. (If one is uncomfortable with infinitesimals, one can interpret this sort of identity as an asymptotic as
.) Combining this with (1) we see that for square matrices
of the same dimension with
invertible and
invertible, one has
for infinitesimal . To put it another way, if
is a square matrix that depends in a differentiable fashion on a real parameter
, then
whenever is invertible. (Note that if one combines this identity with cofactor expansion, one recovers Cramer’s rule.)
Let us see some examples of this differentiation method. If we take the Sylvester identity (2) and multiply one of the rectangular matrices by an infinitesimal
, we obtain
applying (4) and extracting the linear term in (or equivalently, differentiating at
and then setting
) we conclude the cyclic property of trace:
To manipulate derivatives and inverses, we begin with the Neumann series approximation
for bounded square and infinitesimal
, which then leads to the more general approximation
of the same dimension with
bounded. To put it another way, we have
whenever depends in a differentiable manner on
and
is invertible.
We can then differentiate (or linearise) the Schur identity (3) in a number of ways. For instance, if we replace the lower block by
for some test
matrix
, then by (4), the left-hand side of (3) becomes (assuming the invertibility of the block matrix)
while the right-hand side becomes
extracting the linear term in , we conclude that
As was an arbitrary
matrix, we conclude from duality that the lower right
block of
is given by the inverse
of the Schur complement:
One can also compute the other components of this inverse in terms of the Schur complement by a similar method (although the formulae become more complicated). As a variant of this method, we can perturb the block matrix in (3) by an infinitesimal multiple of the identity matrix giving
From (5), we have
and so from (4) the right-hand side of (6) is
extracting the linear component in , we conclude the identity
As a final example of this method, we can analyse low rank perturbations of a large (
) matrix
, where
is an
matrix and
is an
matrix for some
. (This type of situation is also common in random matrix theory, for instance it arose in this previous paper of mine on outliers to the circular law.) If
is invertible, then from (1) and (2) one has the matrix determinant lemma
if one then perturbs by an infinitesimal matrix
, we have
Extracting the linear component in as before, one soon arrives at
assuming that and
are both invertible; as
is arbitrary, we conclude (after using the cyclic property of trace) the Sherman-Morrison formula
for the inverse of a low rank perturbation of a matrix
. While this identity can be easily verified by direct algebraic computation, it is somewhat difficult to discover this identity by such algebraic manipulation; thus we see that the “determinant first” approach to matrix identities can make it easier to find appropriate matrix identities (particularly those involving traces and/or inverses), even if the identities one is ultimately interested in do not involve determinants. (As differentiation typically makes an identity lengthier, but also more “linear” or “additive”, the determinant identity tends to be shorter (albeit more nonlinear and more multiplicative) than the differentiated identity, and can thus be slightly easier to derive.)
Exercise 1 Use the “determinant first” approach to derive the Woodbury matrix identity (also known as the binomial inverse theorem)
where
is an
matrix,
is an
matrix,
is an
matrix, and
is an
matrix, assuming that
,
and
are all invertible.
Exercise 2 Let
be invertible
matrices. Establish the identity
and differentiate this in
to deduce the identity
(assuming that all inverses exist) and thence
Rotating
by
then gives
which is useful for inverting a matrix
that has been split into a self-adjoint component
and a skew-adjoint component
.

24 comments
Comments feed for this article
13 January, 2013 at 12:51 pm
Mark Meckes
Thanks! I’m about to start teaching a matrix analysis course in which I was going to cover most of this material, though I hadn’t thought of quite this viewpoint on the second half. I think you’ve just saved me the work of preparing one lecture.
31 January, 2013 at 1:01 pm
Mark Meckes
I’m also delighted to discover that telling my browser to print this page results in a printout of the content of the post without all the links on the left.
13 January, 2013 at 1:00 pm
José Carlos Santos
When you wrote “{n+m \times n+m} square matrices”, what you meant was “{(n+m) \times (n+m)} square matrices”.
[Parentheses added - T.]
13 January, 2013 at 1:29 pm
Matrix identities as derivatives of determinant identities « Guzman's Mathematics Weblog
[...] via Matrix identities as derivatives of determinant identities. [...]
13 January, 2013 at 2:30 pm
Anonymous
Should the matrix [1,C;0,1] above equation (3) be [1,0;C,1]?
[Corrected, thanks - T.]
13 January, 2013 at 4:43 pm
Joseph Nebus
I think I’m most startled to realize that I don’t remember having encountered Sylvester’s determinant identity before. It seems like a wonderful little bit to show off. (But I suppose everyone’s life is filled with wonderful little bits they run across only surprisingly late.)
13 January, 2013 at 10:29 pm
Ԫ
Hello, I’m a big fan of Terry Tao’s “What’s new” blog, however mainland China has blocked the WordPress. Therefore, I would appreciate it very much if you could send me full copy of each new post better in PDF rather than just e-mail since the character won’t show up.
Send from Ted
6 February, 2013 at 6:31 am
I am not an anoymous
I use freegate + Autoproxy(a plugin of firefox) to circumvent the GFW,you can download freegate here:http://forums.internetfreedom.org/index.php?topic=18444.0
Also,there are several other ways to circumvent the great firewall of China,there are some discussion here:
http://terrytao.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/wordpress-blocked-again-by-great-firewall-of-china/
14 January, 2013 at 10:11 am
Anonymous
Hi,
Is there a minus missing on the right-hand side of the equation below (5)? (the equation of the derivative of A(t) inverse)
[Corrected, thanks - T.]
14 January, 2013 at 3:24 pm
Peter
One identity that has been useful for me recently involves two matrices $A, B \in SL_2(\mathbb C)$. The identity is
$tr(A) tr(B) = tr(AB) + tr(AB^{-1})$
Out of curiosity, do you know if this can be derived using the methods you described? The identity isn’t hard to prove using the fact that a matrix satisfies its own characteristic polynomial, but I don’t know a very satisfying proof.
14 January, 2013 at 4:04 pm
Terence Tao
Hmm, that is a puzzle. It can be deduced by differentiating the
matrix identity
which is valid for arbitrary
matrices
, in the
direction (at
), but then I don’t know of a good reason (other than brute force calculation) as to why (*) holds, other than an observation that five quantities
parameterise the
-dimensional space of pairs
of
matrices up to conjugation, so some identity of the form (*) ought to exist, and then degree considerations indicate that it should have the homogeneous structure indicated in (*).
18 January, 2013 at 2:04 am
Gil Kalai
One thing that comes to mind in this context are polynomial identities for the ring of matrices like the Amitsur-Levitzki identity (See, e.g. http://gilkalai.wordpress.com/2009/05/12/the-amitsur-levitski-theorem-for-a-non-mathematician/ ) For those there is a result by Processi and by Razmislov which asserts that all PI identities are derived from the Cayley-Hamilton theorem, which is a sort of determinant-identity.
18 January, 2013 at 2:49 pm
A researcher
Hello Gil, would you be able to give us a suitable source for the Processi or Razmislov works? Further, could you explain what do you mean by “all PI identities are derived from the C-H theorem”? I thought that to find the generating set of all PI identities of the ring of matrices is an open problem. Only for 2×2 matrices it was solved by Drenski in 1981. But maybe we’re talking about different definitions?
19 January, 2013 at 9:44 am
Gil Kalai
Perhaps for the results I mentioned “are derived” is quite a description of generating sets.
There is an article “Polynomial identities and the Cayley-Hamilton theorem” by Edward Formanek in The Mathematical Intelligencer 11(89) 37-39 which describes the related works of Processi and Razmislov. Rowen’s BAMS book review of a book by Formanek and Drensky http://www.ams.org/bull/2006-43-02/S0273-0979-06-01082-2/S0273-0979-06-01082-2.pdf contains a lot of interesting information.
19 January, 2013 at 8:17 am
Nick Higham
There are lots of nice result along these lines. One of my favorites is $Af(BA) = f(AB)A$ for any $m\times n$ $A$ and $n\times m$ $B$ such that both matrix functions (where $f$ maps square matrices to square matrices) are defined. In particular, $A(BA)^{1/2} = (AB)^{1/2}A$. The proofs are easy using the theory of matrix functions (see Section 1.8 of http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/~higham/fm/index.php).
21 January, 2013 at 3:08 am
Anonymous
As usual, a wonderful to learn from exposition. I was thinking if Prof. Tao could have also related determinant (det) to the rank function. I mean, the current literature suggests det as a good surrogate for the rank, than, for example, the trace function. Probably, this could have motivated some tighter approximations for the rank operator which can be immensely useful, for instance, in numerical optimization. Of course, other application for this very aspect arises in compressive sensing, and, Prof. Tao is again a seminal contributor in this area of signal processing!
30 January, 2013 at 4:26 pm
Amit Bhaya
There’s also the lovely and well known formula \det \exp A = \exp trace(A) with its connection to Liouville’s theorem on conservation of phase space volume by Hamiltonian flows (since Hamiltonian matrices have zero trace).
31 January, 2013 at 3:23 pm
teobanica
Hello, I’m teaching some linear algebra this semester, and, as always, quite hard to get through the first definitions, as to be able to start speaking about the magics of
.. There’s actually this problem with the very definition of
: is that a volume (intuitive and nice and everything), or some more abstract thing? I learned in Romania, using abstract stuff, now I’m teaching in France, and I have to use abstract stuff as well (otherwise I’d be probably put on the death row by my colleagues :) On the other hand a Russian colleague of mine told me that, at least some 20 years ago,
was by definition a volume, in Moscow! (that’s probably why Russians are so good at it) I was wondering how the situation in the US is: any choice allowed? For math students of course.
5 February, 2013 at 2:39 pm
anonymous
Dear Professor Tao,
I did the calculation of the products of the two matrices X and Y, and it does not seem to give the Sylvester determinant equaltiy. Could this point be further elaborated on?
5 February, 2013 at 6:47 pm
Terence Tao
Oops, I didn’t set up the matrices correctly. It should be OK now…
14 February, 2013 at 6:47 am
Artificial Intelligence Blog · “Matrix identities as derivatives of determinant identities”
[...] Check out Terence Tao‘s wonderful post ”Matrix identities as derivatives of determinant identities“. [...]
17 February, 2013 at 10:54 pm
Craig Tracy
For an account of the use of the Sylvester det identity, det(I+AB)=det(I+BA), in random matrix theory, see C. Tracy & H. Widom, “Correlation functions, cluster functions and spacing distributions for random matrices”, J. of Statistical Physics 92 (1998) 809-835.
http://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~tracy/selectedPapers/1990s/CV59.pdf
19 February, 2013 at 8:57 pm
Supercommutative gaussian integration, and the gaussian unitary ensemble « What’s new
[...] later in this post. By the trick of matrix differentiation of the determinant (as reviewed in this recent blog post), one can also use this method to compute matrix-valued statistics such [...]
3 April, 2013 at 12:02 pm
Study Hacks » Blog Archive » You Can Be Busy or Remarkable — But Not Both
[...] new year, he’s written nine long posts, full of mathematical equations and fun titles, like “Matrix identities as derivatives of determinant identities.” His most recent post is 3700 words long! And that’s a normal [...]