WEEK 10

Determinants (II)
Kwok-Wing Tsoi

10.1 Determinant of a linear map

Let T : V → V be a linear operator on a finite-dimensional vector space V . Although
the matrix representation [T ]SS of a linear operator depends on a choice of basis S, its
determinant turns out to be an invariant.
To prove this, we begin with a simple observation.

Theorem 10.1.1. For any A, B ∈ Mn (F ), we have det(AB) = det(BA).

Theorem 10.1.2. Let T : V → V be a linear operator on a finite-dimensional vector

space V . Suppose S and S ′ are two bases of V . Then
 ′

det [T ]SS = det [T ]SS ′ .

Definition 10.1.1. Let T : V → V be a linear operator on a finite-dimensional vector

space V . Define the determinant of T by setting

det(T ) = det [T ]SS

for any choice of a basis S on V .

94
10.2 Block matrices : multiplication
It’s evident that computing anything for a 5 × 5 matrix requires significantly more effort
compared to 2 × 2 or 3 × 3 cases. This naturally raises a fundamental question: can we
establish a relationship between the properties of a larger matrix and those of its smaller
submatrices? This question forms the basis of the theory of block matrices.

Definition 10.2.1. A (2 × 2) block matrix is a matrix of the form

!
A B
C D

where A, B, C, D is a matrix of an appropriate size :

• A and B (resps. C and D) have the same number of rows;

• A and C (resps. B and D) have the same number of columns.

Remark. There are block matrices of other sizes and involve more blocks. For the
sake of simplicity in notation, we confine our discussion to 2 × 2 block matrices, which
are already intriguing and self-contained.
Given a matrix P , we can regard and ‘partition’ P as a block matrix in multiple ways.
For example,    
a b c a b c
d e f  = d e f  .
   
g h i g h i

Theorem 10.2.1. Let P and Q be two block matrices such that the partition along
the columns of P matches the partition along the rows of Q. In this case,
! ! !
A B E F AE + BG AF + BH
PQ = = .
C D GH CE + DG CF + DH

Proof. This follows directly from the definition of matrix multiplications.

 
1 0 2
Example. Let P = 0 1 3. Then
 
4 5 6
  
1 0 2 1 0 2
P 2 = 0 1 3 0 1 3 =
  
4 5 6 4 5 6

– 95 –
10.3 Block matrices : inversion
In the case when a given matrix is ‘block upper-triangular’, there is a pretty formula that
allows us to invert it.

Theorem 10.3.1. Suppose A and D are invertible square matrices (of possibly differ-
ent sizes). Then
!−1 !
A B A−1 −A−1 BD−1
= .
0 D 0 D−1

 
1 0 0 2 3
0 1 0 4 5
 
Example. Find the inverse of the matrix 0 0 1 6 7
 
 
0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1

– 96 –
Example. Prove that the inverse of an invertible upper triangular matrix is still upper
triangular.

– 97 –
10.4 Block matrices : determinant
Now we move onto computing the determinant of a block matrix. We begin with a preli-
menary observation.

Theorem 10.4.1. Let n be a positive integer and A be a square matrix. Then

! !
In 0 A 0
det = det = det(A).
0 A 0 In

Proof. Exercise. (Hint. Induction on n)

Using this, we can deduce a formula for the determinant of ‘block upper triangular
matrices’.

Theorem 10.4.2. Let A and D be square matrices (of possibly different sizes). Then
!
A B
det = det(A) det(D).
0 D

Note that RHS is usually a lot easier to compute because it involves determinants of
smaller matrices.

– 98 –
Example. Let A and B be square matrices of the same size. Prove that
!
A B
det = det(A + B) det(A − B).
B A

Note that RHS is usually a lot easier to compute than the LHS because the RHS only
involves determinants of matrices of a quarter size.

– 99 –
10.4.1 Schur’s factorization
The following results are due to Schur in the early 20th century which give a more general
formula for the determinant of a block matrix.

Theorem 10.4.3 (Schur’s factorization). Let A and D be square matrices (of possibly
different sizes) such that A is invertible. Then
! ! !
I 0 A B A B
= .
−CA−1 I C D 0 D − CA−1 B

As a result, we have
!
A B
= det(A) det D − CA−1 B .


det
C D

Theorem 10.4.4. Let A, B C and D be square matrices of the same size such that

• A is invertible,

• AC = CA.

Then !
A B
det = det(AD − CB).
C D

– 100 –
10.5 Unfinished business : Proof of Theorem 9.2.1
In this section, we complete the story of determinant by proving Theorem 9.2.1 : the effects
of row operations on a determinant.

Theorem 9.2.1. Let A ∈ Mn (F ) be a n × n matrix.

1. Exchanging two rows of A multiplies det(A) by −1.

2. Multiplying a row of A by a non-zero λ ∈ F multiplies det(A) by λ

3. Adding a multiple of a row to another row does not change det(A).

10.5.1 Proof of (2) : Multi-linearity of determinants

We prove (2) of Theorem 9.2.1 from a more general result below.

Theorem 10.5.1. The determinant function det : Mn (F ) → F is row-wise linear.

i.e. for any fixed k ∈ {1, 2, ..., n},

1. For λ ∈ F , we have
   
— r1 — — r1 —
 .
..
  .. 





 . 

det — λrk — = λ det — r k —
   

 .. 


 .. 

 .   . 
— rn — — rn —

2. For any rk , r′k ∈ F n , we have

     
— r1 — — r1 — — r1 —
 .
..
  ..   .. 





 . 


 . 

′
det — rk + rk — = det — ′
rk — + det — rk —
     

 .. 


 .. 


 .. 

 .   .   . 
— rn — — rn — — rn —

In mathematics, we say that the determinant is a multi-linear function because it is

linear on each row, with other rows being fixed.

Remark. Since we deduced almost every result about determinants last week from
Theorem 9.2.1, to avoid circular argument, we shall prove Theorem 10.5.1 by using
just the definition of determinant and nothing else.

– 101 –
10.5.2 Proof of multi-linearity

– 102 –
10.5.3 Proof of (1) : Swapping rows

In this section, we first prove a weakening version of Theorem 10.5.1 (1) :

Claim. Let A ∈ Mn (F ) with n ≥ 2. Exchanging two consecutive rows of A multiplies det(A) by −1.

Proof. We prove by induction on n. When n = 2, then the claim is obvious.

For n ≥ 3, suppose the claim is true for any (n − 1) × (n − 1) matrices.

Let A = (aij ) be a n × n matrix. Suppose A′ is obtained by swapping the k

th and (k + 1) st rows of A. i.e.
   
— r1 — — r1 —
 ..   .. 

 . 


 . 

— r — — rk+1 —
 
k
if A =   , then A′ = 
 

— rk+1 — — rk —
.. ..
   
   
 .   . 
— rn — — rn —
Pn
Case 1. Suppose k > 1. By definition, det(A′ ) = j=1 (−1)
1+j ′
a1j M1j . Now we
′ ′
observe that the minor M1j of A is almost identical to the minor M1j of A except
two of its consecutive rows get swapped. By induction hypothesis, we therefore have
′
M1j = −M1j for every j. As a result,

n
X n
X
det(A′ ) = ′
(−1)1+j a1j M1j =− (−1)1+j a1j M1j = − det(A) as claimed.
j=1 j=1

Case 2. Suppose k = 1. In the case, the first two rows of A get swapped. In other
words,    
a11 a12 · · · a1n a21 a22 · · · a2n
 a21 a22 · · · a2n   a11 a12 · · · a1n 
   
′
if A =  .
 ..  , then A =  ..
  .. 
 .. .   . . 


an1 an2 · · · ann an1 an2 · · · ann

For p ̸= q, define Np,q to be the minor obtained by deleting the first two rows of A
(or A′ ) and the p, q-th columns of A. By symmetry, we have Np,q = Nq,p . Our goal
is to rewrite the det(A) as a linear combination of Np,q .

Pn 1+k
To do this, first we note that det(A) = k=1 (−1) a1k M1k . In particular,
 
a21 · · · a2,k−1 a2,k+1 · · · a2n
 a31 · · · a3,k−1 a3,k+1 · · · a3n 
 
def
M1k = det 
 .. .. .. .. 
 . . . . 


an1 · · · an,k−1 an,k+1 · · · ann

= a21 N1,k − a22 N2,k + · · · + (−1)k a2,k−1 Nk−1,k + (−1)k+1 a2,k+1 Nk+1,k + · · · + (−1)n a2,n Nn,k

– 103 –
For any fixed p, q with p < q, the term Np,q appears twice in the sum det(A) =
Pn 1+k
k=1 (−1) a1k M1k :

• the first time as Nq,p in the expansion of M1p in which the coefficient of Nq,p is
(−1)q a2,q ;

• the second time as Np,q in the expansion of M1q in which the coefficient of Np,q
is (−1)p+1 a2,p ;

Therefore, we can rewrite the determinant of A as a linear combination of Np,q with

p < q as follows :
X
det(A) = ((−1)1+p a1p · (−1)q a2,q + (−1)1+q a1q · (−1)p+1 a2,p ) Np,q
p<q
X
= (−1)p+q+1 (a1p a2q − a1q a2p )Npq .
p<q

Since A′ is obtained by swapped the first and second rows, we have

X
det(A′ ) = (−1)p+q+1 (a2p a1q − a2q a1p )Npq .
p<q

Now it’s evident that det(A) = − det(A′ ). We are done.

Using the claim, we can easily deduce Theorem 10.5.1 (1).

Proof. [Proof of Theorem 10.5.1(1)] Let A be a square matrix and A′ be the matrix
obtained by swapping the p-th and q-th rows of A. In other words,

.. ..
   
 .   . 
 — r —  — r —
 p   q 
 ..  , then A′ = 
  .. 
if A = 
 .   .


   
— rq — — rp —
.. ..
   
. .

To recover A from A′ , we first move rq downward (q − p) times (one-row at a time)

to obtain
..
 
 . 
 .. 
 . 
A′′ = 
 
— rp —

 
— rq —
..
 
.
then we move rp upward (q − p − 1) times (one-row at a time). In total, we have done
(2q − 2p − 1) consecutive row swaps. Therefore, by using the claim, we have

det(A) = (−1)2q−2p−1 det(A′ ) = − det(A′ ).

– 104 –
10.5.4 Proof of (3) : Finishing the proof
The proof of Theorem 10.5.1 follows from combining (1) and (2).

Let A be a square matrix. Suppose A′ is obtained by adding λ times the p-th row to
the q-th row. In other words,

.. ..
   
 .   . 
— r — — rp —
 p   
 ..  ′
 .. 
if A = 

.  , then A = 
 
.


   
— rq — — rq + λrp —
.. ..
   
. .

Therefore,
..
 
 . 
— rp —
 
′
 .. 
det(A ) = det 

.


 
— rq + λrp —
..
 
.

– 105 –