Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $f:E\longmapsto V$ be a linear map between finite dimensional $\mathbb Q$-vector spaces with bases $\{e_1,\cdots,e_n\}$ and $\{v_1,\cdots,v_m\}$ Define $coker(f)$ to be the quotient vector space $V/Im(f)$. This is a $\mathbb Q$-vector space of dimension $m-rank(f)$. Knowing that a basis for $Im(f)$ is already determined and it is composed of the $rank(f)$ vectors among the $n$ vectors $\{f(e_1), \cdots,f(e_n)\}$ that are linearly independant, I want to give an explicit basis for $coker(f)$, possibly in terms of the basis of $V$ and the basis of $Im(f)$. thank you for your help!

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 2 down vote accepted

This is an application of the exchange lemma: if $X$ is a linearly independent set in $V$ and $B$ is a basis of $V$ (actually it's sufficient that $B$ is a spanning set is), then we can substitute $|X|$ elements of $B$ with the elements of $X$ and the resulting set is still a basis.

So, if $X=\{y_1,\dots,y_k\}$ is a basis of $\mathrm{Im}(f)$ (determined as you outline), you can find $m-k$ elements among $\{v_1,\dots,v_m\}$ such that $\{y_1,\dots,y_k,v_{i_{1}},\dots,v_{i_{m-k}}\}$ is a basis of $V$. Set $w_j=v_{i_j}$ $(i=1,\dots,m-k)$ to keep notation simple.

You need only to show that $\{\pi(w_1),\dots,\pi(w_{m-k})\}$ is linearly independent, where $\pi\colon V\to V/\mathrm{Im}(f)$ is the canonical projection, as it is clearly a spanning set. Saying that $$\alpha_1\pi(w_1)+\dots+\alpha_{m-k}\pi(w_{m-k})=0$$ means that $$\alpha_1w_1+\dots+\alpha_{m-k}w_{m-k}\in\mathrm{Im}(f)$$ so $$\alpha_1w_1+\dots+\alpha_{m-k}w_{m-k}=\beta_1y_1+\dots+\beta_ky_k$$ which is only possible if all the coefficients are zero.

Without a knowledge of $f$ it's impossible to say more than this, so this is as much “explicit” as you can get.


Now, assume we know the map $f$ and that we are able to compute the coordinates with respect to a basis of $V$ (it can be the given one or any other, for instance the canonical basis if $V=\mathbb{Q}^m$). So, if $x_1,\dots,x_n$ are the coordinate vectors of $f(e_1),\dots,f(e_n)$ and $y_1,\dots,y_m$ are the coordinate vectors of $v_1,\dots,v_m$, you can build the matrix $$[x_1\ x_2\ \dots\ x_n\ |\ y_1\ y_2\ \dots\ y_m]$$ and proceed to find its reduced echelon form. The bar is just to separate the two sets of vectors.

At the left of the bar you'll find $k=\mathrm{rank}(f)$ dominant columns, at the right $m-k$ dominant columns. The $k$ columns corresponding to the dominant columns at the left are a basis for $\mathrm{Im}(f)$, the canonical projections of the $m-k$ at the right give a basis for $\mathrm{coker}(f)$. This is just like using the exchange lemma.

share|improve this answer
    
thank you egreg : so in conclusion a basis for $coker(f)$ would be $\{\pi(w_1),\dots,\pi(w_{m-k})\}$ for any set of vectors $W=\{w_1,\dots,w_{m-k}\}$ making (basis of Im(f))$\cup W$ a basis of $V$. By the way we know everything about $f$, it sends each $e_i$ to $q_{i1}v_1+\cdots q_{im}v_m$ where $q_{ij}$ are known rationals. –  palio May 4 '13 at 16:44
    
I found the basis of $Im(f)$ from $f(e_1), ...,f(e_n)$ using reduced echelon form of the correspondant matrix of $f$. Can we find these $w_1,...,w_{m-k}$ more simply in the corresponding matrix setting? –  palio May 4 '13 at 16:48
    
@palio Just build a matrix with the basis of $\mathrm{Im}(f)$ as the first columns and the basis of $V$ after them; then reduce. The first $k$ column are linearly independent and remains such in the reduced form; just get the remaining $m-k$ dominant columns. –  egreg May 4 '13 at 16:50
    
thank you very much!! –  palio May 4 '13 at 16:51
    
@palio You can do it in one step, of course. I'll add to my answer. –  egreg May 4 '13 at 16:52

Here's one way to find a basis. Extend the basis of Im$(f)$ to a basis of $V$ (one can always extend a basis of a subspace to a basis of the entire space). Then the images of the extra basis elements (i.e. the basis elements in your basis of $V$ that are not in the basis of Im$(f)$) in coker$(f)$ give a basis for coker$(f)$.

EDIT: If you want your basis of the cokernel to be in terms of your fixed basis of $V$, then you can use the elements $\{v_1,\dots,v_n\}$ to extend your basis of Im$(f)$ to a basis of $V$. I.e. add an appropriate subset of $\{v_1,\dots,v_n\}$ to your basis of Im$(f)$ to get a basis of $V$ (add a $v_i$ that is not in Im$(f)$, then add a $v_j$ that is not in Im$(f)$ + Span $\{v_i\}$, etc. until you have a basis of $V$).

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.