I have a table that describes the influence of sources (columns) on sinks (rows) where rows=$(A,B,C)$ and columns=$(A,B,C,D,E)$. So my table looks like:

  | A | B | C |
A | 1 | 2 | 4 |
B | 2 | 1 | 1 |
C | 2 | 3 | 1 |
D | 1 | 4 | 2 |
E | 1 | 1 | 1 |

If I would like to describe that table in matrix terminology how would I do that? And how are the columns and rows called? What is the correct notation if I want to describe the sum of rows (like the first row $A$ which is $7$). I'd also like to find a way to describe (sum of row)-(autoinfluence where i=j, main diagonal) e.g. row $A$ - (cell $AA$).

As a very unprofessional start:

$$\text{Matrix: } X = (x_{ij})$$ $$\text{where } i = (A,B,C,D,E) \text{ and } j=(A,B,C)$$ $$\text{row sum: } R = \sum_{i=1}^{N}(x_{ij}) = (1,1,...,1)X$$ $$\text{my value: } V = (1,1,...,1)X - X \text{ (where } i=j) = (1,1,...,1)X \text{ (where } i\neq j) $$

I need to describe that table and these desired values in professional looking way in 'ij' or matrix terminology for a scientific paper.


Well, formally a matrix of type $(I, J)$ is just a function from $I × J$. $I$ is an index set for rows and $J$ for columns. Usually $I = \{1, …, m\}$, $J = \{1, …, n\}$ for some $m, n ∈ \mathbb{N}$, but nothing stops you to have $I = \{A, B, C, D, E\}$, $J = \{A, B, C\}$. Since a matrix, say $X$, is just a function, its element in the $i$-th row and $j$-th column is just $X(i, j)$. Traditionally $x_{ij}$ is used instead of $X(i, j)$ but the semantics is the same. Now we have $X = (x_{ij})$ where $(x_{ij})$ is really a shortcut for $(x_{ij}: i ∈ I, j ∈ J)$ which is function analogue of set-builder notation $\{x_{ij}: i ∈ I, j ∈ J\}$.

If you want the sum of $i$-th row then it is in general $\sum_{j ∈ J} x_{ij}$ which is variant of $\sum (x_{ij}: j ∈ J)$ and depends on $i$. In case that $J = \{1, …, n\}$, then $\sum_{j = 1}^n x_{ij}$ is used as a shortcut for $\sum_{j ∈ \{1, …, n\}} x_{ij}$. Note the differences to your notation: there are no parentheses since $x_{ij}$ in the sum is just a particular element rather then the matrix $(x_{ij})$. And other thing is that first index is traditionally row index and second is column index so in your example you are actually summing over elements of $j$-th row.

Also, if the index set you are summing over is clear from context then you can write just $\sum_j x_{ij}$. With this shortcut it is easy to write your value as $\sum_j x_{ij} - x_{ii} = \sum_{j ≠ i} x_{ij}$.

Also note that the limits are typed to the right from the sum sign rather then above and below just because its inside a paragraph. In display mode it looks like $$ \sum_{j = 1}^n x_{ij}, $$ but the meaning is the same.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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