Critical Journal Review

Compiled by
Meidy Adelina (416 331 2017 )
Paulus Nainggolan (416 331 2021)

MATHEMATICS DEPARTEMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATIC AND SCIENCES
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2018
 TABLE OF CONTENT
PREFACE
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY
1.1 Background
1.2 Purpose
IDENTITY OF JOURNAL
CHAPTER III
2.1 Summary Of Journal

2.2 Advantages And Weakness Of Book

CHAPTER III : CLOSING

 CONCLUSION
 SUGESSTION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
 CHAPTER I

PRELIMINARY

1.1 Bacground

The ones that become the ones that mak mak mak mak mak add more add. Critical Journal
Reviews for students is a task that must be done where CJR task is a task that has been given by
Lecturers to students in every semester. Where the CJR duties have been newly designed based
on the recent KKNI at Medan State University, CJR will be an important part of every semester
of lectures.
The background of the authors chose this title is, seen from the title that is closely related to
the sub-subject of differentiation of the material that occurred in the dictate Subject LINEAR
ELEMENTER Elementary. Where in this journal has the title of bringing the Negative
Compensation in the nonnegative inverse eigenvalue problem and The symmetric nonnegative
eigenvalue problem for 5x5 matrices. In an engineering textbook there is a subject on Eigenvalue
and Eigenvectors. This is the background of the author chose the journal

2.1 Purpose

1. To know the role of journal.

2. To know the method used in the journal.
3. To find out the results of the research journal.
4. To know the assessment of the journal
 IDENTITY OF JOURNAL
First Journal
Name : Negative Compensation in the nonnegative inverse eigenvalue prob-
lem
Creator : Alberto Borobia, Julio Moro, Ricardo Soto
Year : 2003
ISBN : 0024-3795
doi : 10.1016/j.laa.2003.10.023

Second Journal
Name : The symmetric nonnegative eigenvalue problem for 5x5 matrices
Creator : R. Loeewy, J.J. Mc.Donald
Year : 2003
ISBN : 0024-3795
doi : 10.1016/j.laa.2003.10.018
 CHAPTER II
RESULTS OF RIVIEW JOURNAL
A. Summary of Journal
First Journal
A set ∆ of complex numbers is said to be realizable if ∆ is the spectrum of an
entrywise nonnegative matrix. It is clear that if a set ∆ of complex numbers can be partitioned
as ٨ = ٨1 ∪ · · · ∪ ٨s in such a way that each ٨i is realizable: if Ai is a nonnegative matrix
with spectrum ٨i for i = 1, 2, . . . , s then the block diagonal matrix A = + Ai is nonnegative
and has spectrum ∆. The purpose of the present paper is to give conditions under which _ is
realizable even if some of the ٨i are not realizable, provided there are other subsets ٨j which
are realizable and, in a certain way, compensate the nonrealizability of the former ones.
To do this, our main tool will be a result, due to Brauer [7] (Theorem 3.1), which
shows how to modify one single eigenvalue of a matrix via a rank-one perturbation, without
changing any of the remaining eigenvalues. This, together with the properties of real matrices
with constant row sums, are the basic ingredients of our technique. This approach was first
adopted by Soto [35] in connection with the nonnegative inverse eigenvalue problem
(hereafter NIEP), i.e. the problem of characterizing all possible spectra of (entrywise)
nonnegative matrices.
We begin by introducing the basic concepts and notation used throughout the paper in
Section 2. After briefly recalling both Brauer’s theorem and Suleimanova’s sufficient
conditions [37], Section 3 contains the proof of a complex analogue of Suleimanova’s result
with the negative real semi-axis replaced by the sector {𝑧 ∈ 𝐶: 𝑅𝑒 𝑧 ≤ 0, |𝑅𝑒 𝑧| ≥ |𝐼𝑚 𝑧|} of
the complex plane.
Section 5 presents our main result, Theorem 5.1, a realizability criterion for sets of
complex numbers which can be partitioned in such a way that the negativity of the
nonrealizable pieces can be compensated by the positivity of the realizable ones. We must
stress that, although the proof is constructive to a certain extent, it does not allow in general,
as in [35], to explicitly construct a nonnegative matrix with the given spectrum, Theorem 5.1
may be sometimes hard to use in practice.
A. Preliminary and Notation
A set A = {λ0, λ1 , . . . , λn} of complex numbers is said to be realizable if there
exists an entry wise nonnegative n + 1 by n + 1 matrix with spectrum A. The set of all
realizable sets is denoted by R.
If a complex set A = {λ0, λ1 , . . . , λn} is realizable, then the non-real elements of
A come in conjugate pairs. Hence, the conjugate set Ā = {λ̄ 0 , λ̄ 1, . . . , λ̄ n } coin-cides with A.
Moreover, the Perron–Frobenius theorem (see [26]) implies that if A = {λ0, λ1 , . . . , λn} is
realizable then one of its elements, say λ0, is real and such that λ0 ≥ |λi | for i = 1. . . n.
Therefore, the set

A ≡{ A = {λ0; λ1 , . . . , λn } ⊂ C : A = A, λ0 ∈ R, λ0 ≥ λi for any λi ∈ R }

Lemma 2.1 (Johnson [15]). Any realizable set is realized in particular by a nonneg- ative
matrix with constant row sums equal to its Perron root.

Also, we will use that any matrix in CSα has eigenvector e = (1,..., 1)T cor- responding
to the eigenvalue α. For simplicity, we denote in what follows by e any vector of the
appropriate dimension with all its entries equal to one. Likewise, we denote by e1 = (1,

0, . . . , 0)T the first column of the identity matrix of any appro-priate dimension.

B. Brauer’s theorem and a complex Suleimanova-type theorem

As pointed out in the introduction, our main motivation is to exploit the advanta- ges
provided by the following result, due to Brauer [7] in the study of the NIEP.

Theorem 3.1 (Brauer [7]). Let A be an n × n arbitrary matrix with eigenvalues λ1 , . . . , λn.

Let v = (v 1 ,..., vn)T be an eigenvector of A associated with the eigen- value λk and let q

be any n-dimensional vector. Then the matrix A + vqT has eigen- values λ1 , . . . , λk−1, λk +

vTq, λ k+1 ,..., λn.

An immediate consequence of Brauer’s theorem is the following useful and well known
result:
Lemma 3.1.

If A = {λ0; λ1 , . . . , λn } ∈ AR and α > 0, then Aα = {λ0 + α; λ1 , . . . , λn } ∈ AR.

Second Journal
The nonnegative inverse eigenvalue problem (NIEP) asks when a list σ = (λ1,
λ2 , . . . , λn) of complex numbers is the spectrum of an n × n nonnegative matrix. When λ1,
λ2 , . . . , λn are real, the symmetric nonnegative inverse eigenvalue problem (SNIEP) asks
when is σ the spectrum of an n × n symmetric nonnegative matrix. Both problems are of great
interest and many papers have been written about them, only some of which will be mentioned
here. Both are not solved for any n such that n ≥ 5. See [5,11] for some necessary conditions
for NIEP.
Consider now σ = (3, 3, −2, −2, −2). It is not realizable as the spectrum of a 5 × 5
nonnegative matrix by the Perron–Frobenius theory. Consider now σt = (3 + t, 3, −2, −2,
−2) for t > 0. Hartwig and Loewy [4] showed that the smallest t such that σt satisfies
SNIEP is t = 1. On the other hand it is shown in the Ph.D. thesis of Meehan [13] that there
exists 0 < t < 1 such that σt satisfies NIEP. Thus, NIEP and SNIEP are different already for n
= 5.
Since we consider here only real n-tuples, we can assume that σ = (λ1, λ2 , . . . ,
λn), where λ1 ≥ λ2≥ · · · ≥ λn. We say that σ is realizable if it is the spectrum of an n×n
symmetric nonnegative matrix. If σ is realizable then clearly λ1 is the spectral radius, and we
may assume without loss of generality that λ1 = 1. It then follows that λn ≥ −1. We define
Rn = {σ = (λ1 = 1, λ2 , . . . , λn) : σ is realizable}.

Definition 1. The Soules set Sn consists of all σ = (λ1, λ2 , . . . , λn) in Rn which satisfy:

There exists an n × n symmetric, nonnegative matrix A and a Soules matrix R such that Rt
AR = diag(λ1 = 1, λ2 , . . . , λn).
Let µ = (µ1, µ2 , . . . , µn) with µ1 ≥ µ2 ≥ · · · ≥ µn (so we don’t assume here µ1 =
1). Let e be the 1 × n vector of ones. For any x ≥ 0, consider µ − xe. Suppose that µ is
realizable. It follows from [9] that there exists a unique d ≥0 such that µ − de is realizable
but µ − xe is not realizable for x > d. We say that µ is an extreme spectrum if d = 0. In that

case, if µ is the spectrum of A = At ≥ 0, we say that A is an extreme matrix.

It is clear that in order to determine Rn it is enough to find the extreme spectra in
Rn. Thus, we are led to consider the extreme spectra which lie in U.
This subset is obtained from U by removing a union of 2 faces of U, one
being part of the Soules set and the other consisting of the trace 0 matrices. We
show that certain matrices cannot be principal submatrices of symmetric,
nonnegative matrices with spectrum in U1. In Section 3 we give a sufficient
condition for a realizable spectrum, for arbitrary n, to be realizable by a positive
symmetric matrix. This condition seems to be of independent interest. In Section 4
we analyze the (+, 0) patterns for which there exists an extreme matrix with spectrum
in U1. This analysis yields nine possible patterns, which are further discussed in
Section 5. It is shown there that seven of those nine patterns do not allow extreme
matrices with spectrum in U1. This analysis is concluded in Section 6 with Theorem
4, which describes the 2 patterns that possibly allow extreme matrices with spectrum
in U1. We show that one of these patterns does indeed yield realizable points in U1
which have not been known previously. In addition, the discussion of Sections 4 and
5 yields a result about the sparsity of matrices (not necessarily extreme) with
spectrum in U1. This sparsity result is the analogous result, for n = 5, of the sparsity
result obtained by Laffey for general nonnegative matrices.

In this section we bring some results that will be used to obtain our main results. The
first result, due to Laffey, deals with an extreme matrix.

Theorem 2. [9] Let A = (aij ) be an extreme, n × n symmetric, nonnegative matrix.

Then there exists an n × n symmetric, nonnegative, nonzero matrix Y = (yij ) such
that

(i) AY = Y A,
(ii) aij yij = 0 for all i, j.

Consider next the polytope U whose vertices are the points c, d, e, i, l. It is straight-
forward to check that U is actually a simplex and therefore has 5 maximal faces
(obtained by deleting one of the vertices and taking the convex hull of the rest). In
particular, let
F1 = convex hull of c, d, e, l,
(4) F2 = convex hull of d, e, i, l.
Note that F1 is contained in S5, and thus we know any point in it is realizable.
On the other hand, every σ ∈ F2 satisfies trace(σ) = 5
 λi = 0. Thus, if σ is i=1
realizable the corresponding matrix A must have trace 0 and σ is clearly an extreme
spectrum. It seems that the set of 5 × 5 symmetric, nonnegative matrices with trace 0
has to be dealt separately (certainly Theorem 2 is of no help here because we can
chose Y = I5). It should also be pointed out that the corresponding problem for 5 × 5
nonnegative matrices has been solved by Laffey and Meehan [10].
Thus we are led to consider here the set U1 defined by U1 = U/(F1 ∪ F2).

B. ADVANTAGES AND WEAKNESS OF JOURNAL

 The Advantages of the journal is:
1. Abstarct Clear, so that by reading the abstract alone readers
know the results of research.
2. In this journal, its subjectdiscussion complete and detailed.
3. Part of discussion is complete and detailed.

 The Weakness of the journal :

1. The language used in this journal still beat around this bush.
2. Still there are words that are less efficient in its use.
 CHAPTER III
CLOSING

3.1 Conclusion

3.2 Sugesstion
Based on the results of the Critical Journal Review that has been done then it
can be submitted some suggestions that can be submitted to students and academics
who want to be the next researcher:
a) For Students
Students are expected to play an active role in conducting a research and
development as well as making this journal review as a reference to
determine the source of knowledge and other scientific approaches that will
be used.
b) For Other Researchers
Review of this journal is still far from perfection, then it should be reviewed
further so that it can complete the deficiencies contained in this journal
review.