Paper detail

The density of uncyclic matrices

An element $X$ in the algebra ${\rm M}(n,\mathbb{F})$ of all $n\times n$ matrices over a field $\mathbb{F}$ is said to be $f$-cyclic if the underlying vector space considered as an $\mathbb{F}[X]$-module has at least one cyclic primary component. These are the matrices considered to be `good' in the Holt-Rees version of Norton's irreducibility test in the MeatAxe algorithm. We prove that, for any finite field $\mathbb{F}_q$, the proportion of matrices in ${\rm M}(n,\mathbb{F}_q)$ that are `not good' decays exponentially to zero as the dimension $n$ approaches infinity. Turning this around, we prove that the density of `good' matrices in ${\rm M}(n,\mathbb{F}_q)$ for the MeatAxe depends on the degree, showing that it is at least $1-\frac2q(\frac{1}{q}+\frac{1}{q^2}+\frac{2}{q^3})^n$ for $q\geq4$. We conjecture that the density is at least $1-\frac1q(\frac{1}{q}+\frac{1}{2q^2})^n$ for all $q$ and $n$, and confirm this conjecture for dimensions $n\leq 37$. Finally we give a one-sided Monte Carlo algorithm called IsfCyclic to test whether a matrix is `good', at a cost of ${\rm O}({\rm Mat}(n)\log n)$ field operations, where ${\rm Mat}(n)$ is an upper bound for the number of field operations required to multiply two matrices in ${\rm M}(n,\mathbb{F}_q)$.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.