arxiv: v3 [math.pr] 22 May 2017

Transcription

1 RADOM PERTURBATIOS OF MATRIX POLYOMIALS PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK arxiv: v3 [math.pr] May 017 Abstract. A sum of a large-dimensional random matrix polynomial and a fixed low-rank matrix polynomial is considered. The main assumption is that the resolvent of the random polynomial converges to some deterministic limit. A formula for the limit of the resolvent of the sum is derived and the eigenvalues are localised. Three instances are considered: a low-rank matrix perturbed by the Wigner matrix, a product HX of a fixed diagonal matrix H and the Wigner matrix X and a special matrix polynomial. The results are illustrated with various examples and numerical simulations. Introduction Matrix models in which a fixed matrix is perturbed by a random one appear frequently in specialist literature, see e.g. [9, 11, 1, 19, 1, 34]. The papers [1, ] are a direct motivation for the present work. Therein, in order to analyse a signal that consists of a finite number of damped oscillations and a noise, one constructs a linear pencil z(ũ0 + Û0) (Ũ1 + Û1) R [z]. Here Û0, Û1 are random Hankel matrices Ũ0, Ũ1 are fixed low rank Hankel matrices and increasing the sampling rate leads to increasing the dimension. We will return to this topic in Example 1 below. We also refer to [17] for other matrix models of noise and information. All above mentioned papers have inspireded us to provide a general framework for a spectral analysis of low rank matrix polynomial A (z) C [z] perturbed by a random matrix polynomial X (z) C [z]. We will be interested in large asymptotic of the resolvent and the spectrum of A (z) + X (z). In addition to this, several studies have addressed the canonical forms of nonrandom structured matrices and matrix polynomials [0] and their change under a low-rank perturbation, see e.g. [3, 13, 15, 4, 5, 6, 7]. Some of the results we obtain, especially those from Section 3, are similar to the first order perturbation theory, i.e. to the study of the eigenvalues of A(z) + tb(z) as functions of a scalar parameter t 0, see e.g. [14,, 30, 31, 3]. In what follows the polynomial A (z) is always a singular polynomial, while X (z) and A (z) + X (z) are regular polynomials, which brings us close to the setting of [14, 16, 30, 31]. However, let us stress that in our paper the dependence on t 0 is replaced by dependence on. Hence, the current paper is a bridge between the spectral theory of random matrices and the perturbation theory for nonrandom structured matrix polynomials. 000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 15A18, Secondary 15B5, 47A56. Key words and phrases. Matrix polynomial, eigenvalue, random matrix, limit distribution of eigenvalues. MW acknowledges the financial support by the C (ational Science Center) grant, decision o. DEC-013/11/B/ST1/

2 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK The necessary condition for techniques we are using is the knowledge of the limit in of the resolvent of the random polynomial X (z) 1. Since the seminal work of Wigner [38] and Marchenko and Pastur [3], spectral theory of random matrices has attracted wide interest. However, only recently scientists have begun to investigate the limit of the resolvent of the random matrix ([9, 18, 1]). Currently the only known example of a matrix polynomial for which the resolvent converges is X(z) = X zi, where X is either a generalised Wigner or a generalised Marchenko-Pastur matrix. amely, it is known that (X z) 1 m(z)i max O( 1/+ε ) with probability 1 γ, for any ε, γ > 0, where m(z) is some scalar function and z belongs to some rectangle in the upper half-plane S. ote that in the formula above one controls both the convergence rate and the probability. We refer to Definition 4 for a precise way of handling this issue. There are three main outcomes of the present paper: extension of the knowledge of limit laws for the resolvents by providing new limit laws for the resolvents of polynomials of type zx I, X + A zi, X zi za, p(z)i + q(z)a + X where A is a low rank and non-symmetric matrix and p(z) and q(z) are scalar polynomials; analysis of limits in of spectra of polynomials of the above type, with a special emphasis on investigating the convergence rates; providing a general framework for further extensions. In the future, employing results for non-symmetric matrices or structured matrix polynomials would be most desirable, see e.g. [35] for applications in neural networks. However, the limit laws for the resolvent have not been discovered yet, see [10] for a review. onetheless, the general scheme we propose in Section is perfectly suited for studying those as well. We present now the promised details of the application of our work in signal processing. Example 1. Let a finite real signal s = s 0,... s n 1 be given. We assume that s is a sum s = ŝ + s of a white noise ŝ and an information part s, which is a sum of damped oscillations s = k j=1 s (k) s (k) j = ã k z j k, j = 0,..., with ã k C, z k < 1 (k = 1,... ). To reveal the (unknown) parameters ã k, z k from the noisy signal s one may follow the way proposed in [4] and construct Padé approximants P n 1 (z)/q n (z) of the Z-transform of the signal. It was observed in [1, ] that the points z k are eigenvalues of the Hankel pencil zũ0 Ũ1 where s 0 s 1... s n 1 s 1 s... s n s 1... s n s... s n Indeed, Ũ 0 = s n 1 s n... s n zũ0 Ũ1 =, Ũ 1 = k ã k (z z k )(u k u k ), u k = j= s n s n+1... s n 1 z 0 ḳ. z n 1 k.,

3 3 However, in real life the pencil zũ0 zũ1 is not known. The accessible quantities are the eigenvalues z k of the pencil zu 0 U 1 = (zũ0 Ũ1) + (zû0 Û1). The (random) pencil zû0 Û1 corresponds to the noise ŝ and constructed analogously. The task can be now expressed as estimating the impact of the random perturbation zû0 Û1 on the (searched) eigenvalues z k. Current numerical simulations support the conjecture that V (zû0 Û1) 1 V max O( 1/ ) with probability 1 γ, γ > 0, for z in a compact set not intersecting the unit circle, where V is an orthonormal matrix such that V u k = e k is the k-th vector of the canonical basis. Under this conjecture the pencil V (zu 0 U 1 )V = V (zû0 Û1)V + k ã k (z z k )(e k e k ) fits the setting of Theorem 9, which allows us to localize the perturbed eigenvalues z k with high probability. amely, one can infer that z k z k O( 1/+ε ) with probability 1 γ, γ > 0, for any ε > 0 and sufficiently large. The paper is organised as follows. Section 1 contains preliminary results in linear algebra and random matrix theory, in particular, we review the theory of limit laws of the resolvent X (z) 1 in the setting desired for current applications. In Section we work in a general framework, considering sum of a matrix polynomials A (z) + X (z), where A (z) = P C (z)q, P C n, C C n n [z], Q C n and the limit of X (z) 1 exists, in a sense that X (z) 1 M (z) max O( α ) with probability 1 γ, α, γ > 0, for z belonging to some abstract set S. The first main result, Theorem 9, says that the limit of (A (z) + X (z)) 1 also exists on some subset of the set S. This result, above all, is a tool for producing new local limit laws by a deformation of existing ones. The second main result of this section, Theorem 1, locates and counts the eigenvalues appearing after such a deformation. In Section 3 we study the matrix case A (z) = A = P CQ, X (z) = X zi, where X C is either the Wigner or the Marchenko-Pastur matrix. Although the low-rank perturbations of Wigner matrices were considered in many papers, see e.g. [6, 7, 8, 9, 11], the novelty here lies in studying non-symmetric perturbations and obtaining precise convergence rates of the eigenvalues depending on the Jordan structure of the matrix CQ P. In fact, we estimate the rate of this convergence by 1 p, where p is the size of the largest Jordan block of CQ P. We show by numerical simulations that the obtained convergence rates cannot be improved in practice. Section 4 discusses random matrices of the form H X, where H is a diagonal matrix and X is a Wigner or a Marchenko-Pastur matrix. Such type of structured matrices is well known in linear algebra, see e.g [0, 4]. Here the random model is analysed with the tools provided by Theorems 9 and 1, matrix polynomials of first order (linear pencils) are involved in the analysis. We essentially extend the results from [33, 39], where H was a diagonal matrix with only one negative entry. j=1

4 4 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK Section 5 contains a study on matrix polynomials of the form X p(z)i + q(z)u u, where X is either a Wigner or a Marchenko-Pastur matrix and u is some deterministic vector. This choice is motivated by the fact that matrix polynomials of this form appear in numerical methods for partial differential equations, see [5]. Again, we localise the spectrum of the given above polynomial by means of Theorems 9 and 1 and show difficulties appearing in a particular example connected with a discretisation of the acoustic wave equation. 1. Preliminaries 1.1. Linear algebra. First let us introduce various norms on spaces of matrices. If b is a vector then by b p we denote the l p -norm of b. If A C k l then Ax q A p,q := sup, 1 p, q. x 0 x p We abbreviate A p,p to A p. Recall that (1) A 1, A () A, A, (3) A 1, A. Recall also the following formulas, valid for A = [a ij ] C k l, (4) A 1 = max 1 j l i=1 k a ij, A = max 1 i k j=1 l a ij. Further, A max denotes the maximum of absolute values of entries of A, clearly (5) A max A p,q, 1 p, q. By I we denote the identity matrix of size. For matrices P C n and Q C n we define QE κ 1 (Q) := sup 1, E C, E 0 E max κ (P ) := EP sup, E C, E 0 E max QEP (6) κ(p, Q) := sup E C, E 0 E max Let us denote the maximal number of nonzero entries in each row of Q by r(q) and the maximal number of nonzero entries in each column of P by c(p ). Proposition. For Q C n and P C n the following inequalities hold κ 1 (Q) n r(q) Q max, κ (P ) n c(p ) P max, κ(p, Q) n r(q) c(p ) Q max P max n r(q) c(p ) Q P.

5 5 Proof. For Q = [q ij ], E = [d ij ] we obtain, using formula (4), the following QE 1 = q ij d jk j=1 ik 1 n = max 1 k q ij d jk Similarly, max 1 k i=1 n j=1 i=1 j=1 q ij d jk nr(q) Q max E max. EP = d ij p jk j=1 ik n = max 1 i d ij p jk max The last claim results from the inequalities and the relation (5). k=1 n j=1 1 k k=1 j=1 d ij p jk nc(p ) P max E max. QEP n QEP max = n max i,j=1,...,n q ik d kl p lj k,l nr(q)c(p ) E max P max Q max, The following elementary result on matrices will be of frequent use. Let A, B C n n and let A be nonsingular. Then A+B is nonsingular if and only if I n +BA 1 is nonsingular, and in such case (7) (A + B) 1 = A 1 (I n + BA 1 ) 1. Let denote any matrix norm. Then (8) (A + B) 1 A 1 A 1 (I n + BA 1 ) 1 B. Furthermore, (9) if BA 1 < 1 then A + B is inveritble and (10) (A + B) 1 A 1 A 1 B 1 BA 1.

6 6 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK In many places of this article we will use the well known Woodbury matrix identity. Let us recall that for invertible matrices X C n n, C C k k and matrices P C n k, Q C k n, the matrix X+P CQ is invertible if and only if L := C 1 +QX 1 P is invertible. In such case (11) (X + P CQ) 1 = X 1 X 1 P L 1 QX Probability theory. In the whole paper we will work with one, hidden in the background in the usual manner, probability space. By P and E we denote the probability and expectation, respectively. Recall the following definition, cf. [9] Definition.1. Definition 3. Let ξ = ξ () (u) :, u U () }, ζ = ζ () (u) :, u U () } be two families of nonnegative random variables, where U () is possibly dependent parameter set. We say that ξ is stochastically dominated by ζ uniformly in u, if for all ε > 0 and γ > 0 we have } (1) sup P ξ () (u) > ε ζ () (u) γ u U () for large enough 0 (ε, γ) (i.e. the constant 0 may depend only on ε, γ, in particular it is independent from the event and the parameter u), simultaneously in u, if for all ε > 0 and γ > 0 we have (13) P Ω \ u U () for large enough 0 (ε, γ). } ξ () (u) ε ζ () (u) γ We will denote the above in symbols as ξ ζ, adding each time a note saying whether the convergence is uniform or simultaneous and naming the set of parameters. Mostly, unlike in [9], we will use the simultaneous version of the definition. We will use in the sequel the fact that addition preserves stochastic dominating. This and other basic properties of stochastic dominating can be found in Lemma 3. of [9]. By analogy to Definition.3 in [9], we say that -dependent event = () (u) Ω :, u U () } holds (simultaneously in u) with high probability if 1 is stochastically dominated by 1 simultaneously in u, i.e. if for all ε > 0 and γ > 0 we have P Ω \ 1 ε 1 (u)} () γ u U () for large enough 0 (ε, γ). In other words, holds with high probability if for all γ > 0 we have P () (u) > 1 γ u U () for large enough 0 (γ). We will use the symbol const to denote a universal constant, independent from.

7 7 Let us introduce now one of the main objects of our study: a local limit law, defined here for random polynomials. Definition 4. Let X (z) = k z i X i C [z] i=0 be a random matrix polynomial, i.e. the matrices X i are either deterministic or random matrices, and the degree k of the polynomial is fixed and does not depend on. Let S C be a family of deterministic open sets with S S +1 for all and let M : S C, Ψ (z) : S [0, + ] be a sequences of deterministic functions. We say that X (z) has a local limit law M (z) on sets S with the rate Ψ (z) if the set S is contained in the resolvent set of X (z) with high probability and X (z) 1 M (z) max Ψ (z) simultaneously in z S. Although it is not formally needed, we assume that for any z S the sequence (Ψ (z)) converges to zero. We present main examples, which are motivation for the above definition. Example 5. Let W = W = W be an Hermitian matrix whose entries W ij are independent complex-valued random variables for i j, such that (14) EW ij = 0, const E W ij, E W ij = 1 and for all p (15) E W ij p const(p). It was showed in [9] that for each ω (0, 1) the polynomial W zi has a local limit law M (z) = m W (z)i, where m W (z) is a Stieltjes transform of Wigner semicircle distribution m W (z) = z + z 4, on the set with the rate S W,ω = z = x + i y : x ω 1, 1+ω y ω 1}, Ψ W (z) = Im m(z) + 1 y y. Indeed, this can be easily deduced from Theorem.1, remark after Theorem.15 (see also Remark.6) and Lemma 3.(i) of [9]. The authors call the local limit law isotropic because of the form M (z) = m W (z)i. In the next section we will produce local limit laws of different type. Furthermore, since m(z) ω 1 for z S one has (16) sup Ψ W (z) z S W,ω ( ω 1 1+ω ω ) = O( ω ). Another example of a local limit law is given by the same polynomial W zi but now with S = T, where T is some compact set in the upper half-plane. j

8 8 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK Observe that in this setting we have again M (z) = m W (z)i with the same rate Ψ W (z), but the estimate (16) can be improved to (17) sup Ψ W (z) = O( 1 ). z T In what follows we will need both constructions presented in this example. Our second example is the isotropic local Marchenko-Pastur limit law. Example 6. Let Y = Y be an M matrix, with, M satisfying (18) 1/ const M const whose entries Y ij are independent complex-valued random variables such that (19) EY ij = 0, E Y ij = and for all p 1 M, (0) E (M) 1/4 Y ij p = const(p). Let also φ = M/, γ ± = φ + 1 φ ±, κ = min( γ x, γ + x ), K = min(, M). Then the polynomial Y Y zi has an isotropic local limit law M = m MP (z)i, where on the set with the rate m MP (z) = m φ MP (z) = φ1/ φ 1/ z + i (z γ )(γ + z) φ 1/ z S MP,ω = z = x + i y C : κ ω 1, K 1+ω y ω 1, z ω }, Ψ MP (z) = Im m φ (z) + 1 y y. As in the previous example, this can be deduced from the results in [9]: Theorem.4, Remark.6 and Lemma 3.(i). Furthermore, one has that (1) sup Ψ MP (z) O( ω ). z S MP,ω As in Example 5 we change the setting by putting S = T, where T is some compact set in the upper half-plane, which leads to the estimate () sup Ψ MP (z) = O( 1 ). z T The next example will not be used later on, but is presented to show further possible constructions of local limit laws. Example 7. Let Y = Y be a matrix as in Example 6. For simplicity we assume that M, i.e. φ 1 and K = M. For each ω (0, 1) the polynomial zy Y I has an isotropic local law M (z) = zm φ ( 1 z ) I = z z(φ 1 φ 1 ) 1 + i (γ + z 1)(1 γ z) φ 1 I

9 9 on the set V = z C : ω z ω 1, Im z log M 1+ω ω }. with the rate 1. Indeed, observe that (3) zy Y I = z(y Y 1 z I ) and use the local limit law from Example 6. Further details are left for the reader. We conclude this section with an example of a random matrix without a local limit law, to show the difference between the local limit law and stochastic convergence of eigenvalues. Example 8. Let X C be a diagonal matrix, with elements on the diagonal being i.i.d. standard normal variables. Although the empirical measures of the eigenvalues of X converge weakly in probability to the normal distribution, the resolvent (X zi ) 1 does not converge in any reasonable sense.. Main results.1. The resolvent. In this subsection we will show how a low-dimensional perturbation deforms a local limit law. Recall that r(b), c(b) denote, respectively, the maximal number of nonzero entries in each row and column of a matrix B. Theorem 9. Let (n ) be a nondecreasing sequence and let C (z) C n n [z], A (z) := P C (z)q C [z], be deterministic matrix polynomials, where P C n, Q C n. Let X (z) C [z] be a random matrix polynomial. We assume that (a1) X (z) has a local limit law M (z) on a family of sets S with rate Ψ (z), see Definition 4, (a) C (z) is invertible for z S, (a3) we have that (4) n sup z S Ψ (z) O( α ), with some α > 0, (a4) the numbers P, Q, c(p ), r(q ) are bounded in. Then for any β (0, α) the resolvent set of the random polynomial X (z) + A (z) contains with high probability the set (5) S := z S : K (z) is invertible, K (z) 1 } < β, where (6) K (z) = C (z) 1 + Q M (z)p. Furthermore, X (z) + A (z) has a local limit law on S (7) M (z) = M (z) M (z)p K (z) 1 Q M (z), with the rate Ψ (z) := α n Ψ (z)( M (z) + 1) under the additional assumption that Ψ (z) converges to zero for z S.

10 10 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK Proof. In the proof we will skip the index for the sake of brevity. We set β = α/, the proof for arbitrary β < α requires only few technical adjustments. Fix arbitrary γ > 0. Due to (a1) and the definition of stochastic simultaneous domination (Definition 3, ε = α/4) we have that with E(z) = X(z) 1 M(z) the following event Θ (8) z S } E(z) max α/4 Ψ(z), holds with probability 1 γ for 0 (α, γ) sufficiently large. ote that if Θ occurs one has that for all z S QE(z)P K(z) 1 QE(z)P α, by (5), κ(p, Q) E(z) max α, by (6), κ(p, Q) α + α 4 Ψ(z), by (8) nc(p )r(q) P Q 3α 4 Ψ(z), by Proposition, const n 3α 4 sup z S Ψ(z), by (a4). Consequently, by the assumption (a3), on the event Θ one has that z Z QE(z)P K(z) 1 < 1 for sufficiently large 0 (α, γ). By the Woodbury matrix equality argument the matrix X(z)+P C(z)Q is invertible if and only if C(z) 1 +QX(z) 1 P is invertible. ote that C(z) 1 + QX(z) 1 P = QE(z)P + K(z). This, together with (7) implies that on the event Θ the matrix X(z) + P C(z)Q is invertible for sufficiently large 0 (α, γ). As γ was arbitrary we see that S is contained in the resolvent of X(z) + A(z) simultaneously in z S with high probability. ow we prove the convergence of (X (z) + A (z)) 1. Let Consider E 1 (z) := (C(z) 1 + Q(M(z) + E(z))P ) 1 K(z) 1. (X(z) + A(z)) 1 = (X(z) + P C(z)Q) 1 = = X(z) 1 X(z) 1 P (C(z) 1 + QX(z) 1 P ) 1 QX(z) 1 = (M(z) + E(z)) (M(z) + E(z))P (K(z) 1 + E 1 (z))q(m(z) + E(z)). Confronting with (7) and dropping the z-dependence we obtain E (z) : = (X(z) + A(z)) 1 M(z) = E + MP E 1 QM + EP K 1 QM + EP E 1 QM + MP K 1 QE + MP E 1 QE + EP K 1 QE + EP E 1 QE. We will estimate the maximum norm of each summand of the right hand side of the above equation. For this aim we state some preliminary inequlities. Recall that by Proposition, assumptions on P and Q and (5) one has κ 1 (Q), κ (P ), κ(p, Q) const n.

11 11 The stochastic domination everywhere below in this proof is simultaneous in z S. One has (9) (30) E(z)P κ (P ) E(z) max nψ(z), QE(z) κ 1 (Q) E(z) max nψ(z), E 1 (z) = (C(z) 1 + Q(M(z) + E(z))P ) 1 (C 1 (z) + QM(z)P ) 1 (C(z) 1 + QM(z)P ) 1 QE(z)P 1 QE(z)P (C(z) 1 + QM(z)P ) 1, by (10) (31) α E(z) max κ(p, Q) 1 E(z) max κ(p, Q) α nψ(z) α 1 nψ(z) α nψ(z) α, We can now derive the announced estimation of summands of E (z). E max Ψ(z) MP E 1 QM max MP E 1 QM M P Q E 1 nψ(z) α M, by (31) EP K 1 QM max EP K 1 QM, EP K 1, QM κ (P ) E max K 1 Q M by () nψ(z) α M, by (9) EP E 1 QM max EP E 1 QM, EP E 1, QM κ (P ) E E 1 Q M by (),(31) n Ψ (z) α M nψ(z) α M, by (4) MP K 1 QE max MP K 1 QE 1, MP K 1 1, QE 1 M P α κ1 (Q)Ψ(z) by (3) nψ(z) α M

12 1 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK MP E 1 QE max MP E 1 QE 1, MP E 1 1, QE 1 M nψ(z) α κ 1 (Q)Ψ(z) by (3),(31) n Ψ (z) α M nψ(z) α M, by (4) EP K 1 QE max EP K 1 QE 1, EP K 1 1, QE 1 Ψ(z)κ (P ) α κ1 (Q)Ψ(z), by (1) n Ψ (z) α nψ(z), by (4) EP E 1 QE max EP E 1 QE 1, EP E 1 1, QE 1 Ψ(z)κ (P )nψ(z) α κ 1 (Q)Ψ(z), by (1),(31) n 3 Ψ 3 (z) α nψ(z), by (4). Due to the fact that α const α, M const M, nψ(z) α 0 the proof is finished... The spectrum. In the current subsection the dimension n will be constant and denoted by n. First let us proof a technical lemma. Lemma 10. Let the matrices A, B C k k. Then det A det B k! k A B max ( A B max + A max ) k 1. Proof. Observe that with M = max( A max, B max ) A max + A B max

13 13 one has det A det B a1σ(1) a σ()... a kσ(k) b 1σ(1) b σ()... b kσ(k) σ S k ( a 1σ(1) b 1σ(1) a σ()... a kσ(k) σ S k + b 1σ(1) a σ() b σ() a 3σ(3)... a kσ(k) +... ) + b 1σ(1) b σ()... b (k 1)σ(k 1) a kσ(k) b kσ(k) k! k A B max M k 1 k! k A B max ( A B max + A max ) k 1. The next step in analysis of the spectra of matrices X + A is the following theorem, for its formulation let us make a usual technical definition. Definition 11. Suppose a point z 0 C is given. We order the complex plane with respects the absolute value λ z 0 and if λ z 0 = µ z 0 we take into account the arguments λ z 0 and µ z 0. Theorem 1. Let n be fixed and let C(z) C n n [z], A (z) := P C(z)Q C [z], be deterministic matrix polynomials, where P C n, Q C n, = 1,,... Let X (z) C [z] be a random matrix polynomial. We assume that (a1) X (z) has a local limit law M (z) on a family of sets S with the rate Ψ (z), see Definition 4, (a ) C(z) is invertible for z S, (a3 ) the following estimate holds sup Ψ (z) O( α ) z S with some α > 0, (a4) the numbers P, Q, c(p ) and r(q ) are bounded in, (a5 ) the matrix-valued function z Q M (z)p is analytic on the interior of S and does not depend on. Let also K(z) := C(z) 1 + Q M (z)p, L (z) := C(z) 1 + Q X (z) 1 P. Assume that the function det K(z) has a zero of order k > 0 at a point z 0 lying in the interior of S and let λ 1,..., λ k,... be the zeros of det L (z) written down with multiplicities in the order given by their distance to z 0. Then the first k of them converge to z 0 in the following sense (3) λ j z 0 α k, j = 1,,..., k, while the k + 1-st, and in consequence all following ones, do not converge to z 0, i.e. for any β > 0 (33) λ k+1 z 0 β.

14 14 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK Proof. Fix ε, γ > 0, with ε < α. We show that there are exactly k zeros λ 1,..., λ k of det L (z) in B(z 0, β ) with probability 1 γ for 0 (ε, γ) large enough and any β ε+α k. This will prove both statements. Indeed, setting β = ε+α k shows that condition (13) in the definition of stochastic convergence is satisfied for any ε < α, and hence, in an obvious way for any ε > 0. Setting β to be arbitrary small shows (33). Let us fix an open bounded set T such that z 0 T and the closure of T is contained in the interior of some S ( 1). We may assume without loss of generality that X (z) is invertible on T. ote that due to (a ) and (a5) the function K(z) is continuous on the closure of T, hence, Moreover, due to Proposition one has sup K(z) max const. z T L (z) K(z) max Q (X (z) 1 M (z))p n P Q c(p )r(q ) X (z) 1 M (z) max. Hence, by (a1) and (a4) the probability of the event (34) z S L (z) K(z) max ε 5 Ψ (z) }, is higher than 1 γ, for 1 (ε, γ) large enough. ote that ε 5 Ψ (z) ε 4 α by (a3). By Lemma 10 one has det L (z) det K(z) n n! L (z) K(z) max ( K(z) max + L (z) K(z) max ) n 1. Hence, the probability of the event (35) z T det L (z) det K(z) n!n ε 4 α ( ε 4 α ) n 1 } + K(z) max is higher than 1 γ, for (ε, γ) large enough. As ε 3 α < 0 and K(z) max is bounded on T the probability of the event (36) z T det L (z) det K(z) ε α} 3 is higher than 1 γ, for 3 (ε, γ) large enough. Observe that Consequently, det K(z) = (det K) (k) (z 0 )(z 0 z) k + o( z 0 z k ). (37) det K(z) (det K) (k) (z 0 ) ε α > ε 3 α, z B(z 0, β ), for sufficiently large 4 (ε, γ) and any β ε+α k. Combining (36) and (37) we get (38) det L (z) det K(z) < det K(z), z B(z 0, β ) with probability higher than 1 γ for 5 (ε, γ) large enough. However, (38) implies via the Rouché theorem that det K(z) and det L (z) have the same number of zeros in B(z 0, β ). Hence, there are exactly k zeros λ 1,..., λ k of det L (z) in B(z 0, β ) with probability higher than 1 γ for 5 (ε, γ) large enough.

15 15 Remark 13. Let us compare Theorems 9 and 1. First note that the latter one has slightly stronger assumptions, which are however necessary for defining the limit point z 0, also the sequence n is required there to be constant. Comparing the claims let us note that both theorems state more or less the same fact: the eigenvalues converge to some limit points with a certain convergence rate. If n = 1 the claim of Theorem 1 is slightly stronger than the one of Theorem 9. amely, the function K(z) is in this situation a scalar function, and the condition K(z) α, which constitutes the set S, locates with high probability the eigenvalues in the (approximate) discs around the points z 0 and with radius equal to β, for β < α while, Theorem 1 already states that β = α. However, already for n = the estimates given by Theorem 1 are weaker, we will see this more clearly in Section 3. The main reason for stating Theorem 1, despite it gives a weaker estimate, is that it allows in some situations to count the eigenvalues, while Theorem 9 does not even guarantee that inside each connected component of the complement of S there is any eigenvalue of X +A. Therefore, in what follows, we will use Theorem 9 to get the optimal convergence rate and Theorem 1 to get the number of eigenvalues which converge to z Random perturbations of matrices In this section we will consider the situation where A (z) = A is a matrix and X (z) = X zi. In this subsection, like in Theorem 9, neither n nor C depend on. Theorem 14. Let n be fixed and let C C n n, A := P CQ C, be deterministic matrices, where P C n, Q C n, = 1,,... Let X C be a random matrix. We assume that (a1 ) X is either a Wigner matrix from Example 5 or a Marchenko-Pastur matrix from Example 6, so that X zi has the local limit law m (z)i on the family of sets S,ω with the rate Ψ (z), where W, MP}, respectively, and let T be a compact set that does not intersect the real line. (a ) C is invertible, (a4) the numbers P, Q, c(p ) and r(q ) are bounded in, (a5 ) the matrix D := CQ P is independent from. Then the resolvent set of X + A contains with high probability the sets } (39) S,ω := z S,ω : min 1 + ξm (z) p ξ βω ξ σ(d) and (40) T := } z T : min 1 + ξm (z) p ξ β, ξ σ(d) where β < 1, p ξ denotes the size of the largest block corresponding to ξ and σ(d) is the set of eigenvalues of D. The polynomial A + X zi has on S,ω and T the following local limit law M (z) = [ m (z)i m (z)p (C 1 + m (z)q P ) 1 Q ],

16 16 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK with the rates ω Ψ (z) and β Ψ (z), respectively. Furthermore, if z 0 C \ R is such that ξ = 1 m (z 0) is an eigenvalue of D with the algebraic multiplicity k ξ and the size of the largest block equal to p ξ, then the k ξ eigenvalues λ 1,..., λ k ξ of X + A closest to z 0 are simple and converge to z 0 in the following sense (41) λ l z 0 1 p ξ, l = 1,..., kξ, provided that the independent random variables constituting the matrix X, i.e. W ij in Example 5 or, respectively, Y ij in Example 6, have continuous distributions. Proof. First we prove that the resolvent of X +A contains with high probability the set S,ω. We fix β < 1 and let β (β, 1/). Let us note that all assumptions of Theorems 9 are satisfied. Furthermore, with K(z) as in Theorem 9 and D = SJ D S 1, where S is invertible and J D is in the Jordan normal form, one has K(z) 1 = (C 1 + m (z)q P ) 1 C (In + m (z)d) 1 C S S 1 (I n + m (z)j D ) 1 C S S 1 n (I n + m (z)j D ) 1 max. ote that (I n + m (z)j D ) 1 is a block-diagonal matrix with blocks corresponding to possibly different eigenvalues ξ of D of possibly different sizes r of the form 1 m (z) s s where s = 1+ξm (z) m (z) (In + m (z)j D ) 1 max 1 s 1 s... ( 1) r+1 s r = 1 s 1... ( 1) r s r+1 m (z).... Cr r, s 1 and the non-indicated entries are zeros. Hence, 1 m (z) max max ξ σ(d) j=1,...,p ξ max 1, m (z) n 1} max ξ σ(d) max j m (z) 1 + ξm (z) 1, ξm (z) p ξ }. As m (z) is bounded on S,ω we can apply estimates (16) and (1) and Theorem 9 with α = ω and get that the resolvent set of X + A contains with high probability the set z S,ω : K (z) 1 } < β ω,

17 17 which in turn contains the following sets p z S,ω : max max 1, 1 ξ } ξ σ(d) 1 + ξm (z) < β ω δ p z S,ω : max max 1, 1 ξ } } ξ σ(d) 1 + ξm (z) < βω, } = z S,ω :, min 1 + ξm (z) p ξ > βω ξ σ(d) where δ is an appropriate constant and > 0 (β, β, δ, ω) is sufficiently large. Proving that the resolvent set of X + A contains the set T follows the same lines, with the only exception that (17), () and α = 1 in Theorem 9 are applied instead of (16) and (1) and α = ω. The local limit law M (z) and the convergence rates are direct consequences of Theorem 9, applied to S = S,ω and to S = T, with α = β in the latter case. ow let us show the statement concerning the convergence of eigenvalues. First note that due to the fact that m (z 0 ) 0 the function det K(z) = det C 1 det(i n + m (z)d) has a zero of order k ξ at z 0. By Theorem 1, det L (z) has exactly k ξ zeros, counting with multiplicities, λ 1,..., λ k ξ, that converge to z 0 as (4) λ l z 0 α, l = 1,..., k ξ with some α > 0. Each of these zeros is an eigenvalue of X + Z converging to z 0. We show now that α = 1 p ξ. Let us fix a compact set T, not intersecting the real line, and such that z 0 is in the interior of T. As d(1+m (z)ξ) dz (z 0 ) 0 one gets immediately from (4) and the form of the set T in (40) that α β/p ξ with arbitrary β < 1 1. Hence, (4) holds with α = p ξ as well. The remaining part of the proof is about counting the eigenvalues. amely, we will show that the eigenvalues of X + A are almost surely simple and that the zeros λ 1,..., λ k ξ are mutually different. We skip the index for brevity, the argument holds separately for each. We prove the claim for X = Y Y being the complex Marchenko-Pastur matrix, the proofs for the real Marchenko-Pastur and the real and complex Wigner matrix follow the same lines and are left to the reader. First we show that the eigenvalues of X + A are almost surely simple. Let p(z) = det(y Y + A zi). The matrix Y Y + A has all eigenvalues simple if and only if the Sylvester resultant matrix S(p, p ) is singular, see e.g. [37] for the original paper of Sylvester and [36] for another usage in matrix perturbation theory. ote that P(Y ) := (Re det S(p, p )) + (Im det S(p, p )) is a real polynomial in the variables Re Y i,j, Im Y i,j, i = 1,..., j = 1..., M, the entries of A we treat as fixed. Therefore, the set S of all entries Y i,j, i = 1,..., j = 1..., M for which Y Y + A has at least one at least double eigenvalue is an algebraic subset of R M, where C is identified with R. To show that S is a proper algebraic subset we need to show that P is a nonzero polynomial. To see this let Y Y = diag(µ 1,..., µ ), with µ 1 < < µ and µ j+1 µ j > A. By a simple perturbation argument, e.g. the Bauer-Fike theorem, the eigenvalues of },

18 18 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK Y Y + A are simple, which is equivalent to P(Y ) 0. Due to our assumptions on the continuity of distributions of Y i,j the probability that Y S equals zero. ow let us show that the zeros of L(z) are almost surely simple. ote that det L(z) = det C 1 det(x zi+a) det(x zi) is a rational function and if it has a double zero then det(x zi + A) has a double zero. However, it was showed above that the eigenvalues of X + A are almost surely simple. Remark 15. The Theorem above may be easily generalised to the situation where X zi has a local limit law of the form µ(z)i with µ(z) being a Stjeltjes transform of a probability measure. The only exception is the counting of the eigenvalues in (41), namely it is not true that the eigenvalues converging to z 0 need to be simple and that their number has to be precisely k ξ. The proof of this generalisation follows exactly the same lines except the last two paragraphs. Example 16. Let X be the Wigner matrix as in Example 5, for the simulations Wigner matrices with real Gaussian entries were used. We use the notation from Theorem 14. We compare the convergence rates of eigenvalues for the following four instances of the matrix C C (1) = [8 i], C () = diag(8 i, 8 i, 8 i), C (3) = 8 i i 1, C (4) = [ i], i with Q (1) = [I n, 0 n, n ], P (1) = Q(1), A(j) = P (1) C(j) Q (1), j = 1,, 3, 4. We have D (j) = C (j), j = 1,, 3, 4 and ξ (j) = 8 i, j = 1,, 3 and ξ (4) = i. It is a matter of a straightforward calculation that the only solution of 1 + ξ (j) m W (z) = 0 equals 63 i /8 for j = 1,, 3 and 3 i / for j = 4. A sample set S and the spectrum of X +A (4) are plotted in Figure. According to Theorem 14 the rate of convergence is (simplifying the statement slightly) 1 in the C (1), C () and C (4) case, and 1 6 in the C (3) case. The graphs of δ() := max λ j z 0 j=1,...,k ξ are presented in Figure 1. ote that the log-log plot shows that the estimate of the convergence rate cannot be in practice improved. Furthermore, it is visible that the rate of convergence in the cases (1), () and (4) is const 1 and that the constant might be in each case different. Let us formulate now a direct corollary from Theorem 14. Corollary 17. If, additionally to the assumptions of Theorem 14, Q P = 0, then the resolvent set of X + A contains with high probability the set S and X + A has on S the following local limit law with the rate M (z) = [ m (z)i n m (z)a ], Ψ (z) := 1 Ψ (z). Example 18. In this example we will compare the convergence of the eigenvalues of X +A to the real axis in three different situations. Here X is again a Wigner matrix. First let us take the matrix A (1) = P (1) C(1) Q (1) from Example 16. In this

19 δ() Figure 1. The log-log plots for C (1) (red circle), C () (blue cross), C (3) (green star) and C (4) (black plus), see Example 16. The plots of 1/ and 1/6 are marked with black lines for reference. Figure. The set S W 1000 (in blue) and the spectrum of W (red crosses) from Example 16. A (4) 1000 situation there is one eigenvalue λ 1 of X + A (1) converging to z 0 = 63 i /8, cf. Example 16, and the set S W is for large a rectangle with an (approximately) small disc around z 0 removed, similarly as for C (4) in Figure. As the parameter ω in the definition of S W is arbitrary, the other eigenvalues converge to the real line with the rate 1, i.e. () 1 where (43) () = max Im λ : λ σ(x + A ) \ λ }} 1. The numbers () are plotted in Figure 4.

20 0 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK Figure 3. The set S W 1000,ω (in blue) and the spectrum of W A (5) 1000 (red crosses) from Example 18. The second situation to consider is A (5) = P (1) C(5) Q (1) with C (5) = [i], Q (1) = [I 1, 0 1, 1 ], P (1) = Q In this situation the equation 1+ξm W (x), with ξ = i, has no solutions in C\[, ]. However, z 0 = 0 can be seen as a solution, if we define m W (0) as lim y 0 m W (y i) = 1i. Hence, the set S W is a rectangle with an (approximately) half-disc around z 0 = 0 removed, see Figure 3. The half disc has radius of order 1, hence (44) () = max Im λ : λ σ(x + A )} converges to zero with the rate 1, which can be seen in Figure 4. The last situation to consider is A (6) = P () C(5) Q () with C (5) = [i], Q () = [0, 1, 0 1, ], P () = [1, 0, 0 1, ]. Here, according to Corollary 17 the sets S W and S W coincide. Hence, all the eigenvalues converge to the real axis with the rate 1, the plot of (), defined as in (44), can be seen in Figure 4. The next corollary will concern the class of port Hamiltonian matrices, i.e. matrices of the form A Z, where A = A and Z is positive definite. This class has recently gathered some interest [8, 9] due to its role in mathematical modelling. Clearly, the spectrum of A Z lies in the closed left half-plane. We will consider below the case where A = C 0 n, n is a nonrandom matrix with n fixed and Z = Y Y is the Marchenko-Pastur matrix. For the sake of simplicity we will take a square Marchenko-Pastur matrix ( = M). Corollary 19. Let Z = Y Y C be a Marchenko-Pastur matrix from Example 6 with M =. Let n > 0 be fixed and let A = C 0 n, n, where C C n n is a skew-symmetric matrix C = C with nonzero eigenvalues i t j with

21 () Figure 4. The log-log plots of () for A (1) (red circle), A(5) (blue cross) and A (6) (green star), see Example 18. The plots of 1 and 1/ are marked with black lines for reference. algebraic multiplicities, respectively, k j (j = 1,... r, k k r = n). Let t j z j :=, j = 1,... r. 1 + i t j Then for any j = 1,,..., r the k j eigenvalues λ j,1, λ j,,..., λ j,kj of A Z converge in probability to z j as where l 1,,..., k j }. λ j,l z j 1, Proof. Consider the matrix Z A. As i C is Hermitian, the matrix D = C from Theorem 14 does not have any Jordan chains longer than one. ote that z j is the solution of 1 + i t j m 1 (z) = 0. The claim follows now directly from Theorem H-selfadjoint random matrices with finite number of negative squares In this section we will consider products H X, where H is a nonrandom diagonal matrix H = diag(c 1,..., c n ) I n, c 1,..., c n < 0, and X is a generalised Wigner or Marchenko-Pastur matrix. To prove a local limit law for the resolvent we need n to be a slowly increasing sequence, while to count the number of eigenvalues converging to their limits we need n to be constant. ote that unlike in the case of perturbations X + A considered in Theorem 14 we do not need to localise the spectrum near the real line, as the spectrum of X is symmetric with respect to the real line and contains at most n points in the upper half plane, see e.g. [0]. The following theorem explains the behavior of all non-real

22 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK eigenvalues of H X. It covers the results on locating the nonreal eigenvalues of H X of [33] and [39], where the case n = 1 was considered. In addition, the convergence rate and formula for the resolvent are obtained. Theorem 0. Let n log be a sequence of nonrandom natural numbers and let H = diag(c 1,..., c n ) I n, where (c j ) j is a negative sequence such that the sequence (c 1 j ) j is bounded. We also assume that (a1 ) X is either a Wigner matrix from Example 5 or a Marchenko-Pastur matrix from Example 6, so that X zi has the local limit law m (z)i on the compact set T with the rate Ψ (z), where W, MP}, respectively. Then, with high probability, the resolvent set of the matrix H X contains the set } 1 T := z T : c j (c j 1)z + m (z) < β, for j = 1,,..., n, where β < 1. Furthermore, H X zi has a local limit law on T (45) M (z) = diag(g 1 (z),..., g n (z)) m (z)i n, z T, with 1 g j (z) = m (z) (c j 1)zm (z) + c j and the rate β Ψ (z). If, additionally, n = n is constant and if k j denotes the number of repetitions of c j in the sequence c 1,..., c n and if, using the notation of Example 6, c j i : = W 1 cj z j := (c j 1) γ γ ++(c jφ 1 +(c j 1)(φ 1 φ 1 )) : = MP, j = 1,..., n (c jφ 1 +(c j 1)(φ 1 φ 1 ))(c j 1) (c j 1) (γ ++γ ) then for any j = 1,,..., n there are exactly k j eigenvalues λ 1,..., λ k j converging to z j in probability as of H X Proof. First note that for z T we have λ l z j 1, l = 1,... kj. (46) H X zi = H (X zi + zp C Q ), where [ ] C = diag(1 c 1 1,..., 1 I c 1 n ), P = n, Q 0 = P n.,n ote that by (17) and () the polynomials X (z) = X zi, A (z) = zp C Q satisfy the assumptions of Theorem 9 with any α < 1.

23 3 Hence, H (X zi + zp C Q ) has a local limit law ( ) 1Q ) M(z) = (m (z)i m (z)p (zc ) 1 + Q m (z)i P m (z) = m (z) diag(c 1 1,..., c 1 n ) I n ( ( m (z) diag ( 1 z(1 c 1 1 ),..., 1 ) ) ) 1 + z(1 c 1 m (z)i n 0 n H 1 n ) = diag(g 1 (z),..., g n (z)) m (z)i n H 1 on the set T with β < α < 1. The rate of this convergence is n α Ψ (z), due to the fact that H 1 is a diagonal matrix with bounded entries. Finally, note that n α Ψ x (z) converges to zero pointwise in z. ow let us prove the statement concerning the eigenvalues. By (46) the eigenvalues of H X are the eigenvalues of the linear pencil X zi + zp C Q. Define K(z) as in Theorems 9 and 1: K(z) := (Cz) 1 + m (z)i n. As the matrix C is diagonal we have that det K(z) = 0 is equivalent to (47) c j 1 c j 1 z + m (z) = 0, for some j 1,... n}. Consequently, the points z j, j = 1,..., n are precisely the zeros of det K(z). If X is a Wigner matrix, then using the well know equality (48) m W (z) + 1 m W (z) + z = 0 it is easy to show that the equation (47) has for each j = 1,... n two complex solutions z ± j = ± c j 1 cj i, let z j = z j. If X is a Marchenko-Pastur then direct computations give the formula for z j. By Theorem 1, for each z j there are k j eigenvalues of X converging to z j as (49) λ l z j α, l = 1,... k j, with some α > 0. By the first part of the theorem, with high probability, the resolvent set of H X contains the set } 1 T = z T : c j (c j 1)z + m (z) < β, for j = 1,,..., n } z T : z z j > β, for j = 1,,..., n where β < β < 1. Hence, α in (49) can be chosen as arbitrary β < 1. Hence by the definition of stochastic domination (see Definition 3), equation (49) holds with α = 1 as well.

24 4 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK Remark 1. For a square Marchenko-Pastur matrix the formula for z j above simplifies to z j = c j c j 1. ote that for an arbitrary Marchenko-Pastur matrix z j < 0. In the Wigner matrix case the point z + j is also a limit point of k j eigenvalues of H X due to the symmetry of spectrum of H X with respect to the real line. Example. Let us consider H = diag( 1,,, 1, 1,..., 1) C. The spectrum of the matrix X = H W is symmetric to the real line and there are three pairs of eigenvalues which do not lie on the real line. The rest of the spectrum is real. By Theorem 0 the resolvent of X converges in probability to ( mw (z) M(z) = diag zm W (z) + 1, m W (z) 3zm W (z) +, m W (z) ) 3zm W (z) +, 1,..., 1. Moreover, one eigenvalue of X converges in probability to z 1 = eigenvalues converge in probability to z = 3 3 i. 5. Analysis of some random quadratic matrix polynomials i and two In general, it is hard to obtain analytic solutions for the limits eigenvalues of matrix polynomials A 0 + za 1 + z A when one of the coefficients is a large random matrix. amely, the key expression K(z) 1 appearing in Theorem 9, is in the general case hard to simplify. We will present a specific situation, where K(z) has a closed form and a theorem may be formulated directly. amely we will consider the matrix polynomials of the form (50) X p(z)i + q(z)u u, where X is either a Wigner or a Marchenko-Pastur matrix and u is some deterministic vector. Matrix polynomials of this type (with X however being nonrandom, but with being large) appear in many practical problems connected with modelling, cf. [5]. Theorem 3. Let C(z) = q(z) C 1 1 [z], A (z) := q(z)u u C [z], be deterministic matrix polynomials, where u C, = 1,,.... Let X (z) = X p(z)i C [z] be a random matrix polynomial, and let neither p(z) nor q(z) depend on. We assume that (a1 ) X is either a Wigner matrix from Example 5 or a Marchenko-Pastur matrix from Example 6, so that X zi has the local limit law m (z)i on the family of sets S,ω with the rate Ψ (z), where W, MP}, respectively, and let T be a compact set that does not intersect the real line. (a ) p(z) and q(z) are fixed nonzero polynomials, (a4 ) u is a deterministic vector of norm one, having at most n nonzero entries, where n is fixed and independent from. Then the resolvent set of X (z) + A (z) contains with high probability the sets S,ω = z C : p(z) S, m (p(z)) + q(z) 1 > βω}.

25 5 and (51) T := z T : p(z) S, m (p(z)) + q(z) 1 > β}, where β < 1. The polynomial X (z) + A (z) has on S,ω and T the following local limit law m (p(z)) M (z) = m (p(z))i m (p(z)) + q(z) 1 u u, with the rates ω Ψ (z) and β Ψ (z), respectively. Furthermore, for each solution z 0 with p(z 0 ) C \ R of the equation m(p(z)) + q(z) 1 = 0 there exists eigenvalues λ j, j = 1,..., k, where k 1, of X (z) converging to z 0 as z 0 λ j 1/, j = 1,..., k. Proof. For the proof we note that the assumptions of Theorem 9 are satisfied, X (z) has a local limit law m (p(z))i and that K(z) = m (p(z)) + q(z) 1, and so the first part of the claim follows directly. The statement concerning the convergence of eigenvalues follows from Theorem 1 and from the form of the set T, cf. the proofs of Theorems 14 and 0. Example 4. In [5] the Problem acoustic_wave_1d contains a quadratic polynomial which, after substitution z = λ, takes the form 1 4π (I 1 ) e e z + π i ζ e. e z + I e e , 1 where ζ is some complex parameter. Replacing the tridiagonal matrix by the Wigner matrix from Example 5 (their spectra coincide) we get random matrix polynomial of the form (50). Below we consider ξ = 1. Applying Theorem 3 we see that [ p 1 ([, ]) = 1 π, 1 ] π and the equation (5) m(4π z ) + 1 π z + π i ζ z 1 = 0 has one solution outside p 1 ([, ]), namely z Hence, at least one eigenvalue converges to z 0 and the rest of the eigenvalues converge to the set p 1 ([, ]). Furthermore, the equation (5) has also one solution z = 0, if we extend the function m W (z) onto the real line as m W (x) = lim y 0 m(x+i y), similarly as the matrix A (5) in Example 18. This fact dramatically destabilises the behavior of the spectrum. amely, for some realisations of the matrix W there are two eigenvalues of (50) relatively far from the origin, lying symmetrically in the upper and lower

26 6 PATRYK PAGACZ, MICHA L WOJTYLAK Im(z) Re(z) Figure 5. The spectrum of the quadratic random polynomial from Example 4 with = 500 (red crosses) and the solutions of (5) (green stars). The matrix W was sampled 10 times and the spectrum was plotted cumulatively on one plot. Only in four instances the polynomial has a non-real eigenvalue. half-plane, while in other realisations the spectrum of the random polynomial (50) is real, see Figure 5. This fact shows, in our opinion, the border for general study of the random matrix polynomials in the framework of the current paper. Further study should be restricted to particular examples. Acknowledgment The authors are indebted to Antti Knowles and Volker Mehrmann for inspiring discussions and helpful remarks. References [1] P. Barone, On the distribution of poles of Pad approximants to the Z-transform of complex Gaussian white noise, Journal of Approximation Theory, 13 (005) [] P. Barone, On the universality of the distribution of the generalized eigenvalues of a pencil of Hankel random matrices, em Random Matrices: Theory and Applications.01 (013), [3] L. Batzke, C. Mehl, A.C.M. Ran and L. Rodman, Generic rank-k perturbations of structured matrices, Operator Theory, Function Spaces, and Applications, Springer International Publishing, 016, [4] D. Bessis and L. Perotti. Universal analytic properties of noise: introducing the j-matrix formalism, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 009 4(36):3650. [5] T. Betcke,. J. Higham, V. Mehrmann, C. Schröder and F. Tisseur, LEVP: A Collection of onlinear Eigenvalue Problems, The University of Manchester, 011, pp. 8. [6] F. Benaych-Georges, A. Guionnet and M. Maïda, Fluctuations of the extreme eigenvalues of finite rank deformations of random matrices, arxiv: [7] F. Benaych-Georges, A. Guionnet and M. Maïda, Large deviations of the extreme eigenvalues of random deformations of matrices, Probab. Theory Relat. Fields, 154 (01), [8] F. Benaych-Georges and R.R. adakuditi, The eigenvalues and eigenvectors of finite, low rank perturbations of large random matrices, Adv. Math., 7 (011),

27 [9] A. Bloemendal, L. Erdös, A. Knowles, H. Yau and J. Yin, Isotropic Local Laws for Sample Covariance and Generalized Wigner Matrices, Electron. J. Probab., 19 (014), pp. 53. [10] C. Bordenave, D. Chafaï, Around the circular law. Probab. Surv., 9 (01), [11] M. Capitaine, C. Donati-Martin, and D. Féral, The largest eigenvalues of finite rank deformation of large Wigner matrices: Convergence and nonuniversality of the fluctuations, Ann. Prob., 37 (009), [1] M. Capitaine, C. Donati-Martin, D. Féral and M. Février, Free convolution with a semicircular distribution and eigenvalues of spiked deformations of Wigner matrices, Electron. J. Probab., 16 (011), [13] F. De Terán, F. M. Dopico, Low rank perturbation of Kronecker structures without full rank, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 9 (007), [14] F. De Terán, F. M. Dopico, J. Moro, First order spectral perturbation theory of square singular matrix pencils, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 49 (008) [15] F. De Terán, F. M. Dopico, Low rank perturbation of regular matrix polynomials, Linear Algebra and its Applications 430 (009) [16] F. De Terán, F. M. Dopico, First order spectral perturbation theory of square singular matrix polynomials, Linear Algebra and its Applications 43 (010), [17] R. B. Dozier, J. W. and Silverstein, On the empirical distribution of eigenvalues of large dimensional information-plus-noise-type matrices, Journal of Multivariate Analysis 98.4 (007), [18] L. Erdös, H-T. Yau and J. Yin, Rigidity of eigenvalues of generalized Wigner matrices, Advances in Mathematics 9.3 (01), [19] D. Féral and S. Péché, The largest eigenvalue of rank one deformation of large Wigner matrices, Comm. Math. Phys., 7 (007), [0] I. Gohberg, P. Lancaster and L. Rodman: Indefinite Linear Algebra and Applications. Birkhäuser Verlag, 005. [1] A. Knowles and J. Yin, The Isotropic Semicircle Law and Deformation of Wigner Matrices, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 66 (013), [] P. Lancaster, A.S. Markus, F. Zhou, Perturbation theory for analytic matrix functions: the semisimple case, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 5 (003) [3] M. A. Marchenko and L. A. Pastur, Distribution of eigenvalues in some ensembles of random matrices, Mat. Sb., 7(114) (1967), [Russian]. [4] C. Mehl, V. Mehrmann, A.C.M. Ran and L. Rodman, Eigenvalue perturbation theory of classes of structured matrices under generic structured rank one perturbations, Linear Algebra Appl., 45 (011), [5] C. Mehl, V. Mehrmann, A.C.M. Ran and L. Rodman, Perturbation theory of selfadjoint matrices and sign characteristics under generic structured rank one perturbations, Linear Algebra Appl., 436 (01), [6] C. Mehl, V. Mehrmann, A.C.M. Ran and L. Rodman, Jordan forms of real and complex symmetric matrices under rank one perturbations Oper. Matrices, 7 (013), [7] C. Mehl, V. Mehrmann, A.C.M. Ran and L. Rodman, Eigenvalue perturbation theory for symplectic, orthogonal, and unitary matrices under generic structured rank one perturbations, BIT, umerical Mathematics, 54 (014), [8] C. Mehl, V. Mehrmann and P. Sharma, Stability radii for linear Hamiltonian systems with dissipation under structure-preserving perturbations, Siam J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 37 (016), [9] C. Mehl, V. Mehrmann, and P. Sharma, Stability radii for real linear Hamiltonian systems with perturbed dissipation, Preprint, Research Center Matheon, Institut für Mathematik, TU Berlin. Submitted for publication, 016. [30] C. Mehl, V. Mehrmann and M. Wojtylak, On the distance to singularity via low rank perturbations, Oper. Matrices, 9 (015), [31] C. Mehl, V. Mehrmann and M. Wojtylak, Parameter Dependent Rank-One Perturbations of Singular Hermitian or Symmetric Pencils, Siam J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 38 (017), [3] J. Moro, F.M. Dopico, First order eigenvalue perturbation theory and the ewton diagram, in: Z. Drmac et al. (Ed.), Applied Mathematics and Scientific Computing, Proceedings of the Second Conference on Applied Mathematics and Scientific Computing, held in June 4th 9th 001 in Dubrovnik, Croatia, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 00, pp