arxiv:math/ v1 [math.co] 21 Jun 2004

Transcription

1 Van der Waerden Conjecture for Mixed Discriminants Leonid Gurvits Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA. arxiv:math/ v1 [math.co] 21 Jun 2004 Abstract We prove that the mixed discriminant of doubly stochastic n-tuples of semidefinite hermitian n n matrices is bounded below by n! n and that this bound is uniquely attained at n the n-tuple ( 1 n I,..., 1 ni). This result settles a conjecture posed by R. Bapat in We consider various generalizations and applications of this result. 1 Introduction An n n matrix A is called doubly stochastic if it is nonnegative entry-wise and its every column and row sum to one. The set of n n doubly stochastic matrices is denoted by Ω n. Let S n be the symmetric group, i.e. the group of all permutations of the set {1,2,,n}. Recall that the permanent of a square matrix A is defined by per(a) = n A(i,σ(i)). σ S n The famous Van der Waerden Conjecture [17] states that min A Ωn D(A) = n! n n and the minimum is attained uniquely at the matrix J n in which every entry equals 1 n. The modern attack at the conjecture began in fifties (of 20th century), see [17] for some history, and culminated with three papers [6], [12], [14]. In a very technical paper [6] S. Friedland got very close to the desired lower bound by proving that min A Ωn D(A) e n. In [12] D.I. Falikman proved the lower bound n! n via ingenious and custom-made arguments. n Finally, the full conjecture was proved by G.P. Egorychev in [14]. The paper [14] capitalized on the simple, but crucial, observation that the permanent is a particular case of the mixed volume or the mixed discriminant, which we will define below. Having in mind this connection, the main inequality in [12] is just a particular case of the famous Alexandrov-Fenchel inequalities [9]. Let us consider an n-tuple A = (A 1, A 2,... A n ), where A i = (A i (k,l) : 1 k,l n) is a complex n n matrix (1 i n). Then det( t i A i ) is a homogeneous polynomial of degree n in t 1,t 2,,t n. The number D(A) := D(A 1,A 2,,A n ) = n t 1 t n det(t 1 A 1 + +t n A n ) (1) 1

2 is called the mixed discriminant of A 1,A 2,,A n. Mixed discriminants were introduced by A.D. Alexandrov as a tool to derive mixed volumes of convex sets ([9], [10]). They are also a 3-dimensional case of multidimemensional Pascal s determinants [16]. There exist many alternative ways to define mixed discriminants. Let S n be the symmetric group, i.e. the group of all permutations of the set {1,2,,n}. Then the following identities hold. D(A 1, A n ) = n ( 1) sgn(στ ) A i (σ(i),τ(i)). (2) σ,τ S n D(A 1, A n ) = det(a σ ), (3) σ S n where the ith column of A σ is the ith column of A σ(i). where B σ (k,l) = A l (k,σ(k)). D(A 1, A n ) = σ S( 1) sgn(σ) per(b σ ), (4) M(A 1,...,A N ) =< (A 1... A N )V,V > (5) where the N N -dimensional vector V = V(i 1,i 2,...,i n ) : 1 i k N,1 k N is defined as follows: V(i 1,i 2,...,i n ) is equal to ( 1) sign(τ) if there exists a permutation τ S N, and equal to zero otherwise. It follows from the definition of the permanent that per(a) = D(A 1, A n ), where A j = Diag(A(i,j) : 1 i n),1 j n. In a 1989 paper [3] R.B. Bapat defined the set D n of doubly stochastic n-tuples. An n-tuple A = (A 1,,A n ) belongs to D n iff the following properties hold: 1. A i 0, i.e. A i is a positive semi-definite matrix, 1 i n. 2. tra i = 1 for 1 i n. 3. n A i = I, where I, as usual, stands for the identity matrix. One of the problems posed in [3] is to determine the minimum of mixed discriminants of doubly stochastic tuples min A Dn D(A) =? 2

3 Quite naturally, Bapat conjectured that min A Dn D(A) = n! n n and that it is attained uniquely at J n =: ( 1 n I,..., 1 n I). In [3] this conjecture was formulated for real matrices. We will prove it in this paper for the complex case, i.e. when matrices A i above are complex positive semidefinite and, thus, hermitian. (Recall that a square complex n n matrix A = {A(i,j) : 1 i,j n} is called hermitian if A = A = {A(j,i) : 1 i,j n}. A square complex n n matrix A is hermitian iff < Ax,x >=< x,ax > for all x C n.) One of the main tools we will use below are necessary conditions for a local minimum under semidefinite constraints. It is very important,in this optimizational context, that the set of n n hermitian matrices can be viewed as an n 2 -dimensional real linear space with (real) inner product < A,B >=: tr(ab). The rest of the paper will provide a proof of Bapat s conjecture. (The lower bound n! n n for real symmetric doubly stochastic n-tuples was proved in [4].) 2 Basic Facts about Mixed Discriminants Fact 1. D(Xα 1 A 1 Y,,Xα i A i Y,,Xα n A n Y) = det(x) det(y) n α i D(A 1, A n ). (6) Fact 2. D(x i y i,,x ny n ) = det( n x i yi ). (7) Here x i y i is an n n complex matrix of rank one, x i and y i are n 1 matrices (columnvectors), y is an adjoint matrix, i.e y = y T. Fact 3. D(A 1,,A i 1,αA+βB,A (i+1), A n ) = αd(a 1,,A i 1,A,A i+1, A n )+βd(a 1,,A i 1,B,A i+1,,a n ). (8) Fact 4. D(A 1,,A n ) 0 if A i 0 (positive semidefinite), 1 i n. This inequality follows, for instance, from the tensor product representation (5). Fact 5. Suppose that A i 0,1 i n. Then D(A 1,,A n ) > 0 iff for any 1 i 1 < i 2 < i k n the following inequality holds: Rank( k j=1 A ij ) k [15]. Thisfactis aratherdirectcorollary of theradotheorem ontherankof intersection of amatroid 3

4 of transversals and a geometric matroid, which is a particular case of the famous Edmonds theorem on the rank of inrersection of two matroids [13]. Fact 6. D(A 1,,A n ) > 0 if the n-tuple (A 1, A n ) is a doubly stochastic. This fact follows from Fact 5. Fact 7. D(A 1, A i 1,X,A i+1, A n ) = tr(x Q i ). (9) where the matrix Q i =: ( D A i ) T ; it follows from the tensor product representation (5) that if all the matrices A i are hermitian (i.e. A i = A i ) then the mixed discriminant D(A 1,...,A n ) is a real number and Q i = Q i also (1 i n). All previous facts 1 7 are well known (see, e.g., [3]). The next, Fact 8, is quite simple, but seems to be unknown (at least to the author ). Fact 8.(Eulerian matrix identity) Q i ω,a i ω = n A i Q i ω,ω = D(A 1,,A n ) ω,ω, (10) where < ω,ω > stands for the standard inner product in C n. Proof: Consider the following identity : D(XA 1,,XA i,,xa n ) = det(x) D(A 1,,A n ), (11) where X is real symmetric nonsingular matrix. Differentiate its left ant right sides respect to this matrix X: T ˆQ i A T i = det(x)x 1 D(A 1,,A n ). (12) Here ˆQ i T = D i evaluated at (XA 1,,XA i,,xa n ). Puting X = I we get that Q T i AT i = D(A 1,,A n ) I = A i Q i (13) 4

5 3 Basic Facts About Minimizers 3.1 Indecomposability Following [4],[5] we call n-tuple A = (A 1,A 2, A n ) consisting of positive semidefinite hermitian matrices indecomposable if Rank( k A ij ) > k for all 1 i 1 < i 2 < < i k n, where 1 k < n. Also, as in [4],[5] associate with a given n-tuple A = (A 1,...,A n ) a set M(A) of n by n matrices M(A,W), where the indices W run over the orthogonal group O(n), i.e. WW = W W = I, and for any orthogonal matrix W with columns ω 1,...,ω n the matrix M(A,W) has as its (i,j) entry the inner product < A j ω i,ω i >. Matrices M(A,W) inherit many properties of A, which means that sometimes we can simplify things by dealing with matrices and not n-tuples. Let us write down a few of these shared properties in the following proposition. Proposition 3.1: 1. The n-tuple A is nonnegative (i.e. consists of positive semidefinite hermitian matrices ) iff for all W O(n), the matrix M(A,W) has nonnegative entries. 2. The n-tuple A is indecomposable iff for all W O(n), the matrix M(A,W) is fully indecomposable in the sense of [17]. 3. n a i = I iff for all W O(n), the matrix M(A,W) is row stochastic. 4. tr(a i ) = 1, for 1 i n, iff for all W O(n), the matrix M(A,W) is column stochastic. 5. Therefore A is doubly stochastic iff for all W O(n), the matrix M(A,W) is doubly stochastic. The following fact [4],[5] states that doubly stochastic n-tuples can be decomposed into indecomposable doubly stochastic tuples. Fact 9. Let A = (A i,,a n ) be a doubly stochastic n-tuple. Then there exists a partition C 1 C k of {1,,n} such that 1. For all 1 s k dim(im( i C s A i )) =: dimx s = C s =: c s. 2. ThelinearsubspacesX s (1 s k) arepairwiseorthogonal andc n = X 1 X 2 X s. 5

6 It follows from the definition that, in the notation of Fact 9, the following identity holds : D(A) = D(A 1 ) D(A s ) D(A k ), where A s is a doubly stochastic c s -tuple formed of restrictions of matrices A i (i C s ) on the subspace X s = Im( i C s A i ). 3.2 Fritz John s Optimality Conditions Recall that we are to find the minimum of D(A) on D n. The set of doubly stochastic n-tuples is characterized by the following constraints A i = I,trA i = 1,A i 0. Notice that our constrained optimization problem is defined on the linear space H =: H n H n, where H n is the linear space of n n hermitian matrices. We view the linear space H n as a n 2 dimensional real linear space with the inner product < A,B >= tr(ab). This inner product extends to tuples via standard summation. Though a rather straightforward application of John s Theorem [7] (see [4] ) gives the next result, we decided to include a proof to make this paper self-contained. Definition 3.2: Consider a doubly stochastic n-tuple A = (A 1,A 2,,A n ). Present positive semidefinite matrices A i 0 in the following block form with respect to the orthogonal decomposition C n = Im(A i ) Ker(A i ) : A i = ( Ãi Define a cone of admissible directions as follows: ),A i 0;1 i n. (14) K 0 = {(Z 1,Z 2,,Z n ) : there exists ǫ > 0 such that the tuple (A 1 +ǫz 1,A 2 +ǫz 2,,A n +ǫz n ) is doubly stochastic.} I.e. K 0 is a minimal convex cone in the linear space of hermitian n-tuples H =: H n H n, which contains all n-tuples {B A : B D n }. We also define the following two convex cones K 1,K 2 and one linear subspace K 3 of H =: H n H n : K 1 = {(B 1,B 2,,B n ), where the matrices B i are hermitian and ( ) Bi;1,1 B B i = i;1,2 ;Im(B B i;2,1 B i;2,1 ) Im(B i;2,2 ),B i;2,2 0,1 i n. i;2,2 6

7 K 2 = {(B 1,B 2,,B n ), where the matrices B i are hermitian and ( ) Bi;1,1 B B i = i;1,2 ;B B i;2,1 B i;2,2 0,1 i n. i;2,2 K 3 = {(C 1,C 2,,C n ) : C i H n, tr(c i ) = 0(1 i n) and C C n = 0}. Proposition 3.3: 1. K 0 = K 1 K The closure K 1 = K The closure K 0 = K 2 K 3. Proof: 1. Recall that a hermitian block matrix with strictly positive definite block D 1,1 0 D = ( D1,1 D 1,2 D 2,1 D 2,2 is positive semidefinite iff D 2,2 0 and D 2,2 D 2,1 D1,1 1 D 2,1. This proves that an n-tuple (B 1,B 2,,B n ) K 1 iff there exists ǫ > 0 such that A i +ǫb i 0,1 i n. Intersection with K 3 just enforces the linear constraints tr(a i ) = 1,1 i n and 1 i n A i = I. 2. This item is obvious. 3. Clearly, the closure K 1 K 3 K 1 K 3 = K 2 K 3. We need to prove the reverse inclusion K 1 K 3 = K 2 K 3 K 1 K 3. Consider the following hermitian n-tuple i = 1 n I A i, i = ) ( 1 n I Ã i n I ) ;1 i n. Clearly, the tuple ( 1,..., n ) is admissible. The important thing is that the (2,2) blocks of matrices i are strictly positive definite. Therefore if (B 1,...,B n ) K 2 K 3 then for all ǫ > 0 the tuple (B 1 + ǫ 1,...,B n + ǫ n ) K 0 = K 1 K 3. This proves that K 1 K 3 = K 2 K 3 K 1 K 3 and thus that K 0 = K 2 K 3. 7

8 Theorem 3.4: If a doubly stochastic n-tuple A = (A 1,A 2,,A n ) is a (local) minimizer then there exists a hermitian matrix R and scalars µ i (1 i n) such that ( D A i ) T =: Q i = R+µ i I +P i, (15) where the matrices P i are positive semi-definite and A i P i = P i A i = 0,1 i n. Proof: Ifadoublystochastic n-tupleaisa(local) minimizerthen< Q 1,Z 1 > + + < Q n,z n > 0 for all admissible tuples (Z 1,Z 2,,Z n ) K 0. In other words the hermitian n-tuple (Q 1,Q 2,,Q n ) belongs to a dual cone K 0. It is well known and obvious that a dual cone K 0 of a clossure is equal to K 0. By Proposition 3.3 the closed cone K 0 = K 2 K 3, and the convex cones K 2,K 3 are closed. Therefore, see, for instance, [18], the closed convex dual cone K 0 = K 2 +K 3. We get by a straigthforward inspection that ( ) 0 0 K 2 = {(P 1,P 2,,P n ) : P i =, 0 P i 0,1 i n, Pi K 3 = {(R+µ 1,R+µ 2,,R+µ n ), where the matrix R is hermitian and µ i,1 i n are real. Therefore, we get that Q T i = R +µ i I +P i, for some hermitian matrix R, real µ i and positive semidefinite P i 0 satisfying the equality A i P i = P i A i = 0,1 i n. Corollary 3.5: In notations of Theorem 3.4 the following identities hold: D(A) = tr(a i Q i ) = tr(a i (R+µI); < A i ω,(r+µ i I)ω >=< A i ω,q i ω >,ω C n ; D(A) = 1 i n < A i ω,(r+µ i I)ω >,< ω,ω >= 1. Proof: It follows directly from the identity A i P i = 0, Facts 7,8 and the hermiticity of all the matrices involved here. The following simple Lemma will be used in the proof of uniqueness. Lemma 3.6: Let us consider a doubly stochastic n-tuple A = (A 1,A 2, 1 n I, 1 n I), where A 1,A 2 0,trA 1 = tra 2 = 1 and A 1 +A 2 = 2 n 1 n I) )) (n 2)! n. n 2 I. Then D(A) = n! n n +tr((a 1 1 n I) (A 1 8

9 Proof: First, notice that the matrices in this tuple commute. Thus, D(A) = per(c ij (1 i,j n), where the first column of matrix C is equal to 1 n e+τ, second column to 1 ne τ; all other columns are equal to 1 ne. Here, as usual, e stands for vector of all ones; the vector τ consists of eigenvalues of A 1 1 n I. Notice that τ i = 0. Using the linearity of the permanent in each column we get that per(α ij ) = n! n n +Per(B), where the first and second columns of matrix B are equal to τ and all others to 1 n e. An easy computation gives that PerB = 2( i<j τ i τ j ) (n 2)! n n 2. But 0 = (τ i + +τ n ) 2 = τ τ2 n +2 i<j τ iτ j. Thus D(A) = per(c) = n! n n + (n 2)! n n 2 ( τ 2 i ) = n! n n + (n 2)! n n 2 tr((a i 1 n I)(A i 1 n I) ). 4 Proof of Bapat s conjecture Theorem 4.1: 1. min A Dn D(A) = n! n n. 2. The minimum is uniquely attained at J n = ( 1 n I, 1 n I, 1 n I). Proof: 1. To make our proof a bit simpler, we will prove the first part of Theorem 4.1 by induction. Assume that the theorem is true for m < n. (Case n = 1 is obvious). Therefore, had a minimizing tuple A decomposed into two tuples B 1 and B 2, of dimensions m 1 and m 2 respectively, thiswould imply, usingfact 9, that D(A) = D(B 1 )D(B 2 ) m 1! m m 1 1 The last inequality is clearly wrong as D(A) D(J n ) = n! m 2! m m > n! n n. n. Thus we can assume n that any minimizing tuple is fully indecomposable. Now apply to a minimizing tuple A = (A 1, A n ) Theorem 3.4: there exists a Hermitian matrix R and scalars µ 1,,µ n such that P i = Q i R µ i I 0 and A i P i = 0. From Corollary 3.5 we get that D(A) = tr(a i (R +µ i I) and D(A) = n < A i ω,(r +µ i I)ω > for any normed vector ω C n. Let W RW = Diag(θ i,,θ n ) for some real θ i and unitary W. As in Proposition 3.1, define a doubly stochastic matrix B = M(A,W). i.e. b ij =< A i ω j,ω j >. Here ω j is a jth column of W ( or jth eigenvector of R). Writing identities D(A) = tr(a i (R +µ i I)) 9

10 and n < A i ω j,(r+µ i I)ω j >= D(A)(1 j n) in terms of the matrix B, we obtain the following systems of linear equations µ i + b ij θ j = D(A)(1 i n); θ j + B ij µ i = D(A)(1 j n). These equations are, of course, encountered also in the matrix case, where they led to the crucial London s Lemma [11],[17], [12],[14]. Proceeding in exactly the same way, we easily deduce that µ = (µ 1,,µ n ) is an eigenvector of BB T with eigenvalue 1; θ is an eigenvector of B T B with eigenvalue 1. It follows from Proposition 3.1 that B is fully indecomposable, which is equivalent to the fact that 1is a simpleeigenvalue forboth BB T andb T B (see e.g. [17] ). Thereforebothµ and θ are proportional to the vector e (all ones). Thus µ i = α, θ i = β and α+β = D(A). Returning to matrices R+µ i I we get that R+µ i I = D(A) I. Now comes the punch line, a generalization of London s Lemma [11] to mixed discriminants: For a minimizing tuple A = (A i A n ) the following inequality holds: ( D(A) A i ) T =: Q i R+µ i I = D(A) I. (16) Indeed, by Theorem 3.4 Q i = R + µ i I + P i and P i 0. After the inequality (16) is established, we are back to familiar grounds of the Van der Waerden s conjecture proofs [12], [14]. Let us introduce the following notations: A i,j = (A 1,...,A i,...,a i,...,a n ),f i,j (A) = Ai,j +A j,i. 2 I.e., we replace jth matrix in the tuple by the ith one to define A i,j, replace ith and jth matrices by their arithmetic average to define f i,j (A). The celebrated Alexandrov-Fenchel inequalities state that 1. D(A) 2 D(A i,j ) D(A j,i ). 2. If A i 0(1 i n) and D(A) 2 = D(A i,j ) D(A i,j ) then A i = τa j for some positive τ. Suppose that A is a minimal doubly stochastic n-tuple, i.e. that D(A) = min B Dn D(B). Then for i j, f i,j (A) is also minimal doubly stochastic n-tuple. Indeed, double stochasticity is obvious. By the linearity of mixed discriminants in each matrix argument we get that D(f i,j (A)) = 1 2 D(A)+ 1 4 D(Ai,j )+ 1 4 D(Aj,i ). Also, D(A i,j ) = tr(a i Q j ),D(A j,i ) = tr(a j Q i ). (17) 10

11 (We used here Fact 7). As Q k D(A) I(1 k n) from inequality (16) and tra k 1 then D(A i,j ) D(A) and D(A j,i ) D(A).Thus,weconcludebasedonAlexandrov-Fenchel s inequalitiesthatifais aminimal doublystochastic n-tuplethend(a i,j ) D(A)(i j) andd(f i,j (A)) = D(A). Additionally, if a minimal tuple A = (A 1,,A n ) consists of positive definite matrices then A i = A j (i j). Indeed A i = τa j and tra i = tra j = 1, thus τ = 1. As A 1 + +A n = I, we conclude that the only positive minimal doubly stochastic n-tuple is J n = ( 1 n I,, 1 n I). In any case, as D(Ai,j ) D(A)(i j), then D(f i,j (A)) = D(A) for minimal tuples A. Define the following iteration on n-tuples: A o = A, A 1 = f 1,2 (A o ) A n 1 = f n 1,n (A n 2 ) A n = f 1,2 (A n 1 ). It is clear that ( A1 + A n A k,, A ) 1 + A n. n n As the initial tuple satisfies A A n = I, then A K ( 1 n I, 1 ni). (Indeed Pr 1 = f 1,2,...,Pr n 1 = f n 1,n are orthogonal projectors in the linear finite-dimensional Hilbert spaceof hermitian n-tuples. By awell knownresult, lim k (Pr n 1...Pr 1 ) k = Pr, where Pr is an orthogonal projector on the linear subspace L = Im(Pr 1 ) Im(Pr 2 )... Im(Pr n 1 ). It is obvious that L = {(A 1,...,A n ) : A 1 = A 2 =... = A n }. ) As the mixed discriminant is a continuous map from tuples to reals, we conclude that J n = ( 1 n I, 1 n I) is a minimal tuple and min A Dn D(A) = D(J n ) = n! n. n 2. Let usnow prove theuniqueness. We only have to provethat any minimal doublystochastic n-tuple consist of positive definite matrices. Suppose that not. Then there exists an integer k 0 such that the tuple A k has at least one singular matrix and the next tuple A k+1 consists of positive definite matrices. Assume without loss of generality that A k+1 = f 1,2 (A k ) and A k = (A 1,A 2,A 3,,A n ). Then A 1+A 2 2 = A 3 = = A n = 1 ni. From Lemma 3.6 we conclude that D(A k ) = D(J n )+ (n 2)! n n 2 tr((a 2 1 n I) (A 2 1 n I) ). 11

12 As we already know that J n is a minimal tuple and A k is also a minimal tuple, thus A 1 = A 2 = 1 n I. But at least one of A 1,A 2 suppose to be singular. We got the desired contradiction. Corollary 4.2: Let us define the set D n,p of hermitian n-tuples as follows D n,p = {A = (A 1,A 2,,A n ) : A i is positive semi-definite,tr(a i ) 1 and A i = P. Notice that tr(p) = n necessarily. If the matrix P is sufficiently close to the identity matrix I then min A Dn,P D(A) = n! n n det(p). Proof: It follows from the uniqueness part of Theorem 4.1 that if P is sufficiently close to the identity matrix I then there exists a minimal n-tuple A = (A 1,A 2,,A n ) D n,p consisting of positive definite matrices. Very similarly to Theorem 3.4, it follows that Q i = R+µ i I(1 i n),µ i is real and R is hermitian. It is straightforward to prove that under this condition D(f i,j (A)) = D(A). Also, f i,j (A) D n,p. Indeed, D(A i,j ) = tr(a i Q j ) = tr(a i (R+µ j I) and D(A) = tr(a i (R+µ i I). (18) Thus, D(A i,j ) = tr(a i )(µ j µ i )+D(A) = D(A)+(µ j µ i ). Therefore, D(f i,j (A)) = 1 2 D(A)+ 1 4 D(Ai,j )+ 1 4 D(Aj,i ) = D(A). Asintheproofof Theorem4.1,thelast equality leads totheminimality ofthetuple( P n,, P n ). 5 Motivations and Connections The author came across Bapat s conjecture because of the following theorem [4],[5]. Theorem 5.1: Let us consider an indecomposable n-tuple A = (A 1,...,A n ) consisting of positive semi-definite matrices. Then 1. There exist a unique vector α of positive scalars α i ;1 i n with product equal to 1 and a positive definite matrix S, such that the n-tuple B = (B 1,...,B n ), defined by B i = α i SA i S, is doubly stochastic. 2. The vector α above is the unique minimum of det( t i A i ) on the set of positive vectors with product equal to 1 and min xi >0, N x det( x i A i ) = (det(s)) 2. 12

13 Let us define the following important quantity, the capacity of A: Cap(A) = inf det( x i A i ). N x i >0, x Using Theorem 4.1 and Theorem 5.1 we get the following inequality [4], [5]: 1 Cap(A) D(A) nn n!. (19) This last inequality played the most important role in [4], [5]. With many other technical details it led to a deterministic poly-time algorithm to approximate mixed volumes of ellipsoids within a simply exponential factor. In the following subsection we will use it to obtain a rather unusual extension of the Alexandrov-Fenchel inequality. 5.1 Generalized Alexandrov-Fenchel inequalities Define L n as a set of all integer vectors α = (α 1,...,α n ) such that α i 0 and n α i = n. For an integer vector we define a matrix tuple α = (α 1,α 2,...,α n ) : α i 0, α i = N A (α) = (A 1,...,A }{{ 1,...,A } k,...,a k,...,a }{{} n,...,a }{{ n } α 1 α k α n ) i.e., matrix A i has α i copies in A (α). For a vector x = (x 1,...,x n ), we define a monomial x (α) = x α xαn n. We will use the notations M (α) for the mixed discriminant D(A (α) ) and Cap (α) for the capacity Cap(A (α) ). Theorem 5.2: Consider a tuple A = (A 1,...,A n ) of semidefinite hermitian n n matrices. If vectors α, α 1,...,α m belong to L n and α = γ i α i ; γ i 0, γi = 1 then the following hold inequalities hold: log(cap (α) ) γ i log(cap (αi) ), (20) log(m (α) ) γ i log(m (αi) ) log( nn ). (21) n! 13

14 Proof: Notice that the inequality (21) follows from (20) via a direct application of the inequality (19). It remains to prove (20). First, using the arithmetic/geometric means inequality, we get that Cap (α) d iff log(det( A i α i e x i )) α i x i +logd for all real vectors x = (x 1,...,x n ). Now, suppose that α,α 1,...,α m L n and m m α = γ i α i, γ i 0, γ i = 1. Then log(det( A i α j i ex i )) α j,x +log(cap (αj) ). Multiplying each of the inequalities above by the corresponding γ i and adding afterwards we get that m m γ j log(det( A i α j i ex i )) α,x + γ i log(cap (αj) ). j=1 j=1 As log(det(x)) is concave for X 0, we eventually get the inequality m log(cap (α) ) γ j log(cap (αj) ). j=1 The Alexandrov-Fenchel inequalities can be written as log(m (α) ) log(m(α1) )+log(m (α2) ). 2 Here the vector α = (1,1,...,1);α 1 = (2,0,1,...,1);α 2 = (0,2,1,...,1). Perhaps the extra log( nn n! ) in Theorem 5.2 is just an artifact of our proof? We will show below that an extra factor is needed indeed. DefineAF(n)asthesmallest(possiblyinfimum)constantonehastosubsractfrom γ i log(m (αi) ) intherightsideof(21)inordertogettheinequality. ThenbyTheorem5.2,AF(n) log( nn n! ) = n. We will prove below that AF(n) nlog( 2) even for tuples consisting of diagonal matrices. In this diagonal case the mixed discriminant coincides with the permanent. Consider the following N N matrix with nonnegative entries: B = i.e. B = I +J

15 where J is a cyclic shift. Assume without a big loss of generality that N = 2k. Define α 1 = (2,2,2,...,2,0,0,...,0), α 2 = (0,0,0,...,0,2,2,...,2) }{{}}{{} k k Then,e = α1 +α 2 2,e = (1,1,...,1) and per(b (e) ) = 2, per(b (α1) ) = per(b (α2) ) = 2 k = 2 N 2. (Here the notation B (α) stands for the matrix having α i copies of ith column of the matrix B.) Thus, per(b (e) ) per(b (α1) per(b (α2 ) = 2 2 N 2 = 2 N. Conjecture 5.3: AF(n) lim = 1. n n 6 Further analogs of van der Waerden conjecture dimensional Pascal s determinants The following open question has been motivated by the author s study of the quantum entanglement [8]. Consider a block matrix ρ = A 1,1 A 1,2... A 1,n A 2,1 A 2,2... A 2,n A n,1 A n,2... A n,n where each block is a n n complex matrix. Define QP(ρ) =:, (22) σ S n ( 1) sign(σ) D(A 1,σ(1),...,A n,σ(n) ), (23) where D(A 1,...,A n ) is the mixed discriminant. If instead of the block form (22), to present ρ = {ρ(i 1,1 2,i 3,i 4 ) : 1 i 1,1 2,i 3,i 4 n}, e.g. as a 4-dimensional tensor, then QP(ρ) = 1 ( 1) sign(τ 1τ 2τ 3τ 4) N! τ 1,τ 2,τ 3,τ 4 S N N ρ(τ 1 (i),τ 2 (i),τ 3 (i),τ 4 (i)). (24) In other words, QP(ρ) is, up to 1 N! factor, equal to the 4-dimensional Pascal s determinant [16]. Call such a block matrix ρ doubly stochastic if the following conditions hold: 15

16 1. ρ 0, e.g. the n 2 n 2 matrix ρ is positive semidefinite i n A i,i = I. 3. The matrix of traces {tr(a i,j ) : 1 i,j n} = I. A positive semidefinite block matrix ρ is called separable if ρ = 1 i k< P i Q i, where the matrices P i 0,Q i 0 : 1 i k ; nonseparable positive semidefinite block matrices are called entangled. Notice that in the block-diagonal case QP(ρ) = D(A 1,1,...,A n,n ) and our definition of double stochasticity coincides with double stochasticity of n-tuples from [3]. Let us denote the closed convex set of doubly stochastic n n block matrices as BlD n, a closed convex set of separable doubly stochastic n n block matrices as SeD n. It was shown in [8] that min ρ BlDn QP(ρ) = 0 for n 3 and, on the other hand, min ρ SeDn QP(ρ) > 0 for n 1. Conjecture 6.1: min ρ SeDn QP(ρ) = n! n n. It is easy to prove this conjecture for n = 2, moreover the following equalities hold : 6.2 Hyperbolic polynomials min QP(ρ) = min QP(ρ) = 2! ρ BlD 2 ρ SeD = 1 2. The following concept of hyperbolic polynomials originated in the theory of partial differential equations [1]. Definition 6.2: A homogeneous polynomial p(x),x R m of degree n in m real varibles is called hyperbolic in the direction e R m (or e- hyperbolic) if for any x R m the polynomial p(x λe) in the one variable λ has exactly n real roots counting their multiplicities. We assume in this paper that p(e) > 0. Denote the ordered vector of roots of p(x λe) as λ(x) = (λ 1 (x) λ 2 (x)...λ n (x)). It is well known that the product of roots is equal to p(x). Call x R m e-positive (e-nonnegative) if λ n (x) > 0 (λ n (x) 0). Define tr e (x) = 1 i n λ i(x). A k-tuple of vectors (x 1,...x k ) is called e-positive (e-nonnegative) if x i,1 i k are e- positive (e-nonnegative). Let us fix n real vectors x i R m,1 i n and define the following homogeneous polynomial: P x1,..,x n (α 1,...,α n ) = p( α i x i ) (25) 1 i n Following [2], we define the p-mixed value of an n-vector tuple X = (x 1,..,x n ) as M p (X) =: M p (x 1,..,x n ) = n p( α 1... α n 1 i n α i x i ) (26) Finally, call an n-tuple of real m-dimensional vectors (x 1,...x n ) e-doubly stochastic if it is e- nonnegative. tr e x i = 1(1 i n) and 1 i n x i = e. Denote the closed convex set of e-doubly stochastic n-tuples as HD e,n. 16

17 Example 6.3: Considerthefollowinghomogeneouspolynomialp(α 1,...,α n ) = det( 1 i n α ia i ). If A i 0 : 1 i n and 1 i n A i 0 then p(.) is hyperbolic in the direction e, where e is a vector of all ones. If 1 i n A i = I then e-double stochasticity of n-tuple X = (e 1,e 2,...,e n ) of n-dimensional canonical axis vectors is the same as double stochasticity of n-tuple of matrices A = (A 1,...,A n ). Moreover M p (X) = D(A). It was proved in a very recent paper [19] that min X HDe,n M p (X) > 0. Conjecture 6.4: min X HDe,n M p (X) = p(e) n! n n 7 Acknowledgements It is my great pleasure to thank my friend and colleague Alex Samorodnitsky. Without our many discussions on the subject this paper would have been impossible. I got the first ideas for the proof of Bapat s conjecture during my Lady Davis professorship at Technion ( ). Many thanks to that great academic institution. References [1] L. Garding, An inequality for hyperbolic polynomials, Jour. of Math. and Mech., 8(6): , [2] A.G. Khovanskii, Analogues of the Aleksandrov-Fenchel inequalities for hyperbolic forms, Soviet Math. Dokl. 29(1984), [3] R. Bapat, Mixed discriminants of positive semidefinite matrices, Linear Algebra and its Applications 126, , [4] L. Gurvits and A. Samorodnitsky, A deterministic polynomial-time algorithm for approximating mised discriminant and mixed volume, Proc. 32 ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, ACM, New York, [5] L. Gurvits and A. Samorodnitsky, A deterministic algorithm approximating the mixed discriminant and mixed volume, and a combinatorial corollary, Discrete Comput. Geom. 27: , [6] S. Friedland, A lower bound for the permanent of a doubly stochastic matrix, Annals of Mathematics, 110(1979), [7] F. John, Extremum problems with inequalities as subsidiary conditions, Studies and Essays, presented to R. Courant on his 60th birthday, Interscience, New York, [8] L. Gurvits, Classical deterministic complexity of Edmonds problem and Quantum Entanglement, Proc. 35 ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, ACM, New York,

18 [9] A. Aleksandrov, On the theory of mixed volumes of convex bodies, IV, Mixed discriminants and mixed volumes (in Russian), Mat. Sb. (N.S.) 3 (1938), [10] R. Schneider, Convex bodies: The Brunn-Minkowski Theory, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications, vol. 44, Cambridge University Press, New York, [11] D. London, Some notes on the vad der Waerden conjecture, Linear Algebra and Appl. 4 (1971), [12] D. I. Falikman, Proof of the van der Waerden s conjecture on the permanent of a doubly stochastic matrix, Mat. Zametki 29, 6: , 957, 1981, (in Russian). [13] M. Grötschel, L. Lovasz and A. Schrijver, Geometric Algorithms and Combinatorial Optimization, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, [14] G.P. Egorychev, The solution of van der Waerden s problem for permanents, Advances in Math., 42, , [15] A. Panov, On mixed discriminants connected with positive semidefinite quadratic forms, Soviet Math. Dokl. 31 (1985). [16] E. Pascal, Die Determinanten, Teubner-Verlag, Leipzig, [17] H.Minc, Permanents, Addison - Wesley, Reading, MA, [18] R. Tyrrell Rockafellar, Convex analysis, Princeton University Press, [19] L. Gurvits, Combinatorial and algorithmic aspects of hyperbolic polynomials, 2003 ; available at 18