What conditions do we need on $A$ in order for the inverse of $AA^top$ to exist?
$begingroup$
I have seen proofs showing why the inverse of $AA^top$ exists but what are the conditions on $A$ in order for $(AA^top)^{-1}$ to exist?
Additionally, how can we show/prove that the columns of $A^top A$ are linearly independent if and only if the columns of $A$ are linearly independent?
linear-algebra proof-explanation
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have seen proofs showing why the inverse of $AA^top$ exists but what are the conditions on $A$ in order for $(AA^top)^{-1}$ to exist?
Additionally, how can we show/prove that the columns of $A^top A$ are linearly independent if and only if the columns of $A$ are linearly independent?
linear-algebra proof-explanation
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to MSE! In order to make your question conform to the standards of the site, I've edited your question to include MathJax formatting. If this is not what you intended, you can roll back the edit. For future questions, please look at the MathJax Tutorial. You can also press "edit" to play around with the changes I've made.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:52
$begingroup$
Also, your first question is confusing. You've seen proofs showing why $(AA^top)^{-1}$ exists, but you want to know what conditions we need on $A$ in order for this inverse to exist? Have you tried referring to the statement of the theorem you've seen proven?
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:54
$begingroup$
math.stackexchange.com/questions/1151491/…
$endgroup$
– T. Fo
Dec 13 '18 at 0:49
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have seen proofs showing why the inverse of $AA^top$ exists but what are the conditions on $A$ in order for $(AA^top)^{-1}$ to exist?
Additionally, how can we show/prove that the columns of $A^top A$ are linearly independent if and only if the columns of $A$ are linearly independent?
linear-algebra proof-explanation
$endgroup$
I have seen proofs showing why the inverse of $AA^top$ exists but what are the conditions on $A$ in order for $(AA^top)^{-1}$ to exist?
Additionally, how can we show/prove that the columns of $A^top A$ are linearly independent if and only if the columns of $A$ are linearly independent?
linear-algebra proof-explanation
linear-algebra proof-explanation
edited Dec 12 '18 at 23:49
Theo Bendit
19k12353
19k12353
asked Dec 12 '18 at 23:46
Eva EliakostasEva Eliakostas
1
1
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to MSE! In order to make your question conform to the standards of the site, I've edited your question to include MathJax formatting. If this is not what you intended, you can roll back the edit. For future questions, please look at the MathJax Tutorial. You can also press "edit" to play around with the changes I've made.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:52
$begingroup$
Also, your first question is confusing. You've seen proofs showing why $(AA^top)^{-1}$ exists, but you want to know what conditions we need on $A$ in order for this inverse to exist? Have you tried referring to the statement of the theorem you've seen proven?
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:54
$begingroup$
math.stackexchange.com/questions/1151491/…
$endgroup$
– T. Fo
Dec 13 '18 at 0:49
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to MSE! In order to make your question conform to the standards of the site, I've edited your question to include MathJax formatting. If this is not what you intended, you can roll back the edit. For future questions, please look at the MathJax Tutorial. You can also press "edit" to play around with the changes I've made.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:52
$begingroup$
Also, your first question is confusing. You've seen proofs showing why $(AA^top)^{-1}$ exists, but you want to know what conditions we need on $A$ in order for this inverse to exist? Have you tried referring to the statement of the theorem you've seen proven?
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:54
$begingroup$
math.stackexchange.com/questions/1151491/…
$endgroup$
– T. Fo
Dec 13 '18 at 0:49
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to MSE! In order to make your question conform to the standards of the site, I've edited your question to include MathJax formatting. If this is not what you intended, you can roll back the edit. For future questions, please look at the MathJax Tutorial. You can also press "edit" to play around with the changes I've made.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:52
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to MSE! In order to make your question conform to the standards of the site, I've edited your question to include MathJax formatting. If this is not what you intended, you can roll back the edit. For future questions, please look at the MathJax Tutorial. You can also press "edit" to play around with the changes I've made.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:52
$begingroup$
Also, your first question is confusing. You've seen proofs showing why $(AA^top)^{-1}$ exists, but you want to know what conditions we need on $A$ in order for this inverse to exist? Have you tried referring to the statement of the theorem you've seen proven?
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:54
$begingroup$
Also, your first question is confusing. You've seen proofs showing why $(AA^top)^{-1}$ exists, but you want to know what conditions we need on $A$ in order for this inverse to exist? Have you tried referring to the statement of the theorem you've seen proven?
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:54
$begingroup$
math.stackexchange.com/questions/1151491/…
$endgroup$
– T. Fo
Dec 13 '18 at 0:49
$begingroup$
math.stackexchange.com/questions/1151491/…
$endgroup$
– T. Fo
Dec 13 '18 at 0:49
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
There are different ways to prove the statement, here I use singular value decomposition.
Note on notation: I assume matrix $A_{n times m}$, with $n geq m$ to be consistent with most of litaratures. Note this gives you $A^{intercal}A$ invertible (not $A A^{intercal}$), which is opposite of your question. You may assume the matrix $A$ in your question is $A^{intercal}$ here.
Any arbitrary $n times m$ matrix $A_{n times m}$ ($n geq m$) admits singular value decomposition,
begin{equation}
A_{n times m} = U_{n times m} Sigma_{m times m} V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
where $Sigma$ is diagonal matrix with positive diagonals, $U$ and $V$ have orthogonal columns, that is $U^{intercal} U = I_{n times n}$ and $V^{intercal} V = I_{m times m}$, and $I$ is identity matrix.
Note that this is the reduced singular value decomposition, meaning that we excluded zero singular values from diagonals of $Sigma$. This happens when $A$ is singular, for example when $n > m$. If $A$ is full rank, then $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ (the singular values) are non-zero.
Construct
begin{equation}
G_{m times m} = A^{intercal} A = V_{m times m} Sigma_{m times m}^2 V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
Above is indeed eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric positive definite matrix $G$, with eigenvalue matrix
begin{equation}
Lambda_{m times m} = Sigma_{m times m}^2.
end{equation}
Since the eigenvalues of $G$ (diagonals of $Lambda$) are all positive numbers, the matrix $G$ is full rank, hence invertible.
Now, construct
begin{equation}
H_{n times n} = A A^{intercal} = U_{n times n}
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}
U_{n times n}^{intercal}
end{equation}
This is the eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric semi-positive definite matrix $H$, with eigenvalues
begin{equation}
Lambda_{n times n} =
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}.
end{equation}
If $n > m$, then some of the eigenvalues of $H$ (diagonals of $Lambda_{n times n}$) are zero, hence $H$ is also singular and not invertible. Conversely, if $H$ has linearly independent columns, it's full rank, so $Lambda_{n times n}$ must have non-zero eigenvalues. This happens with $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ must be non-zero. Therefore, $A$ has no zero singular values and is full rank.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
It seems a bit silly to say that it's "inconsistent with the literature" to ever have a matrix with more columns than rows.
$endgroup$
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 13 '18 at 1:27
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3037402%2fwhat-conditions-do-we-need-on-a-in-order-for-the-inverse-of-aa-top-to-exist%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
There are different ways to prove the statement, here I use singular value decomposition.
Note on notation: I assume matrix $A_{n times m}$, with $n geq m$ to be consistent with most of litaratures. Note this gives you $A^{intercal}A$ invertible (not $A A^{intercal}$), which is opposite of your question. You may assume the matrix $A$ in your question is $A^{intercal}$ here.
Any arbitrary $n times m$ matrix $A_{n times m}$ ($n geq m$) admits singular value decomposition,
begin{equation}
A_{n times m} = U_{n times m} Sigma_{m times m} V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
where $Sigma$ is diagonal matrix with positive diagonals, $U$ and $V$ have orthogonal columns, that is $U^{intercal} U = I_{n times n}$ and $V^{intercal} V = I_{m times m}$, and $I$ is identity matrix.
Note that this is the reduced singular value decomposition, meaning that we excluded zero singular values from diagonals of $Sigma$. This happens when $A$ is singular, for example when $n > m$. If $A$ is full rank, then $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ (the singular values) are non-zero.
Construct
begin{equation}
G_{m times m} = A^{intercal} A = V_{m times m} Sigma_{m times m}^2 V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
Above is indeed eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric positive definite matrix $G$, with eigenvalue matrix
begin{equation}
Lambda_{m times m} = Sigma_{m times m}^2.
end{equation}
Since the eigenvalues of $G$ (diagonals of $Lambda$) are all positive numbers, the matrix $G$ is full rank, hence invertible.
Now, construct
begin{equation}
H_{n times n} = A A^{intercal} = U_{n times n}
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}
U_{n times n}^{intercal}
end{equation}
This is the eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric semi-positive definite matrix $H$, with eigenvalues
begin{equation}
Lambda_{n times n} =
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}.
end{equation}
If $n > m$, then some of the eigenvalues of $H$ (diagonals of $Lambda_{n times n}$) are zero, hence $H$ is also singular and not invertible. Conversely, if $H$ has linearly independent columns, it's full rank, so $Lambda_{n times n}$ must have non-zero eigenvalues. This happens with $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ must be non-zero. Therefore, $A$ has no zero singular values and is full rank.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
It seems a bit silly to say that it's "inconsistent with the literature" to ever have a matrix with more columns than rows.
$endgroup$
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 13 '18 at 1:27
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are different ways to prove the statement, here I use singular value decomposition.
Note on notation: I assume matrix $A_{n times m}$, with $n geq m$ to be consistent with most of litaratures. Note this gives you $A^{intercal}A$ invertible (not $A A^{intercal}$), which is opposite of your question. You may assume the matrix $A$ in your question is $A^{intercal}$ here.
Any arbitrary $n times m$ matrix $A_{n times m}$ ($n geq m$) admits singular value decomposition,
begin{equation}
A_{n times m} = U_{n times m} Sigma_{m times m} V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
where $Sigma$ is diagonal matrix with positive diagonals, $U$ and $V$ have orthogonal columns, that is $U^{intercal} U = I_{n times n}$ and $V^{intercal} V = I_{m times m}$, and $I$ is identity matrix.
Note that this is the reduced singular value decomposition, meaning that we excluded zero singular values from diagonals of $Sigma$. This happens when $A$ is singular, for example when $n > m$. If $A$ is full rank, then $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ (the singular values) are non-zero.
Construct
begin{equation}
G_{m times m} = A^{intercal} A = V_{m times m} Sigma_{m times m}^2 V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
Above is indeed eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric positive definite matrix $G$, with eigenvalue matrix
begin{equation}
Lambda_{m times m} = Sigma_{m times m}^2.
end{equation}
Since the eigenvalues of $G$ (diagonals of $Lambda$) are all positive numbers, the matrix $G$ is full rank, hence invertible.
Now, construct
begin{equation}
H_{n times n} = A A^{intercal} = U_{n times n}
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}
U_{n times n}^{intercal}
end{equation}
This is the eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric semi-positive definite matrix $H$, with eigenvalues
begin{equation}
Lambda_{n times n} =
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}.
end{equation}
If $n > m$, then some of the eigenvalues of $H$ (diagonals of $Lambda_{n times n}$) are zero, hence $H$ is also singular and not invertible. Conversely, if $H$ has linearly independent columns, it's full rank, so $Lambda_{n times n}$ must have non-zero eigenvalues. This happens with $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ must be non-zero. Therefore, $A$ has no zero singular values and is full rank.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
It seems a bit silly to say that it's "inconsistent with the literature" to ever have a matrix with more columns than rows.
$endgroup$
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 13 '18 at 1:27
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are different ways to prove the statement, here I use singular value decomposition.
Note on notation: I assume matrix $A_{n times m}$, with $n geq m$ to be consistent with most of litaratures. Note this gives you $A^{intercal}A$ invertible (not $A A^{intercal}$), which is opposite of your question. You may assume the matrix $A$ in your question is $A^{intercal}$ here.
Any arbitrary $n times m$ matrix $A_{n times m}$ ($n geq m$) admits singular value decomposition,
begin{equation}
A_{n times m} = U_{n times m} Sigma_{m times m} V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
where $Sigma$ is diagonal matrix with positive diagonals, $U$ and $V$ have orthogonal columns, that is $U^{intercal} U = I_{n times n}$ and $V^{intercal} V = I_{m times m}$, and $I$ is identity matrix.
Note that this is the reduced singular value decomposition, meaning that we excluded zero singular values from diagonals of $Sigma$. This happens when $A$ is singular, for example when $n > m$. If $A$ is full rank, then $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ (the singular values) are non-zero.
Construct
begin{equation}
G_{m times m} = A^{intercal} A = V_{m times m} Sigma_{m times m}^2 V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
Above is indeed eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric positive definite matrix $G$, with eigenvalue matrix
begin{equation}
Lambda_{m times m} = Sigma_{m times m}^2.
end{equation}
Since the eigenvalues of $G$ (diagonals of $Lambda$) are all positive numbers, the matrix $G$ is full rank, hence invertible.
Now, construct
begin{equation}
H_{n times n} = A A^{intercal} = U_{n times n}
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}
U_{n times n}^{intercal}
end{equation}
This is the eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric semi-positive definite matrix $H$, with eigenvalues
begin{equation}
Lambda_{n times n} =
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}.
end{equation}
If $n > m$, then some of the eigenvalues of $H$ (diagonals of $Lambda_{n times n}$) are zero, hence $H$ is also singular and not invertible. Conversely, if $H$ has linearly independent columns, it's full rank, so $Lambda_{n times n}$ must have non-zero eigenvalues. This happens with $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ must be non-zero. Therefore, $A$ has no zero singular values and is full rank.
$endgroup$
There are different ways to prove the statement, here I use singular value decomposition.
Note on notation: I assume matrix $A_{n times m}$, with $n geq m$ to be consistent with most of litaratures. Note this gives you $A^{intercal}A$ invertible (not $A A^{intercal}$), which is opposite of your question. You may assume the matrix $A$ in your question is $A^{intercal}$ here.
Any arbitrary $n times m$ matrix $A_{n times m}$ ($n geq m$) admits singular value decomposition,
begin{equation}
A_{n times m} = U_{n times m} Sigma_{m times m} V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
where $Sigma$ is diagonal matrix with positive diagonals, $U$ and $V$ have orthogonal columns, that is $U^{intercal} U = I_{n times n}$ and $V^{intercal} V = I_{m times m}$, and $I$ is identity matrix.
Note that this is the reduced singular value decomposition, meaning that we excluded zero singular values from diagonals of $Sigma$. This happens when $A$ is singular, for example when $n > m$. If $A$ is full rank, then $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ (the singular values) are non-zero.
Construct
begin{equation}
G_{m times m} = A^{intercal} A = V_{m times m} Sigma_{m times m}^2 V_{m times m}^{intercal}
end{equation}
Above is indeed eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric positive definite matrix $G$, with eigenvalue matrix
begin{equation}
Lambda_{m times m} = Sigma_{m times m}^2.
end{equation}
Since the eigenvalues of $G$ (diagonals of $Lambda$) are all positive numbers, the matrix $G$ is full rank, hence invertible.
Now, construct
begin{equation}
H_{n times n} = A A^{intercal} = U_{n times n}
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}
U_{n times n}^{intercal}
end{equation}
This is the eigenvalue decomposition of symmetric semi-positive definite matrix $H$, with eigenvalues
begin{equation}
Lambda_{n times n} =
begin{bmatrix}
Sigma_{m times m}^2 & O_{m times (n-m)} \
O_{(n-m) times m} & O_{(n-m) times (n-m)}
end{bmatrix}.
end{equation}
If $n > m$, then some of the eigenvalues of $H$ (diagonals of $Lambda_{n times n}$) are zero, hence $H$ is also singular and not invertible. Conversely, if $H$ has linearly independent columns, it's full rank, so $Lambda_{n times n}$ must have non-zero eigenvalues. This happens with $n = m$ and all diagonals of $Sigma$ must be non-zero. Therefore, $A$ has no zero singular values and is full rank.
answered Dec 13 '18 at 1:22
SiaSia
1064
1064
1
$begingroup$
It seems a bit silly to say that it's "inconsistent with the literature" to ever have a matrix with more columns than rows.
$endgroup$
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 13 '18 at 1:27
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
It seems a bit silly to say that it's "inconsistent with the literature" to ever have a matrix with more columns than rows.
$endgroup$
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 13 '18 at 1:27
1
1
$begingroup$
It seems a bit silly to say that it's "inconsistent with the literature" to ever have a matrix with more columns than rows.
$endgroup$
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 13 '18 at 1:27
$begingroup$
It seems a bit silly to say that it's "inconsistent with the literature" to ever have a matrix with more columns than rows.
$endgroup$
– Misha Lavrov
Dec 13 '18 at 1:27
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3037402%2fwhat-conditions-do-we-need-on-a-in-order-for-the-inverse-of-aa-top-to-exist%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Hi, welcome to MSE! In order to make your question conform to the standards of the site, I've edited your question to include MathJax formatting. If this is not what you intended, you can roll back the edit. For future questions, please look at the MathJax Tutorial. You can also press "edit" to play around with the changes I've made.
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:52
$begingroup$
Also, your first question is confusing. You've seen proofs showing why $(AA^top)^{-1}$ exists, but you want to know what conditions we need on $A$ in order for this inverse to exist? Have you tried referring to the statement of the theorem you've seen proven?
$endgroup$
– Theo Bendit
Dec 12 '18 at 23:54
$begingroup$
math.stackexchange.com/questions/1151491/…
$endgroup$
– T. Fo
Dec 13 '18 at 0:49