Normal matrices are an important class of matrices; many authors discuss the normality of matrices. In terms of projection matrices, the inverse of matrices, one-sided X-equality, and X-idempotency of matrices, many new characterizations of normal matrices are obtained in this paper. It may be the first time that the projection, one-sided X-equality, and one-sided X-idempotency are used to characterize the normality of matrices.
Citation: Zhirong Guo, Qianglian Huang. Some new characterizations of the normality for group invertible matrices[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(5): 12135-12148. doi: 10.3934/math.2025550
[1] | Yang Chen, Kezheng Zuo, Zhimei Fu . New characterizations of the generalized Moore-Penrose inverse of matrices. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 4359-4375. doi: 10.3934/math.2022242 |
[2] | Kezheng Zuo, Yang Chen, Li Yuan . Further representations and computations of the generalized Moore-Penrose inverse. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 23442-23458. doi: 10.3934/math.20231191 |
[3] | Qi Xiao, Jin Zhong . Characterizations and properties of hyper-dual Moore-Penrose generalized inverse. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 35125-35150. doi: 10.3934/math.20241670 |
[4] | Hui Yan, Hongxing Wang, Kezheng Zuo, Yang Chen . Further characterizations of the weak group inverse of matrices and the weak group matrix. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(9): 9322-9341. doi: 10.3934/math.2021542 |
[5] | Wenxv Ding, Ying Li, Anli Wei, Zhihong Liu . Solving reduced biquaternion matrices equation k∑i=1AiXBi=C with special structure based on semi-tensor product of matrices. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 3258-3276. doi: 10.3934/math.2022181 |
[6] | Ahmad Y. Al-Dweik, Ryad Ghanam, Gerard Thompson, M. T. Mustafa . Algorithms for simultaneous block triangularization and block diagonalization of sets of matrices. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19757-19772. doi: 10.3934/math.20231007 |
[7] | Manpreet Kaur, Munish Kansal, Sanjeev Kumar . An efficient hyperpower iterative method for computing weighted MoorePenrose inverse. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(3): 1680-1692. doi: 10.3934/math.2020113 |
[8] | Yongge Tian . Miscellaneous reverse order laws and their equivalent facts for generalized inverses of a triple matrix product. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(12): 13845-13886. doi: 10.3934/math.2021803 |
[9] | Vladislav N. Kovalnogov, Ruslan V. Fedorov, Denis A. Demidov, Malyoshina A. Malyoshina, Theodore E. Simos, Spyridon D. Mourtas, Vasilios N. Katsikis . Computing quaternion matrix pseudoinverse with zeroing neural networks. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 22875-22895. doi: 10.3934/math.20231164 |
[10] | Mahmoud S. Mehany, Faizah D. Alanazi . An η-Hermitian solution to a two-sided matrix equation and a system of matrix equations over the skew-field of quaternions. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 7684-7705. doi: 10.3934/math.2025352 |
Normal matrices are an important class of matrices; many authors discuss the normality of matrices. In terms of projection matrices, the inverse of matrices, one-sided X-equality, and X-idempotency of matrices, many new characterizations of normal matrices are obtained in this paper. It may be the first time that the projection, one-sided X-equality, and one-sided X-idempotency are used to characterize the normality of matrices.
In this paper, the matrices that we consider are all n×n complex matrices, and we denote the set of all n×n matrices over the complex number field C by Cn×n. Let A∈Cn×n; then there always exists a matrix B∈Cn×n such that
A=ABA,B=BAB,(AB)H=ABand(BA)H=BA, |
where AH denotes the conjugate transpose matrix of A. The matrix B is called the Moore−Penrose inverse matrix of A, which is uniquely determined and is denoted by A†[1,2,3].
The matrix A is said to be group invertible if there is a matrix B∈Cn×n such that
A=ABA,B=BABandAB=BA. |
The matrix B is called the group inverse matrix of A. If it exists, then it is unique[4] and is always denoted by A#.
We use Gn(C) to denote the set of all group invertible matrices in Cn×n. It is well known that A∈Gn(C) if and only if rank(A)=rank(A2). Hence, for any A∈Cn×n, AAH, AHA, and A+AH are all group invertible matrices.
A∈Gn(C) is called an EP matrix if A#=A†. It is known that A is EP if and only if AA†=A†A[2]. For the study of EP matrices, we can also refer to [5]. And A is called a normal matrix if AHA=AAH. In [6], it gives some counterexamples on normal matrices. In recent years, the normality of matrices was wildly studied. For example, in [7, Theorem 5.1], it is shown that A∈Gn(C) is normal if and only if the equation
AX(A#)H=AHA(A†)H |
is consistent and the general solution is given by
X=AH+U−A†AUA†A, where U∈Cn×n. |
In [8, Theorem 3.1], it is proved that A∈Gn(C) is normal if and only if the equation
XA#AH=A#AHX |
has at least one solution in {A,A#,A†, AH,(A†)H,(A#)H}. For the studies of normality in a ring with involution, the readers can refer to [5,9,10,11].
Let A,B and C∈Cn×n. Recall that A is said to be a projection if A2=A=AH. Clearly, A is a projection if and only if A=AAH or A=AHAalways [12]. B and C are called left (right) A-equality if AB=AC (BA=CA). A is called left (right) B-idempotent if A2=BA (A2=AB). Clearly, A is left and right A-idempotent. And A is an idempotent matrix if and only if A is left 2A-En-idempotent.
In [13], using the projections, many characterizations of EP elements were founded. Utilizing the generalized inverse of matrices to construct the inverse matrices of related matrices, the authors provide some characterizations of normal matrices in [7]. Inspired by these, we use the projection, the generalized inverse, one-sided X-equality, and X-idempotency of matrices to investigate the normality of the group invertible matrices. It seems to be the first time that the projection, one-sided X-equality, and one-sided X-idempotency are used to characterize the normality of matrices.
This paper is organized as follows: in terms of projections, many new and interesting characterizations of normal matrices are obtained in Section 2. In Section 3, we characterize normal matrices by constructing the inverse of the product of some matrices. In Sections 4 and 5, utilizing one-sided A-equalitivity and one-sided X-idempotency, we give some properties and characterizations of normal matrices. We conclude in Section 6.
We begin with the following lemma, which appears in [8, Lemma 2.6].
Lemma 2.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if (A†)HA#AH=A†.
Lemma 2.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is a projection if and only if AH=AA†.
Proof. Necessity. If A is a projection, then A2=A=AH and it follows that A=A2=AHA and AA†=AHAA†=AH.
Sufficiency. Suppose that AH=AA†. Then A=(AA†)H=AA†=AH and so A2=(AA†)2=AA†=A. Hence A is a projection.
From Lemma 2.1, one knows that if A is normal, then (A†)HA#AHA=A†A is a projection. Using Lemma 2.2, we can obtain
(A†)HA#AHA((A†)HA#AHA)†=((A†)HA#AHA)H. |
This implies ((A†)HA#AHA)†=A#(A†)HAAHAHA(A#)HA†, if A is normal. The following lemma points out exactly what ((A†)HA#AHA)† is for any A∈Gn(C).
Lemma 2.3. Let A∈Gn(C). Then
(1) ((A†)HA#AHA)†=A†(A#)HA†A2AH.
(2) ((A†)HA#AH)†=(A†)HAAH.
(3) ((A#)HA#AH)†=(A†)HA2A†AHA†A.
(4) ((A#)HA#AH)#=(A#)HA†A3A†AH.
Proof. It is routine, we omit the proof.
Theorem 2.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1) A is normal;
(2) (A†)HAAH=A;
(3) (A#)HAAHA† is a projection;
(4) (A†)HAAHA# is a projection.
Proof. (1)⇒(2). Since A is normal, by Lemma 2.1, (A†)HA#AH=A†. It follows from Lemma 2.3 that
A=((A†)HA#AH)†=(A†)HAAH. |
(2)⇒(3). If A=(A†)HAAH, then
A2A†=(A†)HAAHAA†=(A†)HAAH=A. |
Hence by [5, Theorem 1.2.1], A is EP and
(A#)HAAHA†=(A†)HAAHA†=AA† |
is a projection.
(3)⇒(4). Under the assumption, one obtains
(A#)HAAHA†=((A#)HAAHA†)H=(A†)HAAHA#. |
Hence (A†)HAAHA# is a projection.
(4)⇒(1). Assuming that (A†)HAAHA# is a projection, then
(A†)HAAHA#=((A†)HAAHA#)2, | (2.1) |
and
(A†)HAAHA#=((A†)HAAHA#)H=(A#)HAAHA†. | (2.2) |
Multiplying (2.2) on the right by AA†, one has
(A†)HAAHA#=(A†)HAAHA#AA†. | (2.3) |
Multiplying (2.3) on the left by (A†)HA#AH, one yields
A#=A#AA†. |
Hence, by [5, Theorem 1.2.1], A is EP, which induces A#A=AA†. Now multiplying (2.1) on the left by (A†)HA#AH, one obtains
A#=A#(A†)HAAHA# |
and
A=AA#A=A(A#A†)HAAHA#)A=(A†)HAAH. |
It follows from Lemma 2.3 that
A†=((A†)HAAH)†=(A†)HA#AH. |
By Lemma 2.1, A is normal.
Example 2.1. Let
A=(121201212000i), |
then A is normal and A†=A#=(121201212000−i). Hence
(A†)HAAH=(121201212000i)(121201212000i)(121201212000−i)=(121201212000i)=A |
and
(A#)HAAHA†=(A†)HAAHA#=(121201212000i)(121201212000−i)=(1212012120001) |
is a projection.
Theorem 2.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1) A is normal;
(2) (A†)HA#AHA is a projection;
(3) A†(A†)HAAH is a projection.
Proof. (1)⇒(2). Assume that A is normal. Then (A†)HA#AH=A† by Lemma 2.1. It follows that (A†)HA#AHA=A†A is a projection.
(2)⇒(3). The projectivity of (A†)HA#AHA implies
(A†)HA#AHA=(A†)HA#AHA((A†)HA#AHA)H=(A†)HA#AHAAHA(A#)HA†. |
Multiplying the equality on the left by (A†)HAAH, one gets
A=AAHA(A#)HA†. |
This gives
A2A†=AAHA(A#)HA†AA†=AAHA(A#)HA†=A. |
Hence A is EP [5, Theorem 1.2.1], which induces
A†A=A†AAHA(A#)HA†=AHA(A#)HA†. |
Applying the involution, one has
A†A=(A†)HA#AHA |
and
A†=A†AA†=(A†)HA#AHAA†=(A†)HA#AH. |
Therefore,
A†(A†)HAAH=((A†)HA#AH)(A†)HAAH=(A†)HA#A†A2AH=(A†)HA#AAH=AA† |
is a projection.
(3)⇒(1). Using the projectivity of A†(A†)HAAH, one obtains
A†(A†)HAAH=(A†(A†)HAAH)H(A†(A†)HAAH)=AAHA†(A†)HA†(A†)HAAH. |
Multiplying the equality on the right by (A†)HA#AH, one gets
A†=AAHA†(A†)HA† |
and
AH=A†AAH=AAHA†(A†)HA†AAH=AAHA†. |
Hence A is normal by [5, Theorem 1.3.2].
Example 2.2. Let
A=(111000000), |
then A is not normal; A is group invertible with A#=A and
A†=13(100100100). |
Hence both
(A†)HA#AHA=(111000000) |
and
A†(A†)HAAH=13(100100100) |
are not projections.
From Lemma 2.2, we know that A is a projection matrix if and only if AH is a projection matrix. Hence, we can obtain the following corollary.
Corollary 2.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1) A is normal;
(2) AHA(A#)HA† is a projection;
(3) AAHA†(A†)H is a projection.
According to [5, Lemmas 1.3.2 and 1.3.3], A is normal if and only if A is EP and A†AH=AHA†. Using the representation of the Moore-Penrose inverse of the product of generalized inverse elements, we can get the following conclusion.
Theorem 3.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is a normal matrix if and only if
((A#)HA#AH)†=(A†)HA2AHA†. |
Proof. Necessity. Suppose that A is normal. Then A is EP and A†AH=AHA†. By Lemma 2.3,
((A#)HA#AH)†=(A†)HA2A†AHA†A=(A†)HA2AHA†A†A=(A†)HA2AHA†. |
Sufficiency. Using the hypothesis and Lemma 2.3, one yields
(A†)HA2AHA†=(A†)HA2A†AHA†A. |
Multiplying the equality on the left by A†A#AH, one obtains
AHA†=A†AHA†A=(A†AHA†A)A†A=AHA†A†A. |
It follows that
A†=(A#)HAHA†=(A#)HAHA†A†A=A†A†A. |
Hence, A is EP, which infers
AHA†=A†AHA†A=A†AH. |
Thus, A is normal.
Corollary 3.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is a normal matrix if and only if
((A#)HA#AH)#=(A†)HA2AHA†. |
Proof. Necessity. Assume that A is normal. Then A is EP and A†AH=AHA†. By Lemma 2.1, (A†)HA#AH=A†. Then
((A#)HA#AH)#=((A†)HA#AH)#=(A†)#=(A#)#=A. |
Hence, by Theorem 2.4,
((A#)HA#AH)#=(A†)HAAH=(A†)HA2A†AH=(A†)HA2AHA†. |
Sufficiency. From the assumption and Lemma 2.3, one yields
(A†)HA2AHA†=(A#)HA†A3A†AH=(A†A(A#)H)A†A3A†AH=A†A(A†)HA2AHA†. |
By [14, Lemma 2.11], one gets
(A†)HA2AH=A†A(A†)HA2AH. |
Multiplying the equality on the right by (A†)HA#A#, one has
(A†)H=A†A(A†)H. |
So A†=A†A†A, this implies A is EP. It follows from Lemma 2.3 that
(A†)HA2AHA†=((A#)HA#AH)#=(A#)HA†A3A†AH=(A†)HAAH=((A†)HA#AH)†=((A#)HA#AH)†. |
By Theorem 2.4, A is normal.
It is well known that for a group invertible matrix A, A+En−AA# is invertible and
(A+En−AA#)−1=A#+En−AA#. |
In [7, Theorem 4.2], it is proved that a group invertible matrix A is normal if and only if
(AAH(A#)H+En−AA†)−1=AA†A†+En−AA†. |
In the following, we shall characterize normal matrices by using (AA#)H to construct invertible matrices. Noting that ((A#)HA#AH)((A#)HA#AH)#=AA# by Lemma 2.3, we can get
Theorem 3.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if (A#)HA#AH+En−(AA#)H is invertible with
((A#)HA#AH+En−(AA#)H)−1=(A†)HA2AHA†+En−(AA#)H. |
Corollary 3.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if
((A#)HA#AH+En−AA†)−1=(A†)HA2AHA†+En−AA†. |
Proof. Necessity. Since A is normal, (AA#)H=AA#=AA†. By Theorem 3.3, we are done.
Sufficiency. Using the assumption, one has
En=((A#)HA#AH+En−AA†)((A†)HA2AHA†+En−AA†)=(A#)HA#AH(A†)HA2AHA†+En−AA†. |
This gives
(A#)HAAHA†=AA†. |
By Theorem 3.4, A is normal.
Corollary 3.3. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if
((A#)HA#AH+En−A†A)−1=(A†)HA2AHA†+En−A†A. |
Proof. Necessity. It follows from Corollary 3.4 and the fact that AA†=A†A.
Sufficiency. Under the assumption, one obtains
En=((A†)HA2AHA†+En−AA†)((A#)HA#AH+En−AA†)=(A†)HA2AHA†(A#)HA#AH+En−A†A. |
This induces
A†A=(A†)HA2AHA†(A#)HA#AH=(A†)HA2AHA†(A#)HA#AHAA†=A†AAA†. |
Hence A is EP, which infers A†A=AA†. By Corollary 3.4, A is normal.
In [8, Theorem 4.3], it is shown that a group invertible matrix A is normal if and only if
(A#AHX)#=X†A(A†)H |
for some X∈{A†,AH,(A#)H}. This inspired us to consider the Moore−Penrose inverse; we have the following theorem.
Theorem 3.3. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is a normal matrix if and only if
((A#)HA#X)†=X†A2AHA† |
for some X∈{A,A#,A†,AH,(A#)H,(A†)H}.
Proof. Necessity. It is an immediate corollary of Theorem 3.1.
Sufficiency. (1) If X=A, then ((A#)HA#A)†=A†A2AHA†.
Noting that ((A#)HA#A)†=A†A2A†AHA†A. Then one obtains
A†A2AHA†=A†A2A†AHA†A. |
Multiplying the equality on the left by (A†)HA#, one yields
AA†A†=(A†)HA†AHA†A=((A†)HA†AHA†A)A†A=AA†A†A†A |
and so
A†A†=A†A†A†A. |
By [14, Corollary 2.10], A†=A†A†A. Hence A is EP, which gives
A†=AA†A†=(A†)HA†AHA†A=(A†)HA†AH |
and
AHA†=AH(A†)HA†AH=A†AH. |
Hence A is normal.
(2) If X=A#, then
((A#)HA#A#)†=(A#)†A2AHA†=A†A4AHA†. |
Since ((A#)HA#A#)†=A†A4A†AHA†A, one obtains
A†A4AHA†=A†A4A†AHA†A. |
Multiplying the equality on the left by (A†)H(A#)3, one gets
AA†A†=(A†)HA†AHA†A. |
By the proof of (1), one obtains that A is normal.
(3) If X=A†, then
A3A†AHA†A=((A#)HA#A†)†=(A†)†A2AHA†=A3AHA†. |
Multiplying the equality on the left by A†A#, one has
A†A2A†AHA†A=A†A2AHA. |
By the proof of (1), A is normal.
(4) If X=AH, then A is normal by Theorem 3.1.
(5) If X=(A†)H, then
AHA2A†AHA†A=((A#)HA#(A†)H)†=((A†)H)†A2AHA†=AHA2AHA†. |
Multiplying the equality on the left by A†(A†)H, one obtains
A†A2A†AHA†A=A†A2AHA†. |
By (1), A is normal.
(6) If X=(A#)H, then
AA†AHA†A3A†AHA†A=((A#)HA#(A#)H)†=((A#)H)†A2AHA†=AA†AHA†A3AHA†. |
Multiplying the equality on the left by A†AA#(A#)H, one has
A†A2A†AHA†A=A†A2AHA†. |
Hence A is normal by (1).
From Lemma 2.2, one knows that A∈Cn×n is a projection if and only if A†A and (A†)H are right A-equality.
From Lemma 2.1 and Theorem 2.4, we have
Theorem 4.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1) A is normal;
(2) (A†)HA#, A†(A†)H are right AH−equality;
(3) A†(A†)HAAH, A†A are left A-equality.
Lemma 4.1. Let B and C be right A-equality. Then B2 and BC are right A-equality.
Proof. It is clear.
Lemma 4.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if (A†)HA#=A†(A†)H.
Proof. Necessity. Suppose that A is normal. Then (A†)HA#AH=A† by Lemma 2.1, it follows that (A†)HA#=(A†)HA#A†A=(A†)HA#AH(A†)H=A†(A†)H.
Sufficiency. Applying the condition "(A†)HA#=A†(A†)H", one obtains
(A†)HA#AH=A†(A†)HAH=A†. |
By Lemma 2.1, A is normal.
Theorem 4.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if both ((A†)HA#)2 and A†(A†)H(A†)HA# are right AH-equality.
Proof. Necessity. Under the assumption, (A†)HA#, A†(A†)H are right AH-equality by Theorem 4.1, and at once, ((A†)HA#)2,(A†)HA#A†(A†)H are right AH-equality by Lemma 4.2. Hence ((A†)HA#)2, A†(A†)H(A†)HA# are right AH-equality by Lemma 4.3.
Sufficiency. From the hypothesis, one gets
(A†)HA#(A†)HA#AH=A†(A†)H(A†)HA#AH. | (4.1) |
Multiplying (4.1) on the right by (A†)HAAHA, one obtains
(A†)H=A†(A†)HA |
and
(A†)HA#=A†(A†)HAA#=A†(A†)H. |
By Lemma 4.3, A is normal.
Observing the formula (4.1), we have the following result.
Corollary 4.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if both (A†)HA# and A†(A†)H are right (A†)HA#AH-equality.
Noting that
A#A†A=A#; (A†)HA+A=(A†)H; AA#(A†)H=(A†)H; AA†(A†)H=(A†)H. |
Then Corollary 4.5 induces
Corollary 4.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1) A is normal;
(2) (A†)HA#A+ and A†(A†)HA+ are right A(A†)HA#AH-equality;
(3) (A†)HA#A and A†(A†)HA are right A#(A†)HA#AH-equality;
(4) (A†)HA#A# and A†(A†)HA# are right A(A†)HA#AH-equality.
Theorem 5.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if (A†)HAAH is right A-idempotent.
Proof. Necessity. Since A is normal, (A†)HAAH=A by Theorem 2.4. Hence (A†)HAAH is right A-idempotent.
Sufficiency. Applying the assumption, one yields
(A†)HAAH(A†)HAAH=(A†)HAAHA. |
Multiplying the equality on the left by A†AA#AH, one has
AH(A†)HAAH=AHA, |
i.e., A†A2AH=AHA. It follows that
A=(A†)HAHA=(A†)HA†A2AH=(A†)HAAH. |
Hence, A is normal by Theorem 2.4.
Theorem 5.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if (A#)HAAH is left A-idempotent.
Proof. Necessity. Assume that A is normal. Then A†=A# and, by Theorem 2.4, (A†)HAAH=A. It follows that (A#)HAAH=A. Hence (A#)HAAH is left A-idempotent.
Sufficiency. Applying the condition, one obtains
(A#)HAAH(A#)HAAH=A(A#)HAAH. |
Multiplying the equality on the right by (A†)HA†AHA†A, one obtains
(A#)HAAHA†A=A |
and
A†A2=A†A(A#)HAAHA†A=(A#)HAAHA†A=A. |
Hence A is EP, which leads to A=(A#)HAAHA†A=(A†)HAAH. By Theorem 2.4, A is normal.
Corollary 5.1. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if A−(A#)HAAH is right A-idempotent.
Proof. It follows from Theorem 5.2 and the fact: C is left D-idempotent if and only if D−C is right D-idempotent.
It is easy to see that C is right D-idempotent if and only if C, D are left C-equality. Hence Theorem 5.1 induces the following results.
Corollary 5.2. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if both (A†)HAAH and A are left (A†)HAAH-equality.
Corollary 5.3. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if both (A†)HAAH+En−AA† and A+En−AA† are left (A†)HAAH-equality.
Theorem 5.3. Let A∈Gn(C). Then A is normal if and only if (AA#)HA is left (A†)HAAH-idempotent.
Proof. Necessity. Assume that A is normal. Then (A†)HAAH=A by Theorem 2.4 and
(AA#)HA=(A#)HAHA=(A#)HAAH. |
By Theorem 5.2, one obtains (AA#)HA is left (A†)HAAH-idempotent.
Sufficiency. Applying the condition, one obtains
(AA#)HA(AA#)HA=(A†)HAAH(AA#)HA. |
Multiplying the equality on the right by A†A†, one obtains
(AA#)H=(A†)HAAHA†=AA†(A†)HAAHA†=AA†(AA#)H=AA†. |
Hence, A is EP, which leads to
AH=AH(AA#)H=AH((A†)HAAHA†)=A+A2AHA†=AAHA†. |
Therefore, A is normal by [5, Theorem 1.3.2].
In this paper, we have given many new characterizations of the normality for the group invertible matrices. These characterizations concern the projection, the Moore-Penrose inverse, one-sided X-equality and X-idempotency of matrices. To our knowledge, it is the first time that the projection, one-sided X-equality, and one-sided X-idempotency are used to characterize the normality of matrices. We shall consider the similar characterizations for the normality in C∗-algebra or a ring with involution. Moreover, we shall investigate some interesting applications of our results, for instance in some fields such as degenerate polynomial and stochastic equations[15,16].
Zhirong Guo: Writing-original draft, review and editing; Qianglian Huang: Supervision, Writing-review and editing, Funding acquisition. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript for publication.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
This research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (12471133, 11771378).
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
[1] | A. Ben-Israel, T. Greville, Generalized inverses: theory and applications, Springer Science & Business Media, 2003. |
[2] |
O. Baksalary, G. Trenkler, Characterizations of EP, normal and Hermitian matrices, Linear Multilinear A., 56 (2008), 299–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081080600872616 doi: 10.1080/03081080600872616
![]() |
[3] |
E. Boasso, On the Moore-Penrose inverse in C∗-algebras, Extracta Math., 21 (2006), 93–106. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1308.3429 doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1308.3429
![]() |
[4] |
R. Bru, N. Thome, Group inverse and group involutory matrices, Linear Multilinear A., 45 (1998), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081089808818587 doi: 10.1080/03081089808818587
![]() |
[5] | D. Mosiˊc, Generalized inverses, Faculty of Sciences and Mathematics, University of Ni˘s, 2018. |
[6] |
W. Chen, On EP elements, normal elements and paritial isometries in rings with involution, Electron. J. Linear Al., 23 (2012), 553–561. https://doi.org/10.13001/1081-3810.1540 doi: 10.13001/1081-3810.1540
![]() |
[7] |
C. Peng, H. Zhou, J. Wei, Some new characterizations of normal matrices, Filomat, 38 (2024), 393–404. https://doi.org/10.2298/FIL2402393P doi: 10.2298/FIL2402393P
![]() |
[8] | Y. Tao, X. Ji, J. Wei, Equation characterizations of normal matrices, Georgian Math. J., 2025, accepted. |
[9] |
Y. Qu, J. Wei, H. Yao, Characterizations of normal elements in rings with involution, Acta. Math. Hungar., 156 (2018), 459–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10474-018-0874-z doi: 10.1007/s10474-018-0874-z
![]() |
[10] | D. Mosić, D. Djordjević, New characterizations of EP, generalized normal and generalized Hermitian elements in rings. Appl. Math. Comput., 218 (2012), 6702–6710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2011.12.030 |
[11] |
L. Shi, J. Wei, Some new characterizations of normal elements, Filomat, 33 (2019), 4115–4120. https://doi.org/10.2298/FIL1913115S doi: 10.2298/FIL1913115S
![]() |
[12] | Y. Qu, S. Fan, J. Wei, Projections, one-sided idempotents and SEP elements in a ring with involution, Georgian Math. J., 2025. https://doi.org/10.1515/gmj-2024-2080 |
[13] |
B. Gadelseeda, J. Wei, One sided x-projection, one sided x-idempotent and strongly EP elements in a ∗-ring, Filomat., 39 (2025), 1539–1550. http://doi.org/10.2298/FIL2505539G doi: 10.2298/FIL2505539G
![]() |
[14] |
D. Zhao, J. Wei, Strongly EP elements in rings with involution, J. Algebra Appl., 21 (2022), 2250088. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219498822500888 doi: 10.1142/S0219498822500888
![]() |
[15] |
W. Ramirez, C. Cesarano, Some new classes of degenerated generalized Apostol-Bernoulli, Apostol-Euler and Apostol-Genocchi polynomials, Carpathian Math. Publ., 14 (2022), 354–363. https://doi.org/10.15330/cmp.14.2.354-363 doi: 10.15330/cmp.14.2.354-363
![]() |
[16] |
F. Al-Askar, C. Cesarano, W. Mohammed, Multiplicative Brownian motion stabilizes the exact stochastic solutions of the Davey-Stewartson equations, Symmetry, 14 (2022), 2176. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym14102176 doi: 10.3390/sym14102176
![]() |