3
$\begingroup$
      [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6] [,7] [,8]
[1,]  1.0 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5
[2,] -0.5  1.0 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5
[3,] -0.5 -0.5  1.0 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5
[4,] -0.5 -0.5 -0.5  1.0 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5
[5,] -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5  1.0 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5
[6,] -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5  1.0 -0.5 -0.5
[7,] -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5  1.0 -0.5
[8,] -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5  1.0

The reason I know is because this results in a negative eigenvalue, and variance-covariance matrices are positive semi-definite.

My thinking here was to have the variances be one, so that the correlations were the covariances, and thus equal -0.5.

Is there something with the theory I am missing? I understand that it is not positive semi-definite and how to show as such, but I am more curious what assumptions this is violating in terms of probability/statistics.

I went to generate MVN data with this variance-covariance structure and realized this wasn't positive semi-definite, and then became curious what was inherently wrong with this matrix.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I find it a very fascinating question. If you don't get more responses here you might try at stats.stackexchange.com $\endgroup$
    – Vincent
    Commented Mar 21, 2019 at 14:21
  • $\begingroup$ I have a bit of a resolution to this, I'll try to post it (and possibly an addendum to this question elsewhere like at stats) and be sure to leave a link if so! $\endgroup$
    – OGV
    Commented Mar 23, 2019 at 4:25

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

As shown here, an $n\times n$ matrix with $a$ on the diagonal and $b$ elsewhere, that is, the matrix $$\begin{bmatrix} a & b & \ldots & b\\ b & a & \ldots & b\\ \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\ b & b & \ldots & a\end{bmatrix}$$ has $\color{blue}{a +(n-1)b}$ as one of its eigenvalues. For your particular matrix, we have $a = 1, b = -0.5, n =8$, so $$a + (n-1)b = 1 + 7\times (-0.5) = -2.5< 0.$$ Hence your symmetric matrix has a negative eigenvalue ($-2.5$), so cannot be positive semi-definite. This implies that it is not a valid variance-covariance matrix.

EDIT: Just realised you said you already know this...

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Yup! Sorry, the title was misleading people I think. I already knew for a fact it wasn't positive semi-definite, but theoretically random variables should have this structure. In terms of probability something is specifically violated making it not positive semi-definite, and I was curious what it might be. $\endgroup$
    – OGV
    Commented Mar 20, 2019 at 20:43

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .