Abstract
We discuss the non-uniqueness of the rank 1 tensor decomposition for rank 4 tensors of format , . We discuss several classes of examples and provide a complete classification if .
MSC:
15A69; 14N05; 14N07
1. Introduction
Fix integers and , . Fix a base field , say algebraically closed, and let be -vector spaces of dimension . An element is called a tensor of format . Now, assume . A rank 1 tensor is a tensor of the form with and for all i. The tensor T is said to be concise if there are not subspaces , with for at least one i and . The tensor rank of T is the minimal integer m such that T is a sum of m rank 1 tensors ([]). In many applications, it is very important to know if the rank 1 tensor decompositions , , with each a rank 1 tensor, are “ unique ”, i.e., unique up to the ordering of the rank 1 tensors. The uniqueness is essential to have low rank robust approximations of tensors ([,]). There are many criteria to say that a specific T has a unique rank 1 tensor decomposition, starting with the famous Kruskal’s criterion ([,,,,,,]). Even the original Kruskal’s criterion is sharp ([]) and each of its extensions has a way to construct examples of non-uniqueness just outside the range of its assumptions. We recommend []; as far as we know, it is the more general one, well-written, full of references, and here, the main proofs are combinatorial.
Our work is different. We try to describe all tensors of low rank for which the rank 1 decomposition is not unique. This was done in [] for rank 2 and rank 3 tensors. In this paper, we introduce a new class of tensors with non-unique rank 1 tensor decomposition with exactly terms, tensors of Type II (they occur only in rank at least 4).
Take , , and any non-zero constant c. Obviously and the rank 1 tensor decompositions of T and are the same. Thus, it is natural to work with the projective space and consider the rank 1 decompositions of the equivalence class . Set r: = . Note that . From now on, we call the latter projective space and often call its elements “ tensors ” instead of “ equivalent classes of non-zero tensors ”. Set : = , , and Y: = . All our proofs involve the multiprojective space Y. We recall that is the target of the Segre embedding of Y, i.e., the embedding of Y by the complete linear system . For any set E in a projective space let denote its linear span. For any the solution set is the set of all finite sets such that and . The solution set is exactly the set of all rank 1 tensor decompositions of T with terms, up to an order of the addenda. The set has an algebraic structure (it is a constructible set in the Zariski topology) and so it makes sense to consider the integer as in many of our results.
Our aim is to introduce some ways to produce tensors with non-uniqueness. In [], from rank 3 on the authors met the following type of non-uniqueness.
Definition 1.
Take concise for Y and such that . We say that the triple is of Type I if there is such that , , and . We say that has Type if . We say that q has Type I (resp. Type ) if there is a triple of Type I (resp. .
In some cases, even if q has Type I, not all triples are of Type I (Remark 1). Note that if has Type I with as in Definition 1. Type I only occurs from rank 3 on (see [] (Case (6) of Th. 7.1) for the rank 3 case). For rank 3 non-uniqueness of Type I was the only class which occurs for multiprojective spaces of large dimension. This is not true for tensors of rank at least 4. The main actor of this paper is the following definition.
Definition 2.
Take concise for Y and take such that . We say that the triple , A, B) is of Type II or it has Type II non-uniqueness if there are (not necessarily concise for Y) and partitions , , such that , and for all . We say that q has Type II if there are such that and has Type II.
Type II only occurs from rank 4 on. Note that in Definition 2 the rank of q is the sum of the ranks of and . Proposition 2 describes the multiprojective spaces having a Type II non-uniqueness for rank 4 concise tensors. In Section 5, we provide the examples needed to prove the following results.
Theorem 1.
Fix integers and , , such that . Set . Then there is a concise rank 4 tensor q with and neither of Type I nor of Type II for any .
Theorem 2.
Fix integers and , , such that for all i and . Set . Then there is a concise rank 4 tensor q with and neither of Type I nor of Type II for any .
Conjecture 1.
We conjecture that if and , then all rank 4 tensors q on Y: = with not a singleton is either of Type , , or of Type II.
We do not know, in general, how to prove that if and , then is of Type II. Remark 1 shows that in general not all triples with q of rank 4 and have Type II. We prove the following result.
Theorem 3.
Take , , such that . Take any concise such that and . Then either is of Type II for all or there is such that has Type for all and the set only depends on q.
Proposition 1.
Assume , , such that , , , for all and . Take . Then there is a concise q with rank 4 such that and there is with of Type .
Remark 1.
Proposition 1 means that most sets do not contain . A dimensional count shows the existence of such that (this is even true for the related rank 3 case [] (Example 3.6)). This is one of the main technical problems to prove that q has Type I or Type II. Proposition 6 shows that this problem never occurs for Y and q as in Theorem 3, i.e., with the assumptions of Theorem 3 if there are such that , then q has Type II and all triples have Type II.
Section 7 shows that the results just stated are effective. Remarks 7–9 show how to test if a low rank tensor q has a triple of Type II. We conclude the section with two open problems.
We work over an algebraically closed base field, but this case is extended to any infinite field (Remark 6). The examples work for finite fields with cardinality not very small, but we do not know in each case the minimal cardinality allowed for a field.
2. Preliminaries
Take a multiprojective space . Fix . Let denote the projection onto the i-th factor of Y. Set : = . Let denote the projection (it is the map that forget the i-th component of any ). Let (resp. ) denote the multiindex such that and for all (resp. and for all ).
Let be an integral curve. The multidegree of C is defined by the formula : = , .
Take such that . Since for any and any , and are linearly independent, i.e., . Since , .
Remark 2.
Take of Type II. Then . Now, assume that q is concise and that it has rank 4. By [] (Proposition 3.2) we have . We say that splits if (see Proposition 2 for the existence of split triples). If , splits if and only if (omitting all ) either or , or . All Type II triples of rank 4 which do no not split are obtained by a finite sequence of linear projections (in the sense of Section 2.1) from a Type II concise triple on a bigger projective space with the same number of factors, k, of Y.
Remark 3.
Take of Type and set E: = . Since E is contained in an element, A, of , is linearly independent. Since , and hence .
Remark 4.
Take of Type II. Obviously, and .
Lemma 1.
Take any finite set evincing the rank of a tensor, q. Let k be the number of factors of Y. If and for at least indices i, then .
Proof.
Assume . Since for some j, there is such that is a line contained in the j-th ruling of the Segre variety and . Since and , . Since is a line, there is such that . Thus, q has rank at most , a contradiction. □
Lemma 2.
Assume . Take a concise q of rank 4 such that and take such that . Then .
Proof.
Assume . Since and are linearly independent, is a hyperplane of and of . Since , for any and for any , we get . Hence, is a 3-dimensional space containing at least 5 points of . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A and , [] gives and . No such q has rank 4 ([] (Theorem 3.11.1.1)). □
Lemma 3.
Assume . Take a concise q such that there are such that and . Set x: = . Then is of Type .
Proof.
Set : = and : = . Since q is concise, . Thus, , i.e., , and there is such that . Since A evinces a rank, evinces the rank of . Thus, is of Type . □
Lemma 4.
Take and take any . Then q has rank 2, is isomorphic to the complement of a smooth conic in a projective plane and where and C is smooth. Fix any . Then and are injective, and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A.
Proof.
We have and is a smooth quadric. Fix a line containing q. Since , Bezout theorem gives . Thus, either L is tangent to and meets only at the tangency point or is the union of 2 distinct points and . The set of all such that the line is tangent to is the polar conic D of q with respect to and D is smooth. Write with . Note that . The set of all lines of passing through q is a projective plane and the set of all lines through q and meeting the plane section D of is a smooth conic of this projective plane. Fix , say . Set L: = . Since , . Thus, and are injective. Hence, Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A and . □
2.1. Linear Projections
We use the following construction, called linear projection from a point of the i-th factor. Fix , and a concise . Let be the product of k projective spaces with if and , with the convention that is a point if . Call also the Segre embedding of . Call the multiprojective space with k factors, one of them being a point, with as a factor if and as its i-th factor. Let be the morphism which is the identity map for all factors , while on the i-th factor is the linear projection from o. Since we see as a linear subspace of . Thus, the linear projection of from its linear subspace is well-defined outside . We may see as the target of , i.e., we may see as a submersion with all fibers isomorphic to . Since q is concise, and hence is well-defined. Since q is concise for Y, is concise for . We say that a multiprojective space W is obtained from Y by a finite sequence of linear projections if there is a finite sequence of linear projections from a point of one of the factors; at different steps we allow to change the factor. Note that is the number of linear projections from one point used to get W from Y. If q is concise, we get a unique concise for W iterating the definition of .
3. Existence Results for Type I and Type II Tensors
Proposition 2.
Write , , such that .
(i) If Y has a type II concise rank 4 triple , then
Proof.
Take , , , as in Definition 2. Since , we get that and have rank 2. Let (resp. ) be the minimal multiprojective space containing (resp. ). We have ([] (Proposition 3.2)). Thus, and are the conditions required to be the minimal multiprojective space containing 2 different multiprojective subspaces isomorphic to , concluding the proof of (i). Now, we prove part (ii).
(a) Assume . Since the case is done in Proposition 6, we assume . Fix lines such that , i.e., . Fix lines and . Fix , and , and . For assume . If , assume . If assume . Set : = and : = . Fix a general , a general and a general , . Set A: = and . Take a general . Since , to prove that has Type II and that q is concise it is sufficient to prove that q is concise. Note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Assume that q is not concise. Thus, there is such that for some . Since , Ref. [] (Lemma 5.1) gives . Thus . First assume . Note that (Lemma 4). Thus, . Hence, , a contradiction. Now assume . Take . By concision ([] (Proposition 3.1.3.1)) . Thus, Ref. [] (Lemma 5.1) gives . Thus, . Since , we get , contradicting Lemma 4.
(b) Assume and .
(b1) Assume . We take as two general lines of , D as a line of and as a line of . We also take points for all and points for and such that for all . If assume . If assume . Set : = and : = . Note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing and hence (Lemma 4) the minimal multiprojective space containing A (or containing B). Thus, to prove that is a concise triple of Type II it is sufficient to prove that q has rank 4. Assume that q has rank and take . Since , there is and such that . Since , . Thus, ([] (Lemma 5.1)). Hence, , contradicting Lemma 4.
(b2) Assume . This case is easier, but we need different and to get a concise q. We take as lines of and points , , , and . We assume for , , , and . We take and : = . Then we continue as in step (b1).
(c) Assume . By steps (a) and (b) we may assume . Fix , and , and . Assume for all . We take and . We first check that q is concise. Assume that q is not concise. Thus, there is such that for some . Since ,] (Lemma 5.1) gives . Thus . This is false because for and for (Lemma 4). Thus, it is sufficient to prove that q has rank 4. Assume that q has rank and take . Take , such that , where : = . Since spans and spans (Lemma 4), we have , contradicting [] (Lemma 5.1). Now assume . By Lemma 4 is a non-empty open subset of and that is an open subset of . Thus, taking another , instead of we get contradicting the assumption . □
Proposition 3.
Write , , with . Assume , and . Then Y has a concise rank 2 tensor q of Type .
Proof.
Take lines , and , , and set : = . Fix a general and take . Note that . Fix 2 generals and set A: = . Note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Fix a general . To complete the proof it is sufficient to prove that q is concise and that it has rank 4. Fix .
(a) Assume that q is not concise, i.e., assume the existence of and such that . Concision ([] (Proposition 3.1.3.1)) gives . We have ([] (Lemma 5.1)) and hence . Lemma 4 gives for and hence for some . Since we took general in after fixing , we get , a contradiction.
(b) Now, we prove that q has rank 4, i.e., . Assume . Set S: = . Since for any , . Take a general such that . By [] (Lemma 5.1) . Recall that are general in Y and that . Hence, . Since E evinces a rank, is injective (Lemma 1). Thus and . The generality of means that the minimal multiprojective space containing is isomorphic to . Since and , Ref. [] (Theorem 1.1 and Proposition 6.2) provide a contradiction. □
Definition 3.
Take a concise q of rank 4. We say that has Type if it has Type and .
Proposition 4.
Assume . Take a concise q of rank 4 such that has Type . Set : = and : = . Let be the minimal multiprojective space containing .
(a) and there is a smooth curve of bidegree containing .
(b) We have and if and only if .
(c) If has Type , then , for the 2 factors of Y containing and for all h such that is a point.
Proof.
Since , . Take in the definition of Type . Concision says that is concise for and that is the minimal multiprojective space containing . Since , Ref. [] (Proposition 3.2) gives . Note that , i.e., is in a unique hyperplane section of . Up to the identification of with we have . Since is the minimal multiprojective space containing either or , C is smooth.
Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, and . □
4.
We start with a result true for all multiprojective spaces , , although we only need the case . The following result is an easy consequence of [] (Theorem 2). The strength of [] (Theorem 2) shows the usefulness of [].
Proposition 5.
Write for some . Fix such that and for . Take any such that for any . Then q is concise and .
Proof.
Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, it is sufficient to prove that . If not, by [] (Theorem 2)). there is a set such that and
Since for , we have for . Since is injective and , . Thus, (2) fails. □
Remark 5.
Note that Proposition 5 gives the uniqueness of the tensor decomposition for a general tensor of format .
Theorem 4.
Take and q concise for Y, with rank 4 and with . Take such that . Then either is of Type II or it is of type with .
Proof.
Set S: = . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, . Proposition 5 gives .
Claim 1.
For each we have .
Proof.
Set H: = . Assume that Claim 1 fails for u. Exchanging if necessary the role of A and B we may assume that e: = : = . We have and . Concision gives . Let M be a general element of . Since , . Since , and , Ref. [] (Lemma 5.1) gives a contradiction and proves Claim 1.□
Observation 1.
Claim 1 gives .
Since , there is such that g: = , where H: = . Set and with and .
Claim 2.
is injective.
Proof.
Assume the existence of such that and . Lemma 1 gives , say and . Take such that . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, . Claim 1 gives . Since , . Since , Ref. [] (Lemma 5.1) gives , contradicting the assumption .□
By Claim 1 and Observation 1 there is such that e: = . Set H: = . Write and with and .
(a) Assume . First assume . Thus, with and . Since , . Thus, Ref. [] (Lemma 5.1) gives . Since is very ample, we get , contradicting Claim 2. Assume . Since , Ref. [] (Lemma 5.1) gives . Take a general . Since and , we get . In the same way we see that is contained in the general . Take a general . Claim 2 gives . Since , we get . Similarly a general satisfies . Thus, there are lines such that .
Claim 3.
We have .
Proof.
Assume , say . We get and Claim 1 gives . Set : = and : = . Take a general . Note that and . We have by [] (Lemma 5.1). Thus, . Using a general instead of we get . Thus, , contradicting Claim 2. □
Since (Claim 3), we get in the same way the existence of lines of and such that . Moreover . To conclude that q is of Type II it is sufficient to prove that . Since , we have , , and (here, we use that and ). The residual exact sequence of H gives . Let be the minimal multiprojective space containing and let be the minimal multiprojective space containing . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, it is the minimal multiprojective space , and . Thus, has Type II.
(b) Assume . Set : = and : = . Set : = . Since , . Claim 1 gives . Since and is injective (Claim 2), . Hence, the residual exact sequence of M gives . Take a general . Since , . Since , we have . Thus, the residual exact sequence of M gives an isomorphism
Let be the minimal multiprojective space containing . Since and evince the rank of , and is the minimal Segre whose linear span contains . Recall that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing and the point . Thus, . Thus, for any linear subspace W of we have . We get . Hence, is of Type .
(c) Assume . Set : = and : = . Take a general . Since , . Claim 1 gives . Since and is injective (Claim 2), . Hence, the residual exact sequence of M gives . Since , . Since , we have = 0. Thus, the residual exact sequence of M gives an isomorphism . Thus we have and any is associated to a tensor equivalent to a matrix. To conclude it would be sufficient to prove that . Write . Let be the minimal multiprojective space containing and the minimal multiprojective space containing . Since , we have . Apply twice the last part of step (b).□
Proposition 6.
Take and q concise for Y and of rank 4.
(a) Assume that has Type II for some such that . Then has Type II for all such that . Moreover the rank 2 tensors associated to partitions and are uniquely determined by q. Moreover with U the complement of a smooth conic in a projective plane.
(b) Assume that has Type . Then has Type for all such that . Moreover the rank tensor such that and does not depend on the choice of A and B.
Proof.
Fix such that and . It is sufficient to prove that and have the same type.
(a) Assume that has Type II, i.e., assume . In step (a) of the proof of Theorem 4 we proved that , say , that and that the partitions and with associated rank 2 tensors and is given by and . Since irredundantly spans q, is the unique element of such that . First assume . Theorem 4 gives that has Type II, say with respect to and . Step (a) of the proof of Theorem 4 gives , that with : = and that the decomposition of A is the same as the decomposition of . Thus, , . Thus, .
Now, assume . Fix a finite set . Note that . Thus, there if such that has Type II with and and . Taking K: = E we get that has Type II with and as rank 2 tensors. Recall that is isomorphic to the complement of a smooth conic in a projective plane (Lemma 4). We proved that .
(b) Assume that has Type , , with . Set : = , : = and call such that . Take such that and . It is sufficient to prove that . Since , part (a) proved in step (a) gives and . By Proposition 4 and have Type I with and . Since has rank , we get . Fix a finite set K. In all cases listed in [] there is such that and . Thus, has Type I with . Taking K: = E we get . Thus, and has Type with . □
5. Examples
For any Segre variety let denote its tangential variety. The following result shows that the tangential variety produces a large family of tensors q for which uniqueness fails and for which is very large.
Proposition 7.
Fix a concise and call k the rank of q. Then and .
Proof.
Since q is concise, ([,,]). Since , . If , then is a smooth quadric surface and is the complement of a smooth conic in a projective plane. Assume . In this case, there is a unique degree 2 connected zero-dimensional scheme such that . Set : = with . Let be the set of all smooth and connected curve of bidegree . Fix . Then and there is such that . We have , the set of all containing o has dimension and the set of all C containing v has dimension . Fix . The curve is a degree k rational normal curve in its linear span. Since , . A theorem of Sylvester says that q has -rank k. Hence, for any such that E evinces the -rank of q. The set of all such sets has dimension . To prove that, varying , we get a family of dimension contained in it would be sufficient to prove that for all , , . We claim that for all such that . Fix such that and assume the existence of 3 distinct points . Fix 3 distinct points, 0, 1 and ∞, of . There are unique isomorphisms and such that , and . The embedding f and g of into Y as a curve of multidegree are uniquely determined by their components and . These isomorphisms and are uniquely determined by the images of 0, 1 and ∞, i.e., the points , , . Thus, and hence , a contradiction. □
Example 1.
Take and a concise q in the tangential variety of . Then q has rank 4 and is positive-dimensional ([,]). A general is concise. Proposition 7 gives . We do not know any case with rank 4 and at least 3 factors with larger .
In the next 2 examples we use that the algebraically closed base field has either characteristic 0 or characteristic for the quotation of a theorem of Sylvester ([] (p. 22)). See Remark 6 for the general case.
Example 2.
Fix integers such that and . Take . Let be an integral, smooth and rational curve of multidegree such that is an isomorphism if and an embedding if . If , then is a rational normal curve. Thus, is a rational normal curve of degree 6 in its linear span. Take such that and take such that for any . By a theorem of Sylvester there are sets such that and . Assume for the moment that q has tensor rank 4. Note that is injective for all i and hence q is neither of Type I nor of Type II. Now, assume that q has tensor rank and take . Fix any integers such that and call the projection onto these factors of Y. Since is a smooth curve of bidegree , there is containing A. By [] (Lemma 5.1) we have . Since we get that E depends on at most 3 coordinates, 2 of them being i and j. Thus there is and . Note that . By [] (Lemma 5.1) we get . This is false, because and C is a rational normal curve in its linear span.
Example 3.
Fix integers such that and . Take . Let be an integral, smooth and rational curve of multidegree such that is an isomorphism if and an embedding if . Thus, is a rational normal curve of degree 5 in its linear span. Take a connected zero-dimensional scheme with and take such that for any . By a theorem of Sylvester there are sets such that and A evinces the -rank of q. Assume for the moment that q has tensor rank 4. Note that and are injective for all i and hence is neither of Type I nor of Type II. Now, assume that q has tensor rank and take . Fix any integers such that and call the projection onto these factors of Y. Since is a smooth curve of bidegree , there is containing A. By [] (Lemma 5.1) we have . Since we get that E depends on at most 3 coordinates, 2 of them being i and j. Thus there are and . Note that . By [] (Lemma 5.1) we get . This is false, because and C is a rational normal curve in its linear span.
6. End of the Proofs
Proof of Theorem 1.
Use Example 3. □
Proof of Theorem 2.
Use Example 2. □
Proof of Theorem 3.
Each case is obtained from a sequence of linear projections from the case , which is true by Theorem 4 and Proposition 6. We need to check that at each step the tensor in the definition of a linear projection from a point with respect to one of the factors is not only concise, but it also has rank 4 and not lower rank. Concision was proved in Section 2.1. In our case, with , every concise tensor has rank . □
Proof of Proposition 1.
Fix a plane , lines , and points , . Set : = . Take of rank 3 as in [] (Example 3.6). Hence, is concise for and with 2 irreducible components of dimension 4. Moreover, there are such that , say . Set : = and : = . Since has Type , there is such that . Let be the minimal multiprojective space containing . We have and is concise for ([,] (Proposition 3.2)). Since is the minimal multiprojective space containing , the first positive dimensional factor of is a line . The second positive dimensional factor of is either L or R and both cases occur for certain . We take such that . Fix a general and set A: = and B: = and take a general . Since p is general Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. If q has rank 4, then q is concise for Y, has Type and . Assume that Y has rank and take . Set S: = . Since , there is . Since Y is the minimalmultiprojective space containing A, . By [] (Lemma 5.1) we have . Thus, . We have . For a general we have . For a general we have , a contradiction. □
Remark 6.
Everything works over an arbitrary algebraically closed field , except at 3 places. In Examples 2 and 3 (used to prove Theorems 1 and 2) we quoted a theorem of Sylvester ([] (p. 22)). Let be a rational normal curve of degree 5 (as in Example 3. Fix any zero-dimensional scheme such that and any set such that and . Since and is a rational normal curve, we get . We used Sylvester’s theorem in the proof of Proposition 7 with respect to a rational normal curve of degree k. The proof in [] that q has tensor rank k is characteristic free. We need to check that q has rank k with respect to . Obviously the -rank of q is at least k. Since and is smooth, q has at most rank k by [].
Now take an infinite field K and let be its algebraic closure. If has of Type II (or I) over and with , , then it has Type II (or I) over K, because all points of A and B are defined over K. The examples may be constructed only using K. The examples may be constructed over any field with enough elements.
7. Effectiveness and Further Questions
Remark 7.
Fix a multiprojective space and such that . Write and . The minimal multiprojective space containing is isomorphic to if and only if there are such that for all , and .
Remark 8.
Take a rank 4 tensor and . It is very easy to check if there is such that has Type II. Indeed, B exists if and only if there is a partition such that and the minimal multiprojective spaces , , are isomorphic to . This is effective by Remark 7. Now, we take q with and . There is such that has Type II if and only if there is a partition such that , , the minimal multiprojective space containing is isomorphic to (easy to test by Remark 7) and, calling the minimal multiprojective space containing , the pair is in the list of [] (Theorem 7.1).
Remark 9.
Take a multiprojective space Y, a concise and . If there is a differential test ( with as defined in []) which is necessary to be either of Type I or of Type II.
We discuss here the differential criterion hinted in Remark 9 (see the references in [] for proofs). Take a multiprojective space Y and a finite set , . Set t: = . The set is associated to an additive decomposition of many tensors q, all tensors in the linear span of , but not in the linear span of a proper subset of . Fix any such q and call the set of all such that , and q is. We have if and . The set has an algebraic structure and there is a differentiable map such that at each the integer is the dimension of the kernel of the differential of at A. Thus, if , then A is an isolated point of , i.e., no “ near ” A, but , is an element of . Moreover this criterion is stable for small modifications of q and A. This powerful criterion shows that some additive decompositions are stable under small modifications. This criterion is not an “ if and only if ” criterion (the function defined by is injective but its differential vanishes at 0). In [], the authors classify the pairs , where Y is a multiprojective space, A is a finite set with , Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, and .
Open Problem 1.
Extend [] to the case .
Definition 4.
Take a multiprojective space Y and a concise tensor q for Y. Assume the existence of such that . We say that has Type III if there are partitions , and tensors such that , and for . We say that q has Type III if there are such that has Type III.
In Definition 4 we do not assume that and are concise for Y. We do not have examples of Type III tensors, but we expect that they exist.
Open Problem 2.
Construct examples of Type III tensors.
8. Methods and Conclusions
We provide full proofs of the results we stated, but we leave open a conjecture in the introduction (Conjecture 1) with an explanation (Remark 1) of our main technical difficulty. Using linear projections to prove the conjecture it would be sufficient to prove for all such that , and . We proved the case with and . In the last section, we discuss the effectiveness of our results and and two open problems, one on tensors of rank 4 and one on tensor of higher rank.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not Applicable.
Data Availability Statement
All the proofs are in the main text with full details.
Acknowledgments
The author is a member of GNSAGA of INdAM (Rome, Italy).
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
- Landsberg, J.M. Tensors: Geometry and Applications, Graduate Studies in Mathematics; American Mathematical Society: Providence, RI, USA, 2012; Volume 128. [Google Scholar]
- Bhaskara, A.; Charikar, M.; Vijayaraghavan, A. Uniqueness of tensor decompositions with applications to polynomial identifiability. J. Mach. Learn. Res. Workshop Conf. Proc. 2014, 35, 1–37. [Google Scholar]
- Vannieuwenhoven, N. Condition numbers for the tensor rank decomposition. Linear Algebra Appl. 2017, 535, 35–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angelini, E.; Chiantini, L.; Vannieuwenhoven, N. Identifiability beyond Kruskal’s bound for symmetric tensors of degree 4. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 2018, 29, 465–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A.; Chiantini, L.; Guardo, E. Bounds on the tensor rank. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 2018, 197, 1771–1785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiantini, L.; Ottaviani, G.; Vanniuwenhoven, N. An algorithm for generic and low rank specific identifiability of complex tensors. Siam. J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 2014, 35, 1265–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiantini, L.; Ottaviani, G.; Vanniuwenhoven, N. On identifiability of symmetric tensors of subgeneric rank. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 2017, 369, 4021–4042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiantini, L.; Ottaviani, G.; Vanniuwenhoven, N. Effective criteria for specific identifiability of tensors and forms. SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 2017, 38, 656–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kruskal, J.B. Three-way arrays: Rank and uniqueness of trilinear decompositions, with application to arithmetic complexity and statistics. Linear Algebra Appl. 1977, 18, 95–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lovitz, B.; Petrov, F. A generalization of Kruskal’s theorem on tensor decomposition. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2103.15633. [Google Scholar]
- Derksen, H. Kruskal’s uniqueness inequality is sharp. Linear Alg. Appl. 2013, 438, 708–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A.; Santarsiero, P. Identifiability of rank-3 tensors. Mediterr. J. Math. 2021, 18, 174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballico, E. Linearly dependent subsets of Segre varieties. J. Geom. 2020, 111, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A. Stratification of the fourth secant variety of Veronese varieties via the symmetric rank. Adv. Pure Appl. Math. 2013, 4, 215–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A. Tensor ranks on tangent developable of Segre varieties. Linear Multilinear Algebra 2013, 61, 881–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buczyński, J.; Landsberg, J.M. Ranks of tensors and a generalization of secant varieties. Linear Alg. Appl. 2013, 438, 668–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buczyński, J.; Landsberg, J.M. On the third secant variety. J. Algebr. Combin. 2014, 40, 475–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Iarrobino, A.; Kanev, V. Power Sums, Gorenstein Algebras, and Determinantal Loci; Lecture Notes in Mathematics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1999; Volume 1721, Appendix C by Iarrobino and Steven L. Kleiman. [Google Scholar]
- Ballico, E. An upper bound for the X-ranks of points of in positive characteristic. Albanian J. Math. 2011, 5, 3–10. [Google Scholar]
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A.; Santarsiero, P. Terracini locus for three points on a Segre variety. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2012.00574. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).