- Research Article
- Open access
- Published:
Trace Inequalities for Matrix Products and Trace Bounds for the Solution of the Algebraic Riccati Equations
Journal of Inequalities and Applications volume 2009, Article number: 101085 (2009)
Abstract
By using diagonalizable matrix decomposition and majorization inequalities, we propose new trace bounds for the product of two real square matrices in which one is diagonalizable. These bounds improve and extend the previous results. Furthermore, we give some trace bounds for the solution of the algebraic Riccati equations, which improve some of the previous results under certain conditions. Finally, numerical examples have illustrated that our results are effective and superior.
1. Introduction
As we all know, the Riccati equations are of great importance in both theory and practice in the analysis and design of controllers and filters for linear dynamical systems (see [1–5]). For example, consider the following linear system (see [5]):
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ1_HTML.gif)
with the cost
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ2_HTML.gif)
The optimal control rate the optimal cost
of (1.1) and (1.2) are
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ3_HTML.gif)
where is the initial state of system (1.1) and (1.2) and
is the positive semidefinite solution of the following algebraic Riccati equation (ARE):
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ4_HTML.gif)
with and
being positive definite and positive semidefinite matrices, respectively. To guarantee the existence of the positive definite solution to (1.4), we will make the following assumptions: the pair
is stabilizable, and the pair
is observable.
In practice, it is hard to solve the ARE, and there is no general method unless the system matrices are special and there are some methods and algorithms to solve (1.4); however, the solution can be time-consuming and computationally difficult, particularly as the dimensions of the system matrices increase. Thus, a number of works have been presented by researchers to evaluate the bounds and trace bounds for the solution of the ARE (see [6–16]). Moreover, in terms of [2, 6], we know that an interpretation of is that
is the average value of the optimal cost
as
varies over the surface of a unit sphere. Therefore, considering its applications, it is important to discuss trace bounds for the product of two matrices. In symmetric case, a number of works have been proposed for the trace of matrix products ([2, 6–8, 17–20]), and [18] is the tightest among the parallel results.
In 1995, Lasserre showed [18] the following given any matrix then the following.
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ5_HTML.gif)
where .
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we propose new trace bounds for the product of two general matrices. The new trace bounds improve the previous results. Then, we present some trace bounds for the solution of the algebraic Riccati equations, which improve some of the previous results under certain conditions in Section 3. In Section 4, we give numerical examples to demonstrate the effectiveness of our results. Finally, we get conclusions in Section 5.
2. Trace Inequalities for Matrix Products
In the following, let denote the set of
real matrices and let
denote the subset of
consisting of symmetric matrices. For
, we assume that
,
denote the trace, the inverse, the transpose, the diagonal elements, the singular values of
, respectively, and define
. If
is an arbitrary symmetric matrix, then
and
denote the eigenvalues and the real part of eigenvalues of
. Suppose
is a real
-element array such as
which is reordered, and its elements are arranged in nonincreasing order; that is,
. The notation
(
) is used to denote that
is a symmetric positive definite (semidefinite) matrix.
Let be two real
-element arrays. If they satisfy
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ6_HTML.gif)
then it is said that is controlled weakly by
, which is signed by
.
If and
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ7_HTML.gif)
then it is said that is controlled by
, which is signed by
.
The following lemmas are used to prove the main results.
Lemma 2.1 (see [21, Page 92, H.2.c]).
If and
, then for any real array
,
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ8_HTML.gif)
Lemma 2.2 (see [21, Page 218, B.1]).
Let , then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ9_HTML.gif)
Lemma 2.3 (see [21, Page 240, F.4.a]).
Let , then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ10_HTML.gif)
Lemma 2.4 (see [22]).
Let , then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ11_HTML.gif)
where
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ12_HTML.gif)
Note that if or
, obviously, (2.6) holds. If
, choose
, then (2.6) also holds.
Remark 2.5.
If , then we obtain Cauchy-Schwarz inequality:
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ13_HTML.gif)
where
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ14_HTML.gif)
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_IEq55_HTML.gif)
Remark 2.6.
Note that
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ15_HTML.gif)
Let in (2.6), then we obtain
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ16_HTML.gif)
Lemma 2.7.
If ,
, then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ17_HTML.gif)
Proof.
() Note that for
, or
,
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ18_HTML.gif)
 () If
,
, for
, choose
, then
and
. Thus,
is a convex function. As
and
, from the property of the convex function, we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ19_HTML.gif)
 () If
, without loss of generality, we may assume
. Then from (
), we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ20_HTML.gif)
Since , thus
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ21_HTML.gif)
This completes the proof.
Theorem 2.8.
Let , and let
be diagonalizable with the following decomposition:
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ22_HTML.gif)
where is nonsingular. Then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ23_HTML.gif)
Proof.
Note that is real; by the matrix theory we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ24_HTML.gif)
Since , without loss of generality, we may assume
. Next, we will prove the left-hand side of (2.18):
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ25_HTML.gif)
If
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ26_HTML.gif)
then we obtain the conclusion. Now assume that there exists such that
then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ27_HTML.gif)
We use to denote the vector of
after changing
and
, then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ28_HTML.gif)
After a limited number of steps, we obtain the left-hand side of (2.18). For the right-hand side of (2.18)
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ29_HTML.gif)
If
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ30_HTML.gif)
then we obtain the conclusion. Now assume that there exists such that
then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ31_HTML.gif)
We use to denote the vector of
after changing
and
, then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ32_HTML.gif)
After a limited number of steps, we obtain the right-hand side of (2.18). Therefore, we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ33_HTML.gif)
Since applying (2.18) with
in lieu of
we immediately have the following corollary.
Corollary 2.9.
Let , and let
be diagonalizable with the following decomposition:
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ34_HTML.gif)
where is nonsingular. Then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ35_HTML.gif)
Theorem 2.10.
Let ,
be normal. Then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ36_HTML.gif)
Proof.
Since is normal, from [23, page 101, Theorem
], we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ37_HTML.gif)
where is orthogonal. Since
and
, then for
, we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ38_HTML.gif)
In terms of Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2, (2.18) implies
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ39_HTML.gif)
This completes the proof.
Note that if ,
, then from (2.34) we obtain (1.5) immediately. This implies that (2.18) improves (1.5).
Since applying (2.31) with
in lieu of
we immediately have the following corollary.
Corollary 2.11.
Let ,
be normal, then
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ40_HTML.gif)
3. Trace Bounds for the Solution of the Algebraic Riccati Equations
Komaroff (1994) in [16] obtained the following. Let be the positive semidefinite solution of the ARE (1.4). Then the trace of
has the upper bound given by
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ41_HTML.gif)
where
In this section, by appling our new trace bounds in Section 2, we obtain some lower trace bounds for the solution of the algebraic Riccati equations. Furthermore, we obtain some upper trace bounds which improve (3.1) under certain conditions.
Theorem 3.1.
If , and
is the positive semidefinite solution of the ARE (1.4).
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_IEq121_HTML.gif)
There are both, upper and lower, bounds:
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ42_HTML.gif)
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_IEq122_HTML.gif)
If , then the trace of
has the lower and upper bounds given by
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ43_HTML.gif)
where denotes
and
denotes
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_IEq129_HTML.gif)
If , then the trace of
has the lower and upper bounds given by
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ44_HTML.gif)
where ,
We have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ45_HTML.gif)
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_IEq136_HTML.gif)
Proof.
() Multiply (1.4) on the right and on the left by
to get
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ46_HTML.gif)
where . Take the trace of all terms in (3.6) to get
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ47_HTML.gif)
Since is positive semidefiniteness,
,
and from Lemma 2.7, we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ48_HTML.gif)
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ49_HTML.gif)
By Cauchy-Schwarz inequality (2.8), it can be shown that
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ50_HTML.gif)
Since are positive semidefiniteness,
is positive definiteness, then by (1.5), note that for
,
, and considering (2.6), (3.8), and (3.9), we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ51_HTML.gif)
Note that ,
, then from (1.5) we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ52_HTML.gif)
Combining (3.11) with (3.12), we obtain
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ53_HTML.gif)
Solving (3.13) for yields the left-hand side of (3.2).
Since are positive semidefiniteness,
is positive definiteness, then by (1.5), note that for
,
, and considering (2.6), (3.8), and (3.10), we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ54_HTML.gif)
Combining (3.12) with (3.14), we obtain
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ55_HTML.gif)
Solving (3.15) for yields the right-hand side of (3.2).
() Note that when
, by (1.5), (2.6), and (3.8), we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ56_HTML.gif)
Combining (3.11) with (3.16), we obtain
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ57_HTML.gif)
Solving (3.17) for yields the left-hand side of (3.3).
By (1.5), (2.6), and (3.8), we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ58_HTML.gif)
Combining (3.14) with (3.18), we obtain
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ59_HTML.gif)
Solving (3.19) for yields the right-hand side of (3.3).
() Note that when
, by (3.3), we obtain (3.4) immediately. This completes the proof.
Remark 3.2.
From Remark 2.6 and Theorem 3.1, we have the following results.
() Let
in (3.2), then we have
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ60_HTML.gif)
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_IEq163_HTML.gif)
() Let
in (3.3), then we obtain (3.20).
() Let
in (3.4). Note that when
,
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ61_HTML.gif)
Then we can also obtain (3.20).
Note that the right-hand side of (3.20) is (3.1), which implies that Theorem 3.1 improves (3.1).
4. Numerical Examples
In this section, firstly, we will give an example to illustrate that our new trace bounds are better than those of the recent results. Then, to illustrate that the application in the algebraic Riccati equations of our results will have different superiority if we choose different and
, we will give two examples.
Example 4.1.
Let
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ62_HTML.gif)
Then and
is symmetric. Using (1.5) yields
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ63_HTML.gif)
Using (2.18) yields
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ64_HTML.gif)
where both lower and upper bounds are better than those of the main result of [18], that is, (1.5).
Example 4.2.
Consider the system (1.1), (1.2) with
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ65_HTML.gif)
and consider the corresponding ARE (1.4) with ;
is stabilizable and
is observable. Using (3.20) yields
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ66_HTML.gif)
Using (3.2), when , then we obtain
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ67_HTML.gif)
where the upper bound is better than that of the main result of [16], that is, (3.1).
Example 4.3.
Consider the system (1.1), (1.2) with
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ68_HTML.gif)
and consider the corresponding ARE (1.4) with ;
is stabilizable and
is observable. Using (3.2), when
, then we obtain
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ69_HTML.gif)
Using (3.20) yields
![](http://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1155%2F2009%2F101085/MediaObjects/13660_2009_Article_1885_Equ70_HTML.gif)
where the lower and upper bounds are better than those of (4.8).
5. Conclusions
In this paper, we have proposed lower and upper bounds for the trace of the product of two real square matrices in which one is diagonalizable. We have shown that our bounds for the trace are the tightest among the parallel trace bounds in symmetric case. Then, we have obtained some trace bounds for the solution of the algebraic Riccati equations, which improve some of the previous results under certain conditions. Finally, numerical examples have illustrated that our bounds are better than those of the previous results.
References
Kwakernaak K, Sivan R: Linear Optimal Control Systems. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 1972.
Kleinman DL, Athans M: The design of suboptimal linear time-varying systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1968, 13: 150–159. 10.1109/TAC.1968.1098852
Davies R, Shi P, Wiltshire R: New upper solution bounds for perturbed continuous algebraic Riccati equations applied to automatic control. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2007,32(2):487–495. 10.1016/j.chaos.2006.06.096
Ogata K: Modern Control Engineering. 3rd edition. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA; 1997.
Ni M-L: Existence condition on solutions to the algebraic Riccati equation. Acta Automatica Sinica 2008,34(1):85–87.
Wang SD, Kuo T-S, Hsü C: Trace bounds on the solution of the algebraic matrix Riccati and Lyapunov equation. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1986,31(7):654–656. 10.1109/TAC.1986.1104370
Saniuk JM, Rhodes IB: A matrix inequality associated with bounds on solutions of algebraic Riccati and Lyapunov equations. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1987, 32: 739–740. 10.1109/TAC.1987.1104700
Mori T: Comments on A matrix inequality associated with bounds on solutions of algebraic Riccati and Lyapunov equations. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1988, 33: 1088–1091. 10.1109/9.14428
Kang T, Kim BS, Lee JG: Spectral norm and trace bounds of algebraic matrix Riccati equations. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1996,41(12):1828–1830. 10.1109/9.545751
Kwon WH, Moon YS, Ahn SC: Bounds in algebraic Riccati and Lyapunov equations: a survey and some new results. International Journal of Control 1996,64(3):377–389. 10.1080/00207179608921634
Kim SW, Park PG: Matrix bounds of the discrete ARE solution. Systems & Control Letters 1999,36(1):15–20. 10.1016/S0167-6911(98)00061-9
Kouikoglou VS, Tsourveloudis NC: Eigenvalue bounds on the solutions of coupled Lyapunov and Riccati equations. Linear Algebra and Its Applications 1996, 235: 247–259.
Lee C-H: Eigenvalue upper bounds of the solution of the continuous Riccati equation. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1997,42(9):1268–1271. 10.1109/9.623090
Lee C-H: New results for the bounds of the solution for the continuous Riccati and Lyapunov equations. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1997,42(1):118–123. 10.1109/9.553695
Lee C-H: On the upper and lower bounds of the solution for the continuous Riccati matrix equation. International Journal of Control 1997,66(1):105–118. 10.1080/002071797224847
Komaroff N: Diverse bounds for the eigenvalues of the continuous algebraic Riccati equation. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1994,39(3):532–534. 10.1109/9.280751
Fang YG, Loparo KA, Feng X: Inequalities for the trace of matrix product. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1994,39(12):2489–2490. 10.1109/9.362841
Lasserre JB: A trace inequality for matrix product. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1995,40(8):1500–1501. 10.1109/9.402252
Park P: On the trace bound of a matrix product. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1996,41(12):1799–1802. 10.1109/9.545717
Lasserre JB: Tight bounds for the trace of a matrix product. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1997,42(4):578–581. 10.1109/9.566673
Marshall AW, Olkin I: Inequalities: Theory of Majorization and Its Applications, Mathematics in Science and Engineering. Volume 143. Academic Press, New York, NY, USA; 1979:xx+569.
Wang CL: On development of inverses of the Cauchy and Hölder inequalities. SIAM Review 1979,21(4):550–557. 10.1137/1021096
Horn RA, Johnson CR: Matrix Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK; 1986.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Professor Jozef Banas and the referees for the very helpful comments and suggestions to improve the contents and presentation of this paper. The work was also supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (10971176).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, J., Zhang, J. & Liu, Y. Trace Inequalities for Matrix Products and Trace Bounds for the Solution of the Algebraic Riccati Equations. J Inequal Appl 2009, 101085 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/101085
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/101085