Defactoring: Difference between revisions

Line 456:

Print[output] <br>

There is a difference in that IRREF does not remove rows of zeros in the end for rank-deficient mappings, while this "~~nullspace~~'n'back" does, but for most normal cases, they're the same.

There is a difference in that IRREF does not remove rows of zeros in the end for rank-deficient mappings, while this "null-space'n'back" does, but for most normal cases, they're the same.

</ref>. Of course, this sometimes results in the pivots no longer being 1, so sometimes it is no longer RREF. It is always still REF, though<ref>Also, it will always still satisfy the second aspect of reduced, i.e. that all other entries in pivot columns besides the pivots are zeroes.</ref>, and because it is also always integer, that makes it always IREF; therefore, IRREF is strictly a subcategory of IREF. And because the RREF is unique, and the conversion process does not alter that, the IRREF is also unique.

@@ Line 456: / Line 456: @@
 Print[output] <br>
 <br></span><br>
-There is a difference in that IRREF does not remove rows of zeros in the end for rank-deficient mappings, while this "nullspace'n'back" does, but for most normal cases, they're the same.
+There is a difference in that IRREF does not remove rows of zeros in the end for rank-deficient mappings, while this "null-space'n'back" does, but for most normal cases, they're the same.
 </ref>. Of course, this sometimes results in the pivots no longer being 1, so sometimes it is no longer RREF. It is always still REF, though<ref>Also, it will always still satisfy the second aspect of reduced, i.e. that all other entries in pivot columns besides the pivots are zeroes.</ref>, and because it is also always integer, that makes it always IREF; therefore, IRREF is strictly a subcategory of IREF. And because the RREF is unique, and the conversion process does not alter that, the IRREF is also unique.