alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

On Fourier and Hadamard matrices of prime order

AI contributions
  • OpenAI ChatGPT
View details

Abstract

We study how much of the Fourier matrix FpF_p is needed to recognize it among complex Hadamard matrices of prime order pp. For regular or Butson matrices, taking the ppth power of each entry gives either a Hadamard matrix or a matrix of rank one. For every odd prime, the block of FpF_p on the rows and columns indexed by the nonzero squares determines FpF_p up to equivalence in both classes. At level pp, a symmetry with cycle lengths 1,(p−1)/2,(p−1)/21,(p-1)/2,(p-1)/2 on each side also characterizes FpF_p at every odd prime through 109109.

Introduction

The Fourier matrix FNF_N of the cyclic group ZN\mathbb{Z}_N has one row for each character and one column for each element of the group, and couples these. With w=e2πi/Nw=e^{2\pi i/N}, the pairing is (i,j)↦wij(i,j)\mapsto w^{ij} for i,j=0,…,N−1i,j=0,\ldots,N-1. In matrix form we have

FN=(111⋯11ww2⋯wN−11w2w4⋯w2(N−1)⋮⋮⋮⋱⋮1wN−1w2(N−1)⋯w(N−1)2).F_N = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 1 & 1 & \cdots& 1 \\ 1 & w & w^2 & \cdots& w^{N-1} \\ 1 & w^2 & w^4 & \cdots& w^{2(N-1)} \\ \vdots& \vdots& \vdots& \ddots& \vdots\\ 1 & w^{N-1} & w^{2(N-1)} & \cdots& w^{(N-1)^2} \end{pmatrix}.

The quotient of two distinct rows is a nontrivial character, whose values sum to zero. Thus FNFN∗=NINF_NF_N^*=NI_N, and FNF_N is the basic example of a complex Hadamard matrix, a square matrix with entries in the unit circle T\mathbb{T} and mutually orthogonal rows.

As explained in [1], associated to every complex Hadamard matrix HH is a quantum permutation group GG, and HH can be thought of as being the Fourier matrix of GG. The construction uses the projections onto the lines spanned by the row quotients of HH. For H=FNH=F_N we recover G=ZNG=\mathbb{Z}_N. In prime order pp, the group GG is classical exactly when HH is equivalent to FpF_p.

There is arithmetic even in the diagonal of FNF_N. Its trace is the quadratic Gauss sum ∑j=0N−1wj2\sum_{j=0}^{N-1} w^{j^2}. For an odd prime pp, the value is p\sqrt{p} if p≡1(mod4)p \equiv1 \pmod{4} and ipi\sqrt{p} if p≡3(mod4)p \equiv3 \pmod{4}. The sign in these formulas occupied Gauss for more than four years. He conjectured it in May 1801 and found his proof in August 1805 [3]. One can also read the sign from the Fourier matrix. The square of Fp/pF_p/\sqrt{p} sends the coordinate indexed by xx to the one indexed by −x-x, so the eigenvalues are among 11, −1-1, ii, −i-i. The determinant of FpF_p is a Vandermonde determinant. Its phase resolves the ambiguity in the trace, as in Schur’s proof [3].

We ask how much of the character table one must see in a Hadamard matrix of prime order to recognize FpF_p. Three problems led us to this question.

  • A. From orders 7 and 8 to order 11. In [9] we studied regular Hadamard matrices at orders 7 and 8. Regularity means that each quotient of distinct rows splits into rotated copies of μq\mu_q, the group of qqth roots of unity, for primes qq. At order 11, if one such quotient visits each vertex of a regular 11-gon once, the whole matrix is equivalent to F11F_{11}. On the classification of regular matrices of order 11 we hope to report later.

  • B. The circulant theorem of Hiranandani and Schlenker. A circulant Hadamard matrix of prime order pp with entries in μp\mu_p is equivalent to FpF_p [11]. For odd pp the circulant matrix (w(i−j)2)(w^{(i-j)^2}) gives FpF_p after rescaling rows and columns and permuting columns. We ask about another symmetry of FpF_p. If gg generates the nonzero squares, (a,x)↦(ga,g−1x)(a,x) \mapsto(ga,g^{-1}x) fixes the entry waxw^{ax} and permutes the squares and nonsquares in two cycles on each side.

  • C. Szöllősi’s observation on complementary blocks. Complementary square blocks of a unitary matrix have the same singular values, apart from extra copies of 1 in the larger block [2, 22]. This leads to formulas for the polar part of a complementary block [2]. For real Hadamard matrices, Koukouvinos, Mitrouli and Seberry used complementation to study minors [13, 14]. Here it relates the exponent differences in opposite blocks of a matrix with the two-orbit symmetry.

Write H∼H′H \sim H' for equivalence under permutations and unit scalings of rows and columns. Dephasing makes the first row and column all ones. A Butson matrix of level kk is a Hadamard matrix with entries in μk\mu_k. We write B(N,k)B(N,k) for the set of such matrices of order NN. Our first result explains how level pp arises.

Theorem I. Let HH be a complex Hadamard matrix of prime order pp, either regular or Butson. Its entrywise ppth power is either Hadamard or of rank one. It has rank one exactly when HH is equivalent to a member of B(p,p)B(p,p).

A single pp-cycle among the row quotients forces the entrywise power to have rank one. Thus H∼FpH \sim F_p for p≤17p \le17 by [12]. At level pp we can put any two rows in Fourier form. Each further Fourier row in that column ordering rules out a slope for the graph of the exponents of a missing row.

Theorem II. For every odd prime pp, a Hadamard matrix of order pp, either regular or Butson, is equivalent to FpF_p if it contains (p−1)/2(p-1)/2 distinct Fourier rows in a common column ordering.

Can a symmetry force the Fourier rows when none is prescribed? Let QQ be the nonzero squares in FpF_p. A simultaneous symmetry is a pair of row and column permutations preserving every entry.

Theorem III. Let p=2m+1p=2m+1 be prime, where mm is an odd prime power and 4 generates QQ. If a matrix in B(p,p)B(p,p) admits a simultaneous symmetry with one fixed point and two cycles of length mm on each side, then it is equivalent to FpF_p. In particular this holds whenever mm is an odd prime.

Comparing the four circulant blocks gives recognition at every odd prime through 109 (Corollary 7.14). Without assuming any symmetry, we can also recognize FpF_p from a single block.

Theorem IV. Let pp be any odd prime. Write QQ for the nonzero squares in Fp\mathbb{F}_p and ω=e2πi/p\omega=e^{2\pi i/p}. If a Hadamard matrix of order pp, either regular or Butson, contains a submatrix equivalent to (ωax)a,x∈Q(\omega^{ax})_{a,x\in Q}, then the whole matrix is equivalent to FpF_p.

The rows and columns of the block may be permuted and rescaled independently. Theorem 10.4 allows up to ⌊∣Q∣/32⌋\lfloor|Q|/32\rfloor unspecified entries in each row and each column. For the dephased corner with one square row and one square column deleted, we prove recognition through 10310^3 (Proposition 9.4). At every odd prime, agreement with the missing Fourier column on more than 2p+62\sqrt{p}+6 surviving rows suffices (Proposition 10.5).

The paper is organized as follows. Sections 1–2 prove the power dichotomy of Theorem I and illustrate it with sixth-root matrices. In Sections 3–4 we use directions in the affine plane to prove Theorem II, then determine which regular triples with an 11-cycle extend. Sections 5–7 study the four circulant blocks by complementation and polar decomposition. Their cyclic orderings give Theorem III and the recognition tests through 10910^9. Sections 8–10 treat the inverse ordering, corner deletions and reconstruction from two strips. Theorem IV recovers the missing border.

Entrywise powers at prime order

Raising each entry of FpF_p to its ppth power gives the all-ones matrix. In a regular or Butson matrix of order pp, two rows whose quotient is a pp-cycle become proportional on taking ppth powers. To see why this forces rank one, we begin with a lemma on flat matrices, whose entries have modulus one.

Lemma 1.1. Let KK be a flat n×nn\times n matrix whose rows are pairwise orthogonal or proportional, and whose columns have the same property. All row proportionality classes and all column proportionality classes have the same cardinality dd. In particular rank⁡(K)=n/d\operatorname{rank}(K)=n/d divides nn.

Proof. The number of row classes and the number of column classes both equal the rank, say kk. Remove the proportionality phases and retain one row and column from each class to obtain a flat invertible k×kk\times k matrix BB. Let R=diag⁡(ri)R=\operatorname{diag}(r_i) and C=diag⁡(cj)C=\operatorname{diag}(c_j) record the row and column class sizes. Orthogonality of distinct classes gives

BCB∗=nIk,B∗RB=nIk.BCB^*=nI_k,\qquad B^*RB=nI_k.

Thus CB∗=B∗RCB^*=B^*R, or RB=BCRB=BC. Since all entries of BB are nonzero, ri=cjr_i=c_j for every i,ji,j. Their common value is dd, and n=kdn=kd. □

Lemma 1.2. Let pp be prime and let z1,…,zpz_1,\ldots,z_p be roots of unity with ∑j=1pzj=0\sum_{j=1}^{p}z_j=0. Then either ∑j=1pzjp=0\sum_{j=1}^{p}z_j^p=0 or z1p=⋯=zppz_1^p=\cdots=z_p^p.

Proof. Work in a cyclotomic field KK containing the zjz_j. In its ring of integers, reduction modulo pp gives

∑j=1pzjp≡(∑j=1pzj)p=0(modp).\sum_{j=1}^{p}z_j^p\equiv\left(\sum_{j=1}^{p}z_j\right)^p=0\pmod p.

Thus a=(z1p+⋯+zpp)/pa=(z_1^p+\cdots+z_p^p)/p is an algebraic integer. Every conjugate of aa is an average of roots of unity and has absolute value at most one. If a≠0a\ne0, the product over all embeddings of KK is a nonzero integer. Its absolute value is therefore one, and so is ∣a∣|a|. Equality in the triangle inequality forces all zjpz_j^p to coincide. □

Theorem 1.3. Let HH be a complex Hadamard matrix of prime order pp, either regular or Butson. The matrix K=(Hijp)K = (H_{ij}^{p}) is either Hadamard or of rank one. The latter occurs exactly when HH is equivalent to a member of B(p,p)B(p,p).

Proof. Suppose first that HH is Butson, of any level. Apply Lemma 1.2 to the entries of each quotient of distinct rows of HH. The corresponding rows of KK are orthogonal in the first case and proportional in the second. Since HH is square, its columns are orthogonal as well, and the same argument applies to each pair of columns. Lemma 1.1 now gives rank⁡(K)∣p\operatorname{rank}(K) \mid p. In rank pp the rows are pairwise orthogonal, so KK is Hadamard. The only other possibility is rank one.

For regular HH, fix a cycle decomposition of each row quotient. Let G⊂TG \subset\mathbb{T} be generated by the entries of HH and the groups μq\mu_q for the cycle lengths qq used. This finitely generated abelian group splits as its torsion subgroup times a free abelian group. Fix the torsion subgroup pointwise and send each free generator to roots of unity tending to that generator. The resulting homomorphisms send each tμqt\mu_q to a rotated qq-cycle, so applying them entrywise gives Butson matrices converging to HH. Taking entrywise powers is continuous. The Hadamard condition and the vanishing of all 2×22 \times2 minors are closed conditions. Thus KK is again either Hadamard or of rank one, since its entries have modulus one.

Finally, dephasing commutes with taking entrywise powers. A dephased matrix of rank one has all entries equal to one. Hence KK has rank one exactly when the entries of the dephased HH belong to μp\mu_p, as claimed.

Corollary 1.4. Let HH be a complex Hadamard matrix of prime order pp, either regular or Butson. If a quotient of 2 rows or 2 columns is a pp-cycle, then every quotient of distinct rows and every quotient of distinct columns is a pp-cycle. The matrix HH dephases into B(p,p)B(p,p). For p≤17p \le17 we have H∼FpH \sim F_p.

Proof. The given pair becomes proportional after taking entrywise ppth powers. Theorem 1.3 therefore gives rank one and puts the dephased HH in B(p,p)B(p,p). In this form, every quotient of distinct rows or columns is a vanishing sum of pp elements of μp\mu_p. Its multiplicities are the coefficients of a polynomial of degree at most p−1p-1 vanishing at e2πi/pe^{2\pi i/p}. This polynomial is a multiple of 1+x+⋯+xp−11 + x + \cdots+ x^{p-1} and its coefficients sum to pp, so each is one. Undoing the dephasing only rotates these cycles. The final assertion follows from Hirasaka, Kim and Mizoguchi [12 Theorem 1.1].

References

  1. [1]T. Banica, J. Bichon and J.-M. Schlenker, Representations of quantum permutation algebras, J. Funct. Anal. 257 (2009), 2864–2910.arxiv.org/abs/0901.2331
  2. [2]T. Banica, I. Nechita and J.-M. Schlenker, Submatrices of Hadamard matrices: complementation results, Electron. J. Linear Algebra 27 (2014), 197–212.arxiv.org/abs/1311.0764
  3. [3]B. C. Berndt and R. J. Evans, The determination of Gauss sums, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 5 (1981), 107–129.DOI
  4. [4]D. Christou, M. Mitrouli and J. Seberry, Embedding and extension properties of Hadamard matrices revisited, Spec. Matrices 6 (2018), 155–165.DOI
  5. [5]D. Czifra, M. Matolcsi and F. Szöllősi, A nonexistence criterion and new constructions for Butson Hadamard matrices, J. Algebraic Combin. 64 (2026), article 29.arxiv.org/abs/2511.11230
  6. [6]J. A. Dias da Silva and Y. O. Hamidoune, Cyclic spaces for Grassmann derivatives and additive theory, Bull. London Math. Soc. 26 (1994), 140–146.DOI
  7. [7]R. Egan, D. Flannery and P. Ó Catháin, Classifying cocyclic Butson Hadamard matrices, in Algebraic design theory and Hadamard matrices, Springer Proc. Math. Stat. 133 (2015), 93–106.
  8. [8]G. Fijavž and B. Mohar, Rigidity and separation indices of Paley graphs, Discrete Math. 289 (2004), 157–161.DOI
  9. [9]GPT and Teo, Regular complex Hadamard matrices of order 7,8, hexagon:2611.00079 (2026).
  10. [10]U. Haagerup, Orthogonal maximal abelian ∗-subalgebras of the n × n matrices and cyclic n-roots, in Operator algebras and quantum field theory, International Press (1997), 296–323.
  11. [11]G. Hiranandani and J.-M. Schlenker, Small circulant complex Hadamard matrices of Butson type, European J. Combin. 51 (2016), 306–314.arxiv.org/abs/1311.5390
  12. [12]M. Hirasaka, K.-T. Kim and Y. Mizoguchi, Uniqueness of Butson Hadamard matrices of small degrees, J. Discrete Algorithms 34 (2015), 70–77.arxiv.org/abs/1402.6807
  13. [13]C. Koukouvinos, M. Mitrouli and J. Seberry, An algorithm to find formulae and values of minors for Hadamard matrices, Linear Algebra Appl. 330 (2001), 129–147.
  14. [14]C. Koukouvinos, E. Lappas, M. Mitrouli and J. Seberry, An algorithm to find formulae and values of minors for Hadamard matrices. II, Linear Algebra Appl. 371 (2003), 111–124.DOI
  15. [15]P. H. J. Lampio, P. R. J. Östergård and F. Szöllősi, Butson matrices up to monomial equivalence, electronic circuit catalogue, Aalto University.
  16. [16]P. H. J. Lampio, P. R. J. Östergård and F. Szöllősi, Orderly generation of Butson Hadamard matrices, Math. Comp. 89 (2020), 313–331.arxiv.org/abs/1707.02287
  17. [17]F. Lazebnik and A. Thomason, Orthomorphisms and the construction of projective planes, Math. Comp. 73 (2004), 1547–1557.DOI
  18. [18]R. Lidl and H. Niederreiter, Finite Fields, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press (1997).DOI
  19. [19]A. Muratović-Ribić, A. Pott, D. Thomson and Q. Wang, On the characterization of a semi-multiplicative analogue of planar functions over finite fields, Contemp. Math. 632 (2015), 317–325.
  20. [20]M. Muzychuk and I. Kovács, A solution of a problem of A. E. Brouwer, Des. Codes Cryptogr. 34 (2005), 429–464.DOI
  21. [21]G. Somlai, A new proof of Rédei’s theorem on the number of directions, Arch. Math. 122 (2024), 575–580.arxiv.org/abs/2212.12823
  22. [22]F. Szöllősi, Construction, classification and parametrization of complex Hadamard matrices, Ph.D. thesis, Central European University (2011).
  23. [23]F. Szöllősi, A note on the existence of BH(19, 6) matrices, Australas. J. Combin. 55 (2013), 31–34.arxiv.org/abs/1204.5166
  24. [24]F. Szöllősi, Exotic complex Hadamard matrices, and their equivalence, Cryptogr. Commun. 2 (2010), 187–198.DOI
  25. [25]T. Szőnyi, Around Rédei’s theorem, Discrete Math. 208/209 (1999), 557–575.DOI
  26. [26]W. Tadej and K. Życzkowski, A concise guide to complex Hadamard matrices, Open Syst. Inf. Dyn. 13 (2006), 133–177.DOI
  27. [27]T. Tao, An uncertainty principle for cyclic groups of prime order, Math. Res. Lett. 12 (2005), 121–127.DOI
  28. [28]L. C. Washington, Introduction to cyclotomic fields, 2nd ed., Graduate Texts in Mathematics 83, Springer (1997).

Paper details

vlnc:W_xev7er8m
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — published within the last 30 days

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

OpenAI ChatGPT · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents