⚠️ Warning: This is a draft ⚠️

This means it might contain formatting issues, incorrect code, conceptual problems, or other severe issues.

If you want to help to improve and eventually enable this page, please fork RosettaGit's repository and open a merge request on GitHub.

== Python example contains error == The Python example has a divide by zero error for the matrix

b = [[1, 1, 1, 1], [1, 1, -1, -1], [1, -1, 0, 0], [0, 0, 1, -1]]

although a LUP decomposition exists: [http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=lu+decomposition+{{1%2C+1%2C+1%2C+1}%2C+{1%2C+1%2C+-1%2C+-1}%2C+{1%2C+-1%2C+0%2C+0}%2C+{0%2C+0%2C+1%2C+-1}}]

The permutation matrix has to be updated at each step, but that will make the code a lot more complicated.

== Example 2 pivot matrix seems to be wrong == The pivot matrix in example 2 should also swap the last two rows of the current resulting pivoted matrix: A'(3, 3) = 2 while there is a 7 right beneath it. Here is the result of the multiplication of the two matrices on [http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=matrix+multiplication+calculator&f1={{1%2C0%2C0%2C0}%2C{0%2C0%2C1%2C0}%2C{0%2C1%2C0%2C0}%2C{0%2C0%2C0%2C1}}&f=MatricesOperations.theMatrix1_{{1%2C0%2C0%2C0}%2C{0%2C0%2C1%2C0}%2C{0%2C1%2C0%2C0}%2C{0%2C0%2C0%2C1}}&f2={{11%2C9%2C24%2C2}%2C{1%2C5%2C2%2C6}%2C{3%2C17%2C18%2C1}%2C{2%2C5%2C7%2C1}}&f=MatricesOperations.theMatrix2_{{11%2C9%2C24%2C2}%2C{1%2C5%2C2%2C6}%2C{3%2C17%2C18%2C1}%2C{2%2C5%2C7%2C1}}&a=*FVarOpt.1-_**-.**MatricesOperations.theMatrix3---.-- wolfram alpha]

The pivot matrix I propose is {{1,0,0,0},{0,0,1,0},{0,0,0,1},{0,1,0,0}}.

I did not change the article because it seemed very strange that I would be the first to see this and I therefore wonder if I'm not wrong.

== Re: Example 2 pivot matrix seems to be wrong ==

I noticed this too. In the implementations it appears that the max pivot values are taken from the original A matrix without swapping. When the max pivot is being found for row 3 of A the choices presented are row 3 [3, 7, 18, 1] and row 4 [2, 5, 7, 1], since row 3 contains the largest pivot value the third row of the current permutation matrix is swapped with itself, which contains [0, 1, 0, 0] from the initial swap with row 2. It's strange, but a lot of the algorithm implementations seem to follow that trend and multiplying by the permutation matrix instead of swapping inline with the permutation matrix.

I think the permutation matrix you proposed makes more sense as well.

== Matlab code is wrong ==

Please lock at the following example A=[1 2 -1 0;2 4 -2 -1; -3 -5 6 1; -1 2 8 -2] the code returns nonsense for U, namely

U =

```     0         0         0   -1.0000
0.5000    1.0000   -0.5000         0
```

-0.1429 0 1.0000 0.2857 0.1563 0 0 1.0000

I presume the reason is the permutation matrix. I will try to correct it.