A Guide on How to Read and Do Proofs

to accompany
Anton/Kaul, Elementary Linear Algebra 12th edition
&
Anton/Rorres, Elementary Linear Algebra: Applications Version 12th edition

This supplement is an aid to help you learn how to read, understand, think about and do proofs that are
found in Anton/Kaul’s Elementary Linear Algebra, 12th ed. (John Wiley and Sons, 2020) and in the
Applications Version of that book by Anton/Rorres (henceforward both referred to as ELA/12e).

1. Introduction
Learning Objective: Define proof techniques, the forward-backward method, and the use of mathematical
definitions; and explain how keywords can be used to identify an appropriate proof technique.

A proof is a convincing argument, expressed in the language of mathematics, that a statement is true.
Thus, to do proofs, you must learn this “language of mathematics” which, like any language, takes time,
effort, and practice. With regard to proofs, the language of mathematics consists of a collection of proof
techniques. Just as a game of chess can be described as a sequence of moves of the individual pieces, so
a proof can be described as a sequence of applications of the proof techniques. These proof techniques are
described in detail in the book How to Read and Do Proofs, 6th ed. (John Wiley and Sons, 2014) for
which the author, Daniel Solow, has developed a collection of 15 video lectures corresponding to the first
15 chapters of that book. As a user of ELA/12e, you have access to these videos. The subsequent
discussion here is designed to help you identify an efficient way to use those videos.

The first three video lectures form the foundation that is necessary to understand the remaining
proof techniques. In particular, Lecture 1: What is a Proof? provides an explanation of exactly what a
proof is and what is involved in reading and doing one. Lecture 2: The Forward-Backward Method
explains the most fundamental proof technique called the forward-backward method. This technique is
crucial because, if you truly understand this one, then you will understand all of the other techniques,
each of which is explained in terms of the forward-backward method. Lecture 3: Definitions and
Terminology explains one of the key ideas used in the forward-backward method—and in virtually every
proof—namely, using mathematical definitions. This video also explains how to use previously proved
theorems to prove new theorems—an approach used frequently in ELA/12e. Before proceeding further,
you should view all three of the following videos if you haven’t already done so:

Lecture 1: What is a Proof?

Lecture 2: The Forward-Backward Method
Lecture 3: Definitions and Terminology

Once you have mastered the forward-backward method and can use mathematical definitions and
previous theorems, you will then have the foundation needed to learn the remaining proof techniques,
each of which is keyword based. By this is meant that, associated with each proof technique is a
keyword, or group of keywords, with the property that when you see those keywords in the theorem you
are trying to prove, then you should consider using the associated technique in your proof.

In contrast to doing a proof yourself, reading someone else's proof (such as the ones found in ELA/12e)
presents its own challenge—even if you know all of the proof techniques. One reason is that, often, a
written proof does not explicitly include the names of the techniques that are used in the proof. For
example, virtually no proof in any textbook mentions the forward-backward method explicitly by that
name, even though this technique is used in many of the proofs. In addition, a single sentence of a written
proof can omit several steps and even include the use of more than one technique. To draw an analogy
with the game of chess again, reading a proof is like viewing a chess board at different points in time, but
only after several pieces have been moved. For example, suppose you know the current positions of the
pieces on the board and are then shown the board after the players have each made several moves that you
do not see. When you then look at the board for the second time, you will have to determine which pieces
have moved from their original positions. So it is with reading a proof in that, from what is written, you
will have to determine which proof techniques were used and how they were applied in this case, as well
as possibly having to fill in missing steps.

The subsequent material presented here assumes that you have viewed the first three videos and
understand what a proof is (including an implication), the forward-backward method, and how to use
mathematical definitions and previously proved theorems in the forward-backward method.

2. Using Keywords to Start a Proof

Learning Objective: Define the forward method and backward method, and explain how to use key
questions in a proof.

The first proof you are asked to do in ELA/12e occurs in Exercise 43 in Section 1.2. As you know from
Lecture 1: What is a Proof? when proving that an implication of the form “A implies B” is true, you can
assume that the statement A is true and your job is to show that the statement B is true. In Exercise 43(a),
you can identify the following statements:

A: ad – bc  0

[ ] [ ]
a b 1 0
B: the reduced row echelon form of c d is 0 1 .
In such problems, you should consciously choose a technique with which to start the proof. One way to
do so is to look for keywords that can appear in the statement A or in the statement B because then you
can use an associated proof technique. For reference purposes, a list of the keywords that can appear in
the statement A (or any other forward statement) is summarized in Table 1, together with the video lecture
number and title that explains the associated proof technique. Table 2 contains similar information for
keywords that can appear in the statement B (or any other backward statement).
Keep in mind that some keywords—such as there are—might be hidden, that is, the keywords are there,
but not explicitly. For example, Theorem 1.2.2 in Section 1.2 of ELA/12e states that, “A homogeneous
linear system with more unknowns than equations has infinitely many solutions.” You can rephrase this
as follows to contain explicitly the keywords there are: “For a homogeneous linear system with more
unknowns than equations, there are infinitely many solutions.”

As a general rule, when the statements A and B do not contain keywords—as in the foregoing
Exercise 43(a)—you should use the forward-backward method to start the proof. As you learned in
Lecture 2: The Forward-Backward Method, the forward-backward method consists of a forward process,
in which you create new true statements from A and a backward process, in which, through asking and
answering a key question, you determine how to show that the statement B is true. For example, a key
question associated with the statement B in Exercise 43(a) above is, “How can I show that two matrices
are equal?”

As you know from Lecture 3: Definitions and Terminology, proofs that use the forward-
backward method often use definitions, and sometimes previously proved theorems, in both the forward
and backward processes. An example of using a previously proved theorem in the forward process is in
the proof of part (c) of Theorem 1.4.7 in Section 1.4 of ELA/12e, where it states that, “Properties (l) and
(m) of Theorem 1.4.1 imply that….” When doing proofs yourself, you, too, can use any previously
proved theorem from ELA/12e.

While the statements A and B in Exercise 43(a) do not contain keywords—thus suggesting that you start
with the forward-backward method—the following statement B in Exercise 43(b) contains the keywords
“exactly one”:
ax +by =k
B: the linear system cx+dy=l has exactly one solution.
According to Table 2, these key words suggest using a backward uniqueness method, which is
described in the Lecture 11: The Uniqueness Methods video.

3. Looking for Keywords When Reading a Proof

Learning Objective: Identify the six keyword proof techniques in the forward process, and the seven
keyword proof techniques in the backward process.

It is equally useful to look for keywords when reading a proof of the statement “A implies B.” In
particular, if the statements A or B contain keywords, then the author is likely to be using the associated
proof technique from Table 1 and Table 2. If there are no keywords in A or B, then the author is probably
starting with the forward-backward method.

To illustrate, consider the proof of Theorem 1.4.1 in Section 1.4 of ELA/12e. As there are no keywords,
the proof of each part starts with the forward-backward method, for which the key question is, “How can
I show that two matrices are equal?” As pointed out immediately below Theorem 1.4.1, the answer—
obtained from the definition of two matrices being equal—is always the same: “… we must show that the
matrix on the left side has the same size as that on the right and that the corresponding entries on the two
sides are the same.”

In contrast, Theorem 1.4.3 in Section 1.4 of ELA/12e contains the keywords “either/or” in the backward
statement B and so a proof by elimination—which is described in Lecture 13: The Either/Or Methods —
is used (see Table 2). As another example, the statement B in Theorem 1.6.2 in Section 1.6 says that, “…
the system of equations Ax = b has exactly one solution, namely, x = A1b”. The keywords exactly one in
the backward process suggest that the proof uses a backward uniqueness method—described in Lecture
11: The Uniqueness Methods (see Table 2).

As a proof proceeds, you may encounter additional keywords for which the associated technique is then
used. For example, in the proof of Theorem 1.4.1(d) in Section 1.4 of ELA/12e it says, “We want to show
that corresponding entries of A(B + C) and AB + AC are equal; that is, (A(B + C))ij = (AB + AC)ij, for all
values of i and j.” As such, the keywords for all have appeared in the backward process, thus indicating
that the choose method is used—which is described in Lecture 5: Quantifiers Part 2: The Universal
Quantifier (see Table 2).

In some cases you may have to identify hidden keywords in the theorem, that is, keywords that are not
visible explicitly but are there implicitly. For example, Theorem 1.3.1 in Section 1.3 of ELA/12e states
that, “If A is an m × n matrix, and if x is an n × 1 column vector, then the product Ax can be expressed as
a linear combination of the column vectors of A in which the coefficients are the entries of x.” While no
keywords are explicitly visible, note that you can use Definition 6 for a linear combination to rewrite the
conclusion of Theorem 1.3.1 as follows: “…then there are scalars c1, …, cn such that the product
Ax = A1c1 + … + Ancn. As such, the keywords there are appear in the backward process, thus suggesting
the use of the construction method—which is described in Lecture 4: Quantifiers Part 1: The Existential
Quantifier (see Table 2)—to produce values for the scalars c1, …, cn so that Ax = A1c1 + … + Ancn.

As another example of the use of keywords, consider proving that (e) implies (a) in Theorem 1.6.4: If
Ax = b is consistent for every n × 1 matrix b, then A is invertible. The keywords for every in the
hypothesis suggest using the specialization method—which is described in Lecture 6: Quantifiers Part 3:
Specialization (see Table 1).

Proofs may contain multiple keywords. How to deal with nested quantifiers, statements that contain more
than one quantifier, is described in Lecture 7: Quantifiers Part 4: Nested Quantifiers.

When the keyword no or not appears in the conclusion of a theorem, then the contradiction or
contrapositive methods—which are described in Lecture 10: The Contrapositive Method (see Table 2)
—are likely to be used. This is the case in Example 5 in Section 4.5 of ELA/12e where the contradiction
method is used to show that the vector space P of all polynomials with real coefficients has no finite
spanning set. However, since these two proof techniques are used only rarely in ELA/12e, you might
want to devote more of your time to other proof techniques.

Finally, when the keywords maximum and minimum arise, the max/min methods—which are described
in Lecture 14: The Max/Min Methods (see Table 1 and Table 2)—are likely to be used. The general
approach with these methods is to convert the max/min statements into equivalent statements containing
the keywords for all or there is and then to use the appropriate construction, choose, and specialization
methods. These keywords appear repeatedly in Chapter 7 of ELA/12e and an example of using these
methods is in the proof of Theorem 7.4.1 in Section 7.4.

Finally, for an overall review of the proof techniques, how to use them and when to use them, and a final
example on how to read and do proofs, see Lecture 15: Bringing It All Together.

In summary, when both reading and doing proofs, look for keywords in the forward and backward
processes, because then an associated proof technique is likely to arise. Watch out for hidden keywords—
such as there is—that are not explicitly in the statements but are there implicitly.
 Table 1: Keyword Proof Techniques in the Forward Process
Associated Proof
Keywords Video Lecture
Technique
there is Lecture 4: Quantifiers Part 1: The Existential
No Special Technique
(there are, there exists) Quantifier

for all (for each, for

Specialization Method Lecture 6: Quantifiers Part 3: Specialization
any, for every)

no, not Contrapositive Method Lecture 10: The Contrapositive Method

Note: First Review Lecture 8: Negations of Statements

unique Lecture 11: The Uniqueness Methods

Forward Uniqueness Method Note: First Review Lecture 4: Quantifiers Part 1: The
(one and only one)
Existential Quantifier

either / or Proof by Cases Lecture 13: The Either/Or Methods

max / min Max / Min Methods Lecture 14: The Max/Min Methods

Table 2: Keyword Proof Techniques in the Backward Process

Associated Proof
Keywords Video Lecture
Technique
there is Lecture 4: Quantifiers Part 1: The Existential
Construction Method
(there are, there exists) Quantifier

for all (for each, for Lecture 5: Quantifiers Part 2: The Universal
Choose Method
any, for every) Quantifier

Contradiction Method Lecture 9: Contradiction

Note: First Review Lecture 8: Negations of Statements
no, not
Contrapositive Method Lecture 10: The Contrapositive Method
Note: First Review Lecture 8: Negations of Statements

Lecture 11: The Uniqueness Methods

unique Backward Uniqueness
(one and only one) Method Note: First Review Lecture 4: Quantifiers Part 1: The
Existential Quantifier

Lecture 12: Mathematical Induction

For every integer n ≥ 1, Note: First Review Lecture 5: Quantifiers Part 2: The
Induction Method
a statement P(n) is true Universal Quantifier

either / or Proof by Elimination Lecture 13: The Either/Or Methods