Generalized Inverses of Matrix Products: From Fundamental Subspaces to Randomized Decompositions

We investigate the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse and generalized inverse of a matrix product $A=CR$ to establish a unifying framework for generalized and randomized matrix inverses. This analysis is rooted in first principles, focusing on the geometry of the four fundamental subspaces. We examine: (1) the reverse order law, $A^+ = R^+C^+$, which holds when $C$ has independent columns and $R$ has independent rows, (2) the universally correct formula, $A^+ = (C^+CR)^+(CRR^+)^+$, providing a geometric interpretation of the mappings between the involved subspaces, (3) a new generalized randomized formula, $A^+_p = (P^TA)^+P^TAQ(AQ)^+$, which gives $A^+_p = A^+$ if and only if the sketching matrices $P$ and $Q$ preserve the rank of $A$, i.e., $\mathrm{rank}(P^TA) = \mathrm{rank}(AQ) = \mathrm{rank}(A)$. The framework is extended to generalized $\{1,2\}$-inverses and specialized forms, revealing the underlying structure of established randomized linear algebra algorithms, including randomized SVD, the Nyström approximation, and CUR decomposition. We demonstrate applications in sparse sensor placement and effective resistance estimation. For the latter, we provide a rigorous quantitative analysis of an approximation scheme, establishing that it always underestimates the true resistance and deriving a worst-case spectral bound on the error of resistance differences.

On the Fundamental Impossibility of Hallucination Control in Large Language Models

This paper explains \textbf{why it is impossible to create large language models that do not hallucinate and what are the trade-offs we should be looking for}. It presents a formal \textbf{impossibility theorem} demonstrating that no inference mechanism can simultaneously satisfy four fundamental properties: \textbf{truthful (non-hallucinatory) generation, semantic information conservation, relevant knowledge revelation, and knowledge-constrained optimality}. By modeling LLM inference as an \textbf{auction of ideas} where neural components compete to contribute to responses, we prove the impossibility using the Green-Laffont theorem. That mathematical framework provides a rigorous foundation for understanding the nature of inference process, with implications for model architecture, training objectives, and evaluation methods.