Minimal Gersgorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set and its numerical approximation

Abstract: For a complex tensor A, Minimal Gersgorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set of A is presented, and its sufficient and necessary condition is given. Furthermore, we study its boundary by the spectrums of the equimodular set and the extended equimodular set for A. Lastly, for an irreducible tensor, a numerical approximation to Minimal Gersgorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set is given.

\section{Introduction}

Let $N=\{1,2,\ldots, n\}.$ For a complex (real) order $m$ dimension
$n$ tensor $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})$ (written $\mathcal
{A}\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$ ($\mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$), respectively),
where
\[a_{i_1\cdots i_m}\in \mathbb{C}~ (\mathbb{R}), ~i_j=1,\ldots,n,~j=1,\ldots, m.\]
we call a complex number $\lambda$ an eigenvalue of $\mathcal {A}$
and a nonzero complex vector $x$ an eigenvector of $\mathcal {A}$
associated with $\lambda$, if
\begin{equation}\label{eigvalue}\mathcal {A}x^{m-1}=\lambda
x^{[m-1]},\end{equation} where $\mathcal {A}x^{m-1}$ and $
x^{[m-1]}$ are vectors, whose $i$th components are
\[(\mathcal {A}x^{m-1})_i=\sum\limits_{i_2,\ldots,i_m\in N}
a_{ii_2\cdots i_m}x_{i_2}\cdots x_{i_m}\] and
\[(x^{[m-1]})_i=x_i^{m-1},\] respectively. Note that there are other
definitions of eigenvalue and eigenvectors, such as, H-eigenvalue,
D-eigenvalue and Z-eigenvalue; see \cite{Qi3,Qi5,Qi2}.  Obviously,
the definition of eigenvalue for matrices follows from the case
$m=2$.

Tensor eigenvalues and eigenvectors have received much attention
recently in the literatures \cite{Ch,La1,Ko1,Li,Ng,Qi3,Qi4,Qi1,Wa}.
Many important results on the eigenvalue problem of matrices have
been successfully extended  to higher order tensors; see
\cite{Ch,Ca1,Li1,Ng,Qi3,Qi4,Qi5,Ya,Ya1}. In \cite{Qi3}, Qi
generalized Ger\v{s}gorin eigenvalue inclusion theorem from matrices
to real supersymmetric tensors, which can be easily extended to
generic tensors; see \cite{Ya}.

\begin{theorem} \emph{\cite{Qi3}}
\label{th 1.1} Let $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in
\mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$ and $\sigma(\mathcal {A})$ be the spectrum of
$\mathcal {A}$, that is, \[\sigma(\mathcal
{A})=\{\lambda\in\mathbb{C}: \mathcal {A}x^{m-1}=\lambda x^{[m-1]},~
x\in \mathbb{C}^n\backslash\{0\}\}.\] Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq 2.1}
\sigma(\mathcal {A})\subseteq \Gamma(\mathcal
{A})=\bigcup\limits_{i\in N} \Gamma_i(\mathcal {A}),
\end{equation}
where \[\Gamma_i(\mathcal {A})=\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}:|z-a_{i\cdots
i}|\leq r_i(\mathcal {A})=\sum\limits_{i_2,\ldots,i_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{ii_2\ldots i_m}=0} |a_{ii_2\cdots i_m}|\right\}\] and
\[\delta_{i_1i_2\cdots i_m}= \left\{ \begin{array}{cc}
\delta_{i_1i_2\cdots i_m}=1,       & if ~i_1=\cdots =i_m,~\\
 0,       & otherwise.
\end{array} \right. \]
\end{theorem}

It is easy to see that when $m=2$, Theorem \ref{th 1.1} reduces to
the well known Ger\v{s}gorin eigenvalue inclusion theorem of
matrices \cite{Ger,Varga}. Here, we call $\Gamma_i(\mathcal {A})$
the $i$-th Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set. Note that
$\Gamma_i(\mathcal {A})$ is a closed set in the complex plane
$\mathbb{C}$, Hence, $\Gamma(\mathcal {A})$, which consists of the
$n$ sets $\Gamma_i(\mathcal {A})$, is also closed and bounded in
$\mathbb{C}$.

Also in \cite{Qi3}, Qi obtain  another interesting result on
Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set $\Gamma(\mathcal
{A})$.

\begin{theorem} \emph{\cite{Qi3}}
If $\Gamma_i(\mathcal {A})$ is disjoint with the other
$\Gamma_j(\mathcal {A}),~j\neq i$, then there are exactly
$(m-1)^{n-1}$ eigenvalues which lie in $\Gamma_i(\mathcal {A})$.
Furthermore, if all of $\Gamma_i(\mathcal {A})$,
$i=l_1,l_2,\ldots,l_k$ are connected but disjoint with the other
$\Gamma_j(\mathcal {A})$, $j\neq i$, then there are exactly
$k(m-1)^{n-1}$ eigenvalues which lie in $\bigcup\limits_{i=l_1,l_2,
\ldots, l_k} \Gamma_i(\mathcal {A}) $.
\end{theorem}

In this paper, we also focus on Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue
inclusion set. And we present Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor
eigenvalue inclusion set, give its sufficient and necessary
condition, and research its boundary. For an irreducible tensor, we
give a set which approximates to Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor
eigenvalue inclusion set.

\section{Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set}
In this section, we present Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue
inclusion set and study its characteristic. First, a lemma is given.

\begin{lemma} \emph{\cite{Ya}} \label{lemma 2.1} Let $\mathcal{A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$
and $D=diag(d_1,d_2,\ldots,d_n)$ be a diagonal nonsingular matrix.
If
\[\mathcal{B}=(b_{i_1\cdots
i_m})=\mathcal{A}D^{-(m-1)}\overbrace{DD\cdots D}\limits^{m-1},\]
where \[b_{i_1\cdots i_m}=d_{i_1}^{-(m-1)}a_{i_1i_2\cdots
i_m}d_{i_2}\cdots d_{i_m},~ i_1,\ldots, i_m\in N,\] then $
\mathcal{A}, ~\mathcal{B}$ have the same eigenvalues.
\end{lemma}

From Lemma \ref{lemma 2.1}, we obtain the following tensor
eigenvalue inclusion set.

\begin{theorem}
\label{th 2.1} Let $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in
\mathbb{C}^{[m,n]} $ and $x=(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)^T$ be an entrywise
positive vector, i.e., $x=(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)^T>0$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{equation2.1}\sigma(\mathcal {A})\subseteq \Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal
{A})=\bigcup\limits_{i\in N}\Gamma^{r^x}_i(\mathcal
{A}),\end{equation} where
\[\Gamma^{r^x}_i(\mathcal {A})=\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}: |z-a_{i\cdots
i}|\leq r^x_i(\mathcal {A})= \sum\limits_{i_2,\ldots,i_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{ii_2\cdots i_m}=0} \frac{|a_{ii_2\cdots i_m}|x_{i_2}\cdots
x_{i_m}}{x_{i}^{m-1}} \right\}.\] Furthermore,
\begin{equation}\label{equation2.2}\sigma(\mathcal {A})\subseteq \bigcap\limits_{x>0}\Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal {A}).\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof} Let $X=diag(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)$ and $\mathcal {B}=\mathcal{A}X^{-(m-1)}\overbrace{XX\cdots
X}\limits^{m-1}=(b_{i_1\cdots i_m})$. It is obvious that $X$ is
nonsingular and $\sigma(\mathcal {B})=\sigma(\mathcal{A})$ from
Lemma \ref{lemma 2.1}. From Theorem \ref{th 1.1}, we have
\[\sigma(\mathcal {B})\subseteq \Gamma (\mathcal
{B})=\bigcup\limits_{i\in N} \Gamma_i(\mathcal {B}),
\]
where \[\Gamma_i(\mathcal {B})=\left\{z\in \mathbb{C}:|z-b_{i\cdots
i}|\leq r_i(\mathcal {B})=\sum\limits_{i_2,\ldots,i_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{ii_2\ldots i_m}=0} |b_{ii_2\cdots i_m}|\right\}\] Note that
$b_{i\cdots i}=a_{i\cdots i}$ and $r_i(\mathcal {B})=r^x_i(\mathcal
{A})$. Hence, $\Gamma_i(\mathcal {B})=\Gamma^{r^x}_i(\mathcal {A})$,
consequently, $\Gamma (\mathcal {B})=\Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal {A})$.
Therefore,
\[ \sigma(\mathcal{A})=\sigma(\mathcal {B})\subseteq \Gamma
(\mathcal {B})=\Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal {A}). \]

Furthermore, for any $x>0,~x\in \mathbb{R}^n$, (\ref{equation2.1})
also holds. Hence, (\ref{equation2.2}) follows. \end{proof}

The set $\bigcap\limits_{x>0}\Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal {A})$ in Theorem
\ref{th 2.1} is of interest theoretically because it provides a set,
containing all the eigenvalues of $\mathcal {A}$, which is called
Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set defined as
follows.

\begin{definition} \label{minimal ger} Let $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in
\mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$. Then \begin{equation} \Gamma^R(\mathcal
{A})=\bigcap\limits_{x \in \mathbb{R}^n, \atop
x>0}\Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal {A})
\end{equation}
is Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set of
$\mathcal {A}$, related to the collection of all weighted sums,
$r^x_i(\mathcal {A})$, where $x=(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)^T>0$.
\end{definition}

Next, a sufficient and necessary condition for the elements
belonging to Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set
is provided. Before that, we give some results involving the
$Perron-Frobenius$ theory of nonnegative tensors \cite{Ya}. Given a
real tensor $\mathcal {A}$, we call $\mathcal {A}$ nonnegative,
denoted by $\mathcal {A}\geq 0$, if every of its entries is
nonnegative.

\begin{definition} \cite[Definition 2.1]{Ch} A tensor
$\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots,i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$ is called
reducible, if there exists a nonempty proper index subset $I\subset
N$ such that \[|a_{i_1\cdots,i_m }|=0,~\forall i_1\in I, ~\forall
i_2,\ldots,i_m\notin I.\] If $\mathcal {A}$ is not reducible, then
we call  $\mathcal {A}$ irreducible.\end{definition}

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma 2.2}\emph{\cite{Ya}}
\label{nonnegative-tensor-pf} If $\mathcal{A} \in
\mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$ is nonnegative, then the spectral radius
\[\rho(\mathcal{A})=\max\{|\lambda|: \lambda \in \sigma(\mathcal {A})\}\] is an eigenvalue with a nonnegative eigenvector
$x\neq 0$ corresponding to it. Moreover, if $\mathcal{A}$ is
irreducible, then $\rho(\mathcal{A})>0$ and $x$ is positive.
\end{lemma}

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma 2.4} \emph{\cite[Theorem 5.3]{Ya}}
Let $\mathcal {A} \in \mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$ be nonnegative. Then
\[\rho(\mathcal {A}) =\max\limits_{x\geq 0, x\neq 0}
\min\limits_{x_i>0} \frac{(\mathcal {A}x^{m-1})_i} {x^{m-1}_i}=
\min\limits_{x\geq 0, x\neq 0} \max\limits_{x_i>0} \frac{(\mathcal
{A}x^{m-1})_i} {x^{m-1}_i}.\]
\end{lemma}

\begin{remark}
The first equality is only given in Theorem 5.3 of \cite{Ya}. And
similar to the proof of  Theorem 5.3 of \cite{Ya}, the second is
proved easily.
\end{remark}

From Lemma \ref{lemma 2.4}, we can obtain the following result.

\begin{corollary} \label{corollary 2.1}
Let $\mathcal {A} \in \mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$ be nonnegative. Then
\[\rho(\mathcal {A}) =  \sup\limits_{x>0} \min\limits_{i\in N}
\frac{(\mathcal {A}x^{m-1})_i} {x^{m-1}_i}=\inf\limits_{x>0}
\max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal {A}x^{m-1})_i} {x^{m-1}_i}.\]
\end{corollary}

From Corollary \ref{corollary 2.1}, we have the following result.

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma 2.5}
Let $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots,i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$ and $z$
be any complex number. And let $\mathcal
{B}(z)=(b_{i_1\cdots,i_m})\in \mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$, where
\[b_{i\cdots i}=-|z-a_{i\cdots
i}|,~b_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}=|a_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}|~for ~ i\in N
~and~\delta_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}=0.\]  Then $\mathcal {B}(z)$ possesses
a real eigenvalue $v(z)$ which has the property that if $\lambda\in
\sigma(\mathcal {B}(z))$, then
\[Re(\lambda) \leq v(z).\] Furthermore, \begin{equation}\label{eq3.1}v(z)=\inf\limits_{x>0}\max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal {B}(z)x^{m-1})_i}{x_i^{m-1}}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof} Let $\mu=\max\limits_{i\in N}|z-a_{i\cdots i}|$, and
$\mathcal {C}=(c_{i_1\cdots,i_m})\in \mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$, where
\begin{equation} \label{eq 2.2} c_{i\cdots i}=\mu-|z-a_{i\cdots i}|~and~c_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}=|a_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}|, ~i\in N, ~\delta_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}=0.
\end{equation}
Then $B(z)=-\mu\mathcal {I}+\mathcal {C}$, where $\mathcal {C}\geq
0$. From Equality (\ref{eigvalue}), it is obvious that
$\lambda(\mathcal {C})\in \sigma (\mathcal {C})$ if and only if
$-\mu+\lambda(\mathcal {C})\in \sigma (\mathcal {B}(z))$. Moreover,
From Lemma \ref{lemma 2.2}, $\rho(\mathcal {C})$ is an eigenvalue of
$\mathcal {C}$ with a nonnegative eigenvector. Hence,
$-\mu+\rho(\mathcal {C})$ is an eigenvalue of  $\mathcal {B}(z)$
with a nonnegative eigenvector. Let
\begin{equation} \label{eq 2.3} v(z)=-\mu+\rho(\mathcal {C}).\end{equation} Obviously, $v(z)\in \sigma
(\mathcal{B}(z))$ is real. And for any $\lambda \in \sigma(\mathcal
{B}(z)),$ we have
\[Re(\lambda)=Re(\lambda+\mu-\mu)=Re(\lambda+\mu)-\mu\leq |\lambda+\mu|-\mu\leq \rho(\mathcal {C})-\mu=v(z).\]
Furthermore, by Corollary \ref{corollary 2.1}, we have
\[\rho(\mathcal {C})=\inf\limits_{x>0}
\max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal {C}x^{m-1})_i} {x^{m-1}_i}.\]
Then
\begin{eqnarray*}v(z)&=&-\mu+\rho(\mathcal {C})\\
&=&-\mu+\inf\limits_{x>0} \max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal
{C}x^{m-1})_i} {x^{m-1}_i}\\
&=&\inf\limits_{x>0} \max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{((-\mu\mathcal
{I}+\mathcal {C})x^{m-1})_i} {x^{m-1}_i}\\
&=&\inf\limits_{x>0} \max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1})_i} {x^{m-1}_i}.\end{eqnarray*} The conclusion
follows.
\end{proof}

For $v(z)$ in Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}, we give the following property.

\begin{proposition}\label{lemma 4.2} Let $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$ and $v(z)$ be defined as Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}. Then
$v(z)$ is uniformly continuous on $\mathbb{C}$.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof} Let $\mathcal {B}(z)\in
\mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$ be defined as Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}. Then,
similar to the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem3.1},

\[v(z)=\inf\limits_{x>0}\max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1})_i}{x_i^{m-1}}=\inf\limits_{x>0}\max\limits_{i\in N}
\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|z-a_{i\cdots i}|\}.\] Note that for any
$z,~\tilde{z}\in \mathbb{C}$ and $x>0,~x\in \mathbb{R}^n$,
\[\begin{array}{lll}
   \max\limits_{i\in N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|z-a_{i\cdots i}|\}& = & \max\limits_{i\in N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|z-\tilde{z}+\tilde{z}-a_{i\cdots i}|\} \\
   &\geq&\max\limits_{i\in N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-(|z-\tilde{z}|+|\tilde{z}-a_{i\cdots
   i}|)\}\\
   &=&\max\limits_{i\in N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|\tilde{z}-a_{i\cdots
   i}|\}-|z-\tilde{z}|,
\end{array}\]
that is,
\[\max\limits_{i\in N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|\tilde{z}-a_{i\cdots
   i}|\}\leq |z-\tilde{z}|+\max\limits_{i\in N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|z-a_{i\cdots i}|\}.\]
Hence,
\[\begin{array}{lll}
\inf\limits_{x>0}\max\limits_{i\in N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal
{A})-|\tilde{z}-a_{i\cdots i}|\} &\leq& \inf\limits_{x>0}
\left\{|z-\tilde{z}|+\max\limits_{i\in N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal
{A})-|z-a_{i\cdots i}|\}\right\}\\
&=&|z-\tilde{z}|+\inf\limits_{x>0}\max\limits_{i\in
N}\{r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|z-a_{i\cdots i}|\},
\end{array}\]
which implies \[v(\tilde{z})-v(z)\leq |z-\tilde{z}|.\] Similarly, we
can obtain
\[v(z)-v(\tilde{z})\leq |z-\tilde{z}|.\]
Therefore, \[|v(z)-v(\tilde{z})|\leq |z-\tilde{z}|.\] This implies
that $v(z)$ is uniformly continuous on $\mathbb{C}$.
\end{proof}

We now establish the sufficient and necessary condition for
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$.

\begin{theorem} \label{theorem3.1}
Let $\mathcal {A}, ~\mathcal {B}(z)$ and $v(z)$ be defined as Lemma
\ref{lemma 2.5}. Then  \begin{equation}\label{eq3.2}z\in
\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})~if ~and ~only ~if ~v(z)\geq
0.\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof} Assume that $z\in \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$. From
Definition \ref{minimal ger}, we have that for each vector $x>0$,
$z\in \Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal {A})$. Hence, there is an $i_0\in N$
such that \[|z-a_{i_0\cdots i_0}|\leq r^{x}_{i_0}(\mathcal {A}),\]
equivalently,
\[r^{x}_{i_0}(\mathcal {A})-|z-a_{i_0\cdots i_0}|\geq 0.\]
Note that for any $i\in N$, \[\frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1})_i}{x_i^{m-1}}=r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|z-a_{i\cdots
i}|.\] Then  $\frac{\left(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1}\right)_{i_0}}{x_{i_0}^{m-1}}\geq 0$, which implies
that for each vector $x>0$, \[\max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1})_i}{x_i^{m-1}}\geq 0.\] By Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5},
\[v(z)=\inf\limits_{x>0}\max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1})_i}{x_i^{m-1}}\geq 0.\]

Conversely, suppose that $v(z)\geq 0$. From Equality (\ref{eq3.1}),
then for each vector $x>0$, there is an $i\in N$ such that \[0\leq
v(z)\leq \frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1})_i}{x_i^{m-1}}=r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|z-a_{i\cdots
i}|.\]Hence, $|z-a_{i\cdots i}|\leq r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})$, and then
$z\in \Gamma^{r^x}_i(\mathcal {A})$ which implies $z\in
\Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal {A})$. Since this inclusion holds for each
vector $x>0$,  we have $z\in \Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$ from Definition
\ref{minimal ger}.
\end{proof}

\section{Boundary of $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$} In Section 2, a
sufficient and necessary condition for the elements belonging to
Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, is given. We in this section focus on
the boundary of $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, and establish
relationships between its boundary (see Definition \ref{boundary}),
the spectrum of the equimodular set for $\mathcal {A}$ (see
Definition \ref{equimodular}),  the spectrum of the extended
equimodular set for $\mathcal {A}$ (see Definition \ref{extended
equimodular}) and $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$.

\begin{definition}\label{boundary}
Let $\mathcal{A} \in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$. The boundary of Minimal
Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal
{A})$, denoted by $\partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, is defined by
\[\partial\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})=\overline{\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})}\bigcap \overline{(\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'},\]
where $(\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'$ is the complement of
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, and $\overline{\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal
{A})}$ is the closure of $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$.
\end{definition}

\begin{definition}\label{equimodular}
Let $\mathcal{A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m}) \in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$. The
equimodular set of $\mathcal{A}$, denoted by $\Omega(\mathcal{A})$,
is defined as \[\Omega(\mathcal{A})=\{\mathcal {Q}=(q_{i_1\cdots
i_m}) \in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}: q_{i\cdots i}= a_{i\cdots i},
|q_{ii_2\cdots i_m}|= |a_{ii_2\cdots i_m}|, ~i\in N,
\delta_{ii_2\cdots i_m}=0\}.\]
\end{definition}

\begin{definition}\label{extended equimodular}
Let $\mathcal{A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m}) \in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$. The
extended equimodular set of $\mathcal{A}$, denoted by
$\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A})$, is defined as
\[\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A})=\{\mathcal {Q}=(q_{i_1\cdots i_m}) \in
\mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}: q_{i\cdots i}= a_{i\cdots i}, |q_{ii_2\cdots
i_m}|\leq |a_{ii_2\cdots i_m}|, i\in N, \delta_{ii_2\cdots
i_m}=0\}.\]
\end{definition}

A sufficient and necessary condition for the point lying on the
boundary of $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$ is given as follows.

\begin{proposition}\label{boundary nec}
Let $\mathcal {A}$ and $v(z)$ be defined as Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}.
 $z\in \partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$ if and only if $v(z)= 0$,
 and there is a sequence of $\{z_j\}_{j=1}^{\infty} \subseteq (\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'$ (i.e., $v(z_j)<0$ for
 all $j\geq 1$) such that $\lim\limits_{j\rightarrow\infty} z_j=z$.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof} Note that $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$ is a compact set in the complex plane.
Hence, from Definition \ref{boundary}, \[\partial\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal
{A})=\overline{\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})}\bigcap
\overline{(\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'}=\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal
{A})\bigcap \overline{(\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'}.\] Furthermore,
by Theorem \ref{theorem3.1}, we have that
 \begin{equation}\label{eq4.1}z\in \overline{(\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'}~if ~and ~only
~if ~v(z)\leq 0.\end{equation} Therefore, if $z\in \partial
\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$,  then, from (\ref{eq3.2}) and
(\ref{eq4.1}), $v(z)= 0$. Note that $(\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'$ is
open and unbounded, then, by (\ref{eq4.1}) and $z\in
\overline{(\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'}$, there is a sequence of
$\{z_j\}_{j=1}^{\infty} \subseteq (\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))' $ such
that $\lim\limits_{j\rightarrow\infty} z_j=z$, where $v(z_j)<0$ for
all $j\geq 1.$

Conversely, it is obvious by assumption that $z\in
\overline{(\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}))'}$ and $z\in
\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})=\overline{\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})}$, that
is, \[z\in \partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}).\] The proof is
completed.
\end{proof}

\begin{proposition}\label{pro 4.2}
For any $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$ and
any $z\in \mathbb{C}$ with $v(z)=0$, there is a tensor $\mathcal
{Q}=(q_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in \Omega(\mathcal{A})$ for which $z$ is an
eigenvalue of $\mathcal {Q}$.  Then
\[ \partial
\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})\subseteq \sigma
(\Omega(\mathcal{A}))\subseteq \sigma
(\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))\subseteq \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}),
\]
where $\sigma (\Omega(\mathcal{A}))=\bigcup\limits_{\mathcal{D}\in
\Omega(\mathcal{A})} \sigma(\mathcal{D})$ and $\sigma
(\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))=\bigcup\limits_{\mathcal{D}\in
\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A})} \sigma(\mathcal{D})$.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof} From Definition \ref{minimal ger}, \ref{equimodular} and  \ref{extended equimodular}, it is obvious that
$\Omega(\mathcal{A})\subseteq \hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A})$ and $\sigma
(\Omega(\mathcal{A}))\subseteq \sigma
(\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))\subseteq \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$.
Hence, we next only prove $\partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal
{A})\subseteq \sigma (\Omega(\mathcal{A}))$.

If $z\in \mathbb{C}$ is such that $v(z)=0$, then, from the proof of
Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}, there is a vector $y=(y_1,\ldots, y_n)^T\geq
0$, $y\neq 0$ such that $\mathcal {B}(z)y=0,$ where $\mathcal
{B}(z)$ is defined as Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}. This implies that for
any $k\in N$
\begin{equation}\label{eq4.2} |z-a_{k\cdots k}|y_k^{m-1} =\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop \delta_{kk_2\cdots
k_m}=0} |a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots y_{k_m}.
\end{equation}
Now, let $\psi_k$ satisfy \[ z-a_{k\cdots k}=|z-a_{k\cdots
k}|e^{\emph{\textbf{i}}\psi_{k}},~ k\in N,
\]
and $\mathcal {Q}=(q_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$, where
\[q_{k\cdots k}=a_{k\cdots k} ~and ~ q_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=|a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|e^{\textbf{\emph{i}}\psi_{k}}, ~k\in N,~\delta_{kk_2\cdots
k_m}=0.\] Hence, from Definition \ref{equimodular}, $\mathcal {Q}\in
\Omega(\mathcal{A})$. Moreover, By considering the $k$-th entry
$(\mathcal{Q}y^{m-1})_k$ of $\mathcal{Q}y^{m-1}$, we have that for
any $k\in N$,
\begin{eqnarray*}(\mathcal{Q}y^{m-1})_k&=&\sum\limits_{k_2,\ldots,k_m\in
N}q_{kk_2\cdots k_m}y_{k_2}\cdots y_{k_m}\\
&=&q_{k\cdots k}y_{k}^{m-1}+ e^{\emph{\textbf{i}}\psi_k}\left(
\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop \delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0}
|a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots y_{k_m}\right)\\
&=&(z-(z-a_{k\cdots k}))y_{k}^{m-1}+
e^{\textbf{\emph{i}}\psi_k}\left( \sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in
N,\atop \delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0}
|a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots y_{k_m}\right)\\
&=&zy_{k}^{m-1}+ e^{\emph{\textbf{i}}\psi_k}\left( -|z-a_{k\cdots
k}|y_{k}^{m-1}+ \sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0}
|a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots y_{k_m}\right)\\
&=& zy_{k}^{m-1}, ~(By~ Equality~ (\ref{eq4.2}))
\end{eqnarray*}
that is,
\[\mathcal{Q}y^{m-1}=zy^{[m-1]}.\]
Note that $y\neq 0$, then $z$ is an eigenvalue of $\mathcal{Q}\in
\Omega(\mathcal{A})$, which shows that $v(z)=0$ implies $z\in
\sigma(\Omega(\mathcal{A}))$. From Proposition \ref{boundary nec},
we have that for each point $z\in \partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal
{A})$, $v(z)=0$, consequently, $z\in \sigma(\Omega(\mathcal{A}))$.
Hence, $\partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})\subseteq \sigma
(\Omega(\mathcal{A})) $. The proof is completed. \end{proof}

For the sets $\sigma (\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))$ and
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, we have the following result.

\begin{proposition}\label{pro 4.3}
Let $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$. Then
\[\sigma (\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))= \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}).\]
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof} From Proposition \ref{pro 4.2}, we have $\sigma (\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))\subseteq \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal
{A})$. Hence, we only prove $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})\subseteq
\sigma (\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))$.

Let $z\in \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$. Then, from Theorem
\ref{theorem3.1}, $v(z)\geq 0$. And from the proof of Lemma
\ref{lemma 2.5}, there is a vector $y=(y_1,\ldots, y_n)^T\geq 0$,
$y\neq 0$ such that \[\mathcal {B}(z)y^{m-1}=v(z)y^{[m-1]},\] where
$\mathcal {B}(z)$ is defined as Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}. Hence for any
$k\in N$, \begin{equation}\label{eq4.3} (|z-a_{k\cdots
k}|+v(z))y_k^{m-1} =\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0} |a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots y_{k_m}
\end{equation}
Now, let $\mathcal {Q}=(q_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$,
with
\[q_{k\cdots k}=a_{k\cdots k} ~and ~ q_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=\mu_k a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}, ~k\in N,~\delta_{kk_2\cdots
k_m}=0,\] where
\[\mu_k=\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
   \frac{\left( \sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0} |a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots
y_{k_m}\right)-v(z)y_k^{m-1}}{\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0} |a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots
y_{k_m}},   & if ~\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0} |a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots y_{k_m}>0,  \\
   1,   &if ~\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0} |a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots
y_{k_m}=0.
\end{array}
\right.\] Furthermore, from Equality (\ref{eq4.3}) and the fact that
both $|z-a_{k\cdots k}|y_k^{m-1}\geq 0$ and $v(z)y_k^{m-1}\geq 0$
hold for any $k\in N$, we easily obtain $0\leq \mu_k \leq 1$ for any
$k\in N$. Hence, \[\mathcal {Q}\in \hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}).\] For
the tensor $\mathcal {Q}$, we have from Equality (\ref{eq4.3}) that
for any $k\in N$,
\begin{eqnarray*}|z-q_{k\cdots k}|y_k^{m-1}&=&|z-a_{k\cdots
k}|y_k^{m-1}\\
&=&\left(\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop \delta_{kk_2\cdots
k_m}=0} |a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots
y_{k_m}\right)-v(z)y_k^{m-1}\\
&=&\mu_k\left(\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0} |a_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots
y_{k_m}\right)\\&=&\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0} |q_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots
y_{k_m},
\end{eqnarray*}
i.e.,
\[|z-q_{k\cdots k}|y_k^{m-1}=\sum\limits_{k_2,\dots,k_m\in N,\atop
\delta_{kk_2\cdots k_m}=0} |q_{kk_2\cdots k_m}|y_{k_2}\cdots y_{k_m}
~for ~any~k\in N.\] Now, the above expression is exactly of the form
of Equality (\ref{eq4.2}) in the proof of Proposition \ref{pro 4.2}.
Hence, similar to the proof of Proposition \ref{pro 4.2}, we have
that there is a tensor $\mathcal {P} \in \Omega(\mathcal{Q})$ such
that $z\in \sigma (\mathcal {P})$. Note that $ \mathcal {P}\in
\Omega(\mathcal{Q})$ and $\mathcal{Q}\in \hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A})$.
Therefore, $\mathcal {P}\in \hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A})$,
consequently, $z\in \sigma ( \hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))$ and
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})\subseteq \sigma
(\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))$. The proof is completed.
\end{proof}

From Propositions \ref{pro 4.2} and \ref{pro 4.3}, we can obtain the
following relationships.

\begin{theorem}\label{theorem 4.1}
Let $\mathcal {A}\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$. Then
\[\partial
\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})\subseteq \sigma
(\Omega(\mathcal{A}))\subseteq \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}).\]
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark} From Proposition \ref{pro 4.3}, we known that $\sigma
(\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))$ completely fills out $\Gamma^R(\mathcal
{A})$, that is,  $\sigma (\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))=
\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$. And from Theorem \ref{theorem 4.1}, we
known that if $\sigma (\Omega(\mathcal{A}))$ is a proper subset of
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$ with $\sigma (\Omega(\mathcal{A}))\neq
\partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, then $\sigma
(\Omega(\mathcal{A}))$ necessarily have internal boundaries in
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$.
\end{remark}

\section{A numerical approximation of Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue
inclusion set}
Unlike Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set
$\Gamma(\mathcal {A})$, or $\Gamma^{r^x}(\mathcal {A})$ of
(\ref{equation2.1}), Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue
inclusion set $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$ of a complex tensor
$\mathcal {A}$ is not easy to determine numerically generally. In
this section, for an irreducible tensor $\mathcal {A}$, we give a
numerical approximation of $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, which
contains $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$. We now give a lemma, which will
be used below.

\begin{lemma} \label{lemma 4.1} Let $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in \mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$ be
irreducible, and $v(z)$ be defined as Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}. Then
for each $i\in N$,
\[v(a_{i\cdots i})>0.\]
Furthermore, for each $a_{i\cdots i}$ and for each real $\theta$
with $0\leq \theta < 2\pi$, let $\tilde{\gamma}_i(\theta)>0$ be the
smallest $\gamma>0$ for which
\begin{equation}\label{eq5.0}\left\{\begin{array}{l}
   v(a_{i\cdots i}+\tilde{\gamma}_i(\theta)e^{\textbf{i}\theta})=0,   \\
~ and~there ~is~ a~ sequence~ of ~\{z_j\}_{j=1}^\infty ~with\\
 \lim\limits_{j\rightarrow\infty} z_j=a_{i\cdots
i}+\tilde{\gamma}_i(\theta)e^{\textbf{i}\theta}~ such ~that~
v(z_j)<0~ for~ all~ j\geq 1.
\end{array}
\right.\end{equation}
 Then, the complex interval $[ a_{i\cdots i}+te^{\textbf{i}\theta}]$, for $0\leq t\leq \tilde{\gamma}_i(\theta) $, is
contained in $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$ for each real $\theta\in
[0,2\pi)$, that is, the set
\[\bigcup\limits_{\theta~\in [0,2\pi) } [ a_{i\cdots i}+te^{\textbf{i}\theta}]_{t=0}^{\tilde{\gamma}_i(\theta)},~i\in N,\] is a subset of
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof} Let $\mathcal {B}(z)=(b_{i_1\cdots i_m})\in
\mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$ be defined as Lemma \ref{lemma 2.5}, where,
\[b_{i\cdots i}=-|z-a_{i\cdots
i}|~and~b_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}=|a_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}|, ~ i\in N,
~\delta_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}=0.\] And let $\mathcal
{C}=(c_{i_1\cdots,i_m})\in \mathbb{R}^{[m,n]}$, where
\[c_{i\cdots i}=\mu-|z-a_{i\cdots i}|~and~c_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}=|a_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}|, ~i\in N, ~\delta_{ii_2\cdots,i_m}=0,\]
$\mu=\max\limits_{i\in N}|z-a_{i\cdots i}|$. Then $B(z)=-\mu\mathcal
{I}+\mathcal {C}$. Since $\mathcal {A}$ is irreducible, $\mathcal
{B}(z)$, also $\mathcal {C}$, is irreducible. Hence, $\mathcal {C}$
is an irreducible nonnegative tensor. From Lemma \ref{lemma 2.2},
there is a positive eigenvector of $\mathcal {C}$ corresponding to
$\rho (\mathcal {C})$. Therefore, similar to the proof of \ref{lemma
2.5}, there is a positive eigenvector of $\mathcal {B}(z)$
corresponding to $v(z)$. Moreover, by Equality (\ref{eq3.1}), that
is,
\[v(z)=\inf\limits_{x>0}\max\limits_{i\in N} \frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1})_i}{x_i^{m-1}},\] we get that for any $z$, there
exists a positive vector $y$ such that for all $j\in N$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq5.1} v(z)=\frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)y^{m-1})_j}{y_j^{m-1}}.\end{equation} Then for any $i\in N$,
take $z=a_{i\cdots i}$ and let $x=(x_1,\ldots,x_n)^T>0$ be such that
for any $j\in N$, $v(a_{i\cdots i})=\frac{(\mathcal
{B}(z)x^{m-1})_j}{x_j^{m-1}}$. In particular,
\[v(a_{i\cdots i})=\frac{(\mathcal {B}(z)x^{m-1})_i}{x_i^{m-1}}=r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A})-|a_{i\cdots i}-a_{i\cdots i}|=r^{x}_i(\mathcal {A}).\]
Since $\mathcal {A}$ is irreducible, we have $r^{x}_i(\mathcal
{A})>0$, consequently, $v(a_{i\cdots i})>0$.

Furthermore, for each $\theta$ with $0\leq \theta< 2\pi$,
$a_{i\ldots i}+te^{\emph{\textbf{i}}\theta}$, for all $t\geq 0$, is
the semi-infinite complex line. Obviously, the function $
v(a_{i\ldots i}+te^{\emph{\textbf{i}}\theta})$ is positive at $t=0$,
is continuous on this line, and is negative outside
$\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$ from Theorem \ref{theorem3.1}. Hence, there
is a smallest $\tilde{\gamma}_i(\theta)>0$ satisfying (\ref{eq5.0}).
And by Proposition \ref{boundary nec}, we get that $a_{i\ldots
i}+\tilde{\gamma}_i(\theta)e^{\textbf{\emph{i}}\theta} \in \partial
\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A}).$ This implies that for each real $\theta$,
[$a_{i\ldots i}$, $a_{i\ldots
i}+\tilde{\gamma}_i(\theta)e^{\textbf{\emph{i}}\theta}$] is a subset
of $\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$. The conclusion follows.
\end{proof}

We now give the following procedure for approximating Minimal
Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set $\Gamma^R(\mathcal
{A})$ for an irreducible tensor $\mathcal {A}=(a_{i_1\cdots,i_m})\in
\mathbb{C}^{[m,n]}$.

\textbf{Procedure of numerical approximation }

Step 1. determine the positive numbers $\{ v(a_{j\cdots j})\}_{j\in
N}$;

Step 2. determine the largest $\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)$ for $0\leq
\theta< 2\pi$, such that $a_{j\cdots
j}+\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)e^{\emph{\textbf{i}}\theta} \in \partial
\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq4.4} v(a_{j\cdots
j}+\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)e^{\emph{\textbf{i}}\theta})=0, ~with~
v(a_{j\cdots
j}+(\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)+\varepsilon)e^{\emph{\textbf{i}}\theta})<
0
\end{equation}
for all sufficiently small $\varepsilon>0$;

Step 3. take the $m$ points $w_{k_{j_\theta}}=a_{j\cdots
j}+\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)e^{\textbf{\emph{i}}\theta} \in
\partial \Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$ for $k_{j_\theta}=1,2,\ldots, m$, and detemine the set $ \bigcap\limits_{k_{j_\theta}=1}^m
\Gamma^{w_{k_{j_\theta}}}(\mathcal {A})$ approximating to
$\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$, where
\[\Gamma^{w_{k_{j_\theta}}}(\mathcal {A})=\bigcup\limits_{i\in N}\{z\in \mathbb{C}:|z-a_{i\cdots i}|\leq |w_{k_{j_\theta}}-a_{i\cdots i}|\}.\]

\begin{remark} \label{remark1} (i) To determine $v(a_{j\cdots j})$, we use Equality (\ref{eq
2.3}) with $z=a_{j\cdots j}$, i.e., \[v(a_{j\cdots
j})=-\mu+\rho(\mathcal {C}),\] where $\mu= \max\limits_{i\in
N}|a_{j\cdots j}-a_{i\cdots i}|$ and $\rho(\mathcal {C})$ is an
eigenvalue of the irreducible nonnegative tensor $\mathcal {C}$
defined as (\ref{eq 2.2}) (note that the irreducibility of $\mathcal
{C}$ is deduced by that of $\mathcal {A}$), and the following method
for calculating $\rho(\mathcal {C})$ (see \cite{Li1,Ng}), i.e., if
for an vector $x^{(0)}> 0$, let $\mathcal {D}=\mathcal {C}+h\mathcal
{I}$, where $h>0$, and let $y^{(0)} = \mathcal
{D}\left(x^{(0)}\right)^{m-1}$,
\[\begin{array}{ll}
x^{(1)}=\frac{\left(y^{(0)}\right)^{[\frac{1}{m-1}]}}{\parallel\left(y^{(0)}\right)^{[\frac{1}{m-1}]}\parallel},&
y^{(1)} = \mathcal {D}\left(x^{(1)}\right)^{m-1},\\
x^{(2)}=\frac{\left(y^{(1)}\right)^{[\frac{1}{m-1}]}}{\parallel\left(y^{(1)}\right)^{[\frac{1}{m-1}]}\parallel},&
y^{(2)} = \mathcal {D}\left(x^{(2)}\right)^{m-1},\\
\vdots &\vdots\\
x^{(k+1)}=\frac{\left(y^{(k)}\right)^{[\frac{1}{m-1}]}}{\parallel\left(y^{(k)}\right)^{[\frac{1}{m-1}]}\parallel},&
y^{(k+1)} = \mathcal {D}\left(x^{(k+1)}\right)^{m-1},~k\geq 2\\
\vdots &\vdots\\
\end{array}\]
and let
\[\underline{\lambda}_k=\min\limits_{x_i^{(k)}>0}
\frac{\left(y^{(k)}\right)_i}{\left(x_i^{(k)}\right)^{m-1}},~
\overline{\lambda}_k=\max\limits_{x_i^{(k)}>0}
\frac{\left(y^{(k)}\right)_i}{\left(x_i^{(k)}\right)^{m-1}},~k=1,2,\ldots,\]
then
\[\underline{\lambda}_1\leq \underline{\lambda}_2\leq \cdots \leq \rho(\mathcal {D})=\rho(\mathcal {C})+h
\leq  \cdots \leq \overline{\lambda}_2\leq \overline{\lambda}_1.\]
moreover, \begin{equation} \lim\limits_{k\longrightarrow
\infty}\underline{\lambda}_k= \rho(\mathcal {D})=\rho(\mathcal
{C})+h=\lim\limits_{k\longrightarrow \infty}\overline{\lambda}_k.
\end{equation}
Hence, we can obtain convergent upper and lower estimates of
$v(a_{j\cdots j})$, which do not need great accuracy for graphing
purpose, as Example \ref{example4.1} shows.

(ii) The numerical estimation of $\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)$. From
Lemma \ref{lemma 4.1}, there is $\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)$ such that
(\ref{eq4.4}) holds. Now, let $z=a_{j\cdots j}$ and
$\tilde{z}=a_{j\cdots
j}+\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)e^{\textbf{i}\theta}$, we have from
Proposition \ref{lemma 4.2} that
\[\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)\geq v(a_{j\cdots j})>0.\] Hence,
$v(a_{j\cdots j}+v(a_{j\cdots j})e^{\textbf{i}\theta})\geq 0$. If
$v(a_{j\cdots j}+v(a_{j\cdots j})e^{\textbf{i}\theta})=0$, then take
\[\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)=v(a_{j\cdots j})\] for which $v(a_{j\cdots j})$ can be determined
by the method of (i), otherwise, $v(a_{j\cdots j}+v(a_{j\cdots
j})e^{\textbf{i}\theta})>0$, then we increase the number
$v(a_{j\cdots j})$ to $v(a_{j\cdots j})+\Delta$, $\Delta>0$, until
$v(a_{j\cdots j}+(v(a_{j\cdots j})+\Delta)e^{\textbf{i}\theta})<0$,
and apply a bisection search to the interval $[v(a_{j\cdots j}),
~v(a_{j\cdots j})+\Delta]$ to determine $\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)$
satisfying (\ref{eq4.4}). Note here that estimates of
$\tilde{\gamma}_j(\theta)$ also do not need great accuracy for
graphing purpose.

(iii) It is obvious that $w_{k_{j_\theta}}$ in Step 3,
$k_{j_\theta}=1,2,\ldots, m$, are not only boundary points of
$\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$, but boundary points of
$\Gamma^{w_{k_{j_\theta}}}(\mathcal {A})$, and that
\[\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})\subseteq \Gamma^{w_{k_{j_\theta}}}(\mathcal {A})\]
which shows that the larger $m$ is, the better
$\Gamma^{w_{k_{j_\theta}}}(\mathcal {A})$ approximates to
$\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$.
\end{remark}

\begin{example} \label{example4.1} Consider the irreducible tensor \[\mathcal {A} = [A(1,:,:),A(2,:,:),A(3,:,:)]\in
\mathbb{C}^{[3,3]},\] where
\[A(1,:,:)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
     2 &  0 &0  \\
      0& 0 &1    \\
      0&   0& 1  \\
\end{array}
\right),~ A(2,:,:)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
     0 &  0 &0  \\
      0& 2 &0    \\
      1&   0& 0  \\
\end{array}
\right), ~A(3,:,:)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
     1 &  1 &0  \\
      0& 1 &0    \\
      0&   0& 1  \\
\end{array}
\right).\] We next give a numerical approximation to
$\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$. By the part (i) of Remark \ref{remark1},
we compute $v(a_{iii})$ for $i=1,2,3$, and get
\[v(a_{111})=v(a_{222})=1.62019803,~v(a_{333})=1.43720383.\] Furthermore,
based on the entries $a_{111}=a_{222}=2$ and $a_{333}=1$, we look
for six points
\[\begin{array}{ll}
w_1=a_{111}+\tilde{\gamma}_1(0),& w_2=a_{333}-\tilde{\gamma}_3(\pi),\\
w_3=a_{111}+\textbf{i}~\tilde{\gamma}_1(\frac{\pi}{2}),&w_4=a_{111}-\textbf{i}~\tilde{\gamma}_1(\frac{3\pi}{2}),\\
w_5=a_{333}+\textbf{i}~\tilde{\gamma}_3(\frac{\pi}{2}),&
w_6=a_{333}-\textbf{i}~\tilde{\gamma}_3(\frac{3\pi}{2})
\end{array}\]
of $\partial\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$, which are found by the method
proposed in the part (ii) of Remark \ref{remark1}, that is,
\[\begin{array}{lll}
w_{1}=3.62019802,& w_{2}=-0.43720383,&w_3=2+\textbf{i}1.86790935,\\
w_4=2-\textbf{i}1.86790935,&
w_5=1+\textbf{i}1.81661895,&w_6=1-\textbf{i}1.81661895.
\end{array}\]
And now $\Gamma(\mathcal {A})$, $\Gamma^{w_{1}}(\mathcal {A})$,
$\Gamma^{w_{2}}(\mathcal {A})$, $\Gamma^{w_{3}}(\mathcal {A})$
$(\Gamma^{w_{3}}(\mathcal {A})=\Gamma^{w_{4}}(\mathcal {A}))$ and
$\Gamma^{w_{5}}(\mathcal {A})$ $(\Gamma^{w_{5}}(\mathcal
{A})=\Gamma^{w_{6}}(\mathcal {A}))$ are given by Figures.1, 2, 3, 4
and 5, respectively. In Figure 6, the set
$\left(\bigcap\limits_{k=1}^6 \Gamma^{w_{k}}(\mathcal {A})\right)$,
which approximates to $\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$, is shown with the
inner boundary, and the boundary of $\Gamma(\mathcal {A})$ is shown
with the outside. The six points $\{ w_k\}_{k=1}^6$ are plotted with
asterisks. As we can see,
$\left(\bigcap\limits_{k=1}^6\Gamma^{w_{k}}(\mathcal{A})\right)
\subset \Gamma(\mathcal {A})$, that is, the set which approximates
to Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set is also
contained in Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set. Also, it
is easy to see that more points of $\partial\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$
are given, the better $\Gamma^{w_{k}}(\mathcal {A})$ approximates to
$\Gamma^R(\mathcal {A})$.

\end{example}

\section{Conclusions} In this paper, we present Minimal Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion
set $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, give a sufficient and necessary
condition for $\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$ by using the
$Perron-Frobenius$ theory of nonnegative tensors, and establish the
relationships between $\partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, $\sigma
(\Omega(\mathcal{A}))$, $\sigma (\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))$ and
$\Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A})$, i.e., \[\partial \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal
{A})\subseteq \sigma (\Omega(\mathcal{A}))\subseteq \sigma
(\hat{\Omega}(\mathcal{A}))= \Gamma^{R}(\mathcal {A}).\] These
results obtained are generalizations of the corresponding results of
matrices \cite {Varga} to higher order tensors. In \cite{Li-Li}, Li
et al. provided two new eigenvalue inclusion sets which are
contained in Ger\v{s}gorin eigenvalue inclusion set for tensors. An
interesting problem arises: what's the relationship between Minimal
Ger\v{s}gorin tensor eigenvalue inclusion set and the sets in
\cite{Li-Li}? In the future, we will research this problem.

\bigskip
\noindent {\bf Acknowledgments.} This work is supported by National
Natural Science Foundations of China (10961027, 71161020, 71162005)
and IRTSTYN.