So I'll preface by saying I'm not entirely sure whether the issue here is comfort with matrix inversion, or its interpretation for this statistical purpose.
That said I think a good way to approach the precision matrix, is through what we can do with it.
Conditionals
$ \bf z = \left[ \begin{matrix}
\bf x \\
\bf y
\end{matrix} \right]
\sim \mathcal N \left(
\left[ \begin{matrix}
\bf a \\
\bf b
\end{matrix} \right]
,
\left[ \begin{matrix}
\boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa} & \boldsymbol \Lambda_{ab}\\
\boldsymbol \Lambda_{ab}^T & \boldsymbol \Lambda_{bb}
\end{matrix} \right]^{-1}
\right) \\$
Then the conditional has a nice form:
$\bf x | \bf y \sim \mathcal N \left(
\bf a + \boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa}^{-1}\boldsymbol \Lambda_{ab}(\bf y - \bf b)
, \ \
\boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa}^{-1}
\right) \\$
Things to observe:
- If $\boldsymbol \Lambda_{ab}$ is zero, $\bf x$ is conditionally independent of $\bf y$. This is useful for modelling sitatuations where, for example, elements of $\bf z$ represent readings at different locations, but the value at each location is only linked to its close neighbours and not to locations far away.
- If $\bf x$ is univariate, $\boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa}^{-1}$ is very easy to find (1/scalar).
Reverse conditionals
Suppose $\bf A$ is a matrix of constants (often provided by a given covariance matrix), and we are given two random vectors along with a prior for one and a conditional/likelihood for the other. See Bishop PRML p.93:
$ \bf y \sim \mathcal N(\bf b, \ \ \boldsymbol \Lambda_{bb}^{-1} ) \\
\bf x | \bf y \sim \mathcal N \left(
\bf A \bf y + \bf a, \ \ \boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa}^{-1}
\right) \\ $
Then we can obtain the reverse conditional and the other marginal:
$ \bf x \sim \mathcal N(\bf A \bf b + \bf a,
\ \ \boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa}^{-1} + \bf A \boldsymbol \Lambda_{bb}^{-1} \bf A^T ) $
$ \bf y | \bf x \sim \mathcal N \left(
\left( \boldsymbol \Lambda_{bb} + \bf A^T \boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa} \bf A \right)^{-1}
\left( \bf A^T \boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa} (\bf x - \bf a ) + \boldsymbol \Lambda_{bb} \bf b \right)
, \ \ \left( \boldsymbol \Lambda_{bb} + \bf A^T \boldsymbol \Lambda_{aa} \bf A \right)^{-1}
\right) $
To see how we might use this suppose $\bf y$ is a common flight path used by planes, and $\bf x$ is the route taken by a particular plane. So that $\bf x | y$ is the route taken by a particular plane, given which path it is on. Then we would think about $\bf y | x$ if we had seen a particular plane flying and wanted to get a picture of what path the pilot was trying to follow.
If we take a simple case where $\bf A = I$ and $\Lambda_{aa}=a \bf I$,$ \Lambda_{bb}=b \bf I$ then:
$ \bf y | \bf x$$ \sim \mathcal N \left(
\left( b + a \right)^{-1}
\left( a \left(\bf{x} - \bf{a} \right) +
b \bf{ b} \right)
, \ \ \left( b + a \right)^{-1}
\right) $
At which point you might notice that if $b >> a$ then the mean of $\bf y$ is much closer to its marginal mean. Whereas if $a >> b$ the mean of $\bf y$ gets moved far more in the direction of the difference of $\bf x$ from its mean.
Hence if $\bf x$ is our observed data, and the information about $\bf y$ our prior, then if $b>>a$ we have a strong prior. That is the data would have to be extremely unusual in order to change our beliefs about the distribution of $\bf y$.
Derivations
I'd suggest checking out the Woodbury matrix identity.
https://github.com/pearcemc/gps/blob/master/MVNs.pdf