Can somebody look over my proof? (Asymptotic notation and algorithms)

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 2K views
scorpion4377
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hey. I'm self studying my way through an algorithms book, and one of the questions at the end of a section is to prove that [itex]log(n!) \in \Theta (n log(n))[/itex]. I wrote up what I believe is a valid proof. However, I don't have much experience writing formal proofs (and even less experience with having my proofs corrected by professionals), so it could very well be invalid/lingered with errors. Can somebody take a quick look at it and comment on any mistakes that may exist? Can you comment on my style? Any advice would be appreciated.

Here is my write-up. I apologize for not using the built-in equation editor.

http://i.imgur.com/iyAto.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think Stirling's formula is unnecessary here. An asymptotic expression for [itex]\log(n!)[/itex] can be obtained as follows:
[tex]\log(n!)=\sum_{k=1}^{n}\log(k) \sim \int_{1}^{n}\log(x)dx[/tex]
The integral on the right side can be evaluated using integration by parts:
[tex]\int \log(x)dx = x\log(x) - \int dx = x\log(x)-x+C[/tex]
and this yields
[tex]\log(n!) \sim n\log(n)-n \sim n\log(n)[/tex]
Can you take it from there?
 
That wouldn't be rigorous, would it? In my proof, I kept the error terms and treated them rigorously.

EDIT: The point of the problem is to proof the asymptotic behavior of the function, so it would be self defeating to use its asymptotic form. Please correct me if I am wrong, though.
 
Last edited:
You can get the error bounds from post #2.
$$\log(n!) = \sum_{k=2}^n \log k$$
I changed the lower limit since ##\log 1 = 0##.

Because ##\log## is a monotonic function you can bracket the sum by two integrals
$$\int_2^n \log (x-1)\,dx < \sum_{k=2}^n \log k < \int_2^n \log x\,dx$$

Draw a picture of the integrals and the sum as a set of rectangles, if you can't see where that came from.
 
I see! That definitely looks like a valid proof, too. The book that I'm using mentioned bounding functions using integrals, but for some reason told me to use Sterling's formula to prove the theorem.