Can the Double Summation be Simplified?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Josie Jones
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Simplifying Summation
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
7 replies · 4K views
Josie Jones
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am trying to simplify a double summation and was wondering if anyone would be able to help me.

The sum is

$$ \sum_{i=1}^{n-1} \sum_{j=i+1}^n a_i a_j $$

Is it possible to simplify it down and maybe lose one of the sigmas?

Thank you in advance :)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Yes. Consider ##\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{n-1} \sum_{j=1}^{i-1} a_i a_j##. You can rearrange that until it looks like your original problem. This, plus the original sum, plus the sum over ##a_i^2## can be expressed much shorter, and that gives you a way to express your sum in a more convenient way as well.

All these steps are easier to follow if you draw a table (i,j).
 
mathman said:
There are no [itex]a_i^2[/itex] terms.
Not in the original sum, but if you add these terms (in a suitable way) you can get a nice compact expression. The original sum is then the difference between a nice compact expression and the sum of these squares (with suitable prefactors).
 
so if this $$ \sum_{i=1}^{n-1} \sum_{j=i+1}^n a_i a_j $$ is taking elements from the same vector a of size n and summing the products of adjacent elements, then why can't you write it as $$ \sum_{i=2}^{n} a_i La_i $$ where L is the Lag Operator:

862131b68e4a017e26f0a9c5e34af12fd42ce10c
for all t >1 (or a and index i in this case)
 
Yes it is, the indexes in the OP are such a mess, I guessed at what perhaps was being attempted. The double sum with one index depending on the other does not make any sense to me
 
BWV said:
The double sum with one index depending on the other does not make any sense to me
Huh? That is very common, and the notation is nothing unusual either. The range of elements to be summed over in the inner sum depends on the index of the outer sum. So what?