Combinatorics: 1= ((n+k)Cr)*((1/2)^(n+k)) from k = 0 to n

  • Thread starter Thread starter nomadreid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Combinatorics
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a combinatorial identity involving sums of binomial coefficients and powers of one-half. The original poster presents a sum of the form ((n+k)Cr)*((1/2)^(n+k)) from k = 0 to n, questioning why it equals one. Participants explore various interpretations and identities related to this expression.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants question the notation and whether "r" was a typo, while others clarify the correct formulation of the problem. There are attempts to relate the sum to known identities, such as the binomial expansion and properties of binomial coefficients. Induction is suggested as a potential method for proof, with participants discussing the steps involved.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various interpretations being explored. Some participants have provided insights and alternative formulations, while others express confusion about the original problem statement. There is no explicit consensus on the best approach yet, but several lines of reasoning are being pursued.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the question arose from a broader context related to combinatorial problems, specifically mentioning Banach's matchbox problem. The discussion also highlights the distinction between homework and non-homework queries, as the original poster clarifies that this is not a homework problem.

nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,773
Reaction score
256
(This is not HW, even though it may look a bit like it.)
Using the notation nCr in the combinatorics meaning,
The sum of ((n+k)Cn)*((1/2)^(n+k)) from k = 0 to n equals one. Why?
(I thought it might use the identity (n+1)Cr = nCr+nC(r-1), but that didn't get me anywhere.)
Thanks in advance for any pointers.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
:redface: oops, right. Thanks, Stephen Tashi, for spotting the typo. I have edited it.
So, back to the question...
 
Not sure you've stated it correctly, still. Is this what you wanted?

[itex]1 = 1^n = (\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2} )^n[/itex]

[itex]= \Sigma_{k = 0}^n {{n}\choose{k}} \frac{1}{2^n}[/itex] (binomial expansion)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks, homeomorphic, but no: my title stated it incorrectly (I forgot to edit the title, and now it no longer gives me that option), but I have edited the original question, as Stephen Tashi pointed out. The binomial expansion you suggest only gives me
Sum of (nCk)*((1/2)^(k)) from k = 0 to n
Note the differences to
Sum of ((n+k)Cn)*((1/2)^(n+k)) from k = 0 to n
As a random example, I asked Wolfram Alpha to compute this, with n=7, and it was indeed one. This is not a proof, but a reassurance that I wrote it right.
 
nomadreid said:
(This is not HW, even though it may look a bit like it.)

And if it looks like homework, then it belongs in the homework forums! I'll move it for you :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
OK, thanks. Hope to get a response there. As a side note: the question arose as I was looking at Banach's matchbox problem.
 
reformulated:sum from k=0 to n of (n+k)Ck = 2^n

Or, to put it another way, why is the sum from k=0 to n of ([(n+k)Ck]/2k) equal to 2n?
 
Last edited:
nomadreid said:
Or, to put it another way, why is the sum from k=0 to n of ([(n+k)Ck]/2k) equal to 2n?

I'm confused what the problem actually is. Is this the problem:

[tex]\sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n+k}{k} \frac{1}{2^k} = 2^n[/tex]

because the OP and the title both say completely different things.
 
  • #10
micromass said:
I'm confused what the problem actually is. Is this the problem:

[tex]\sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n+k}{k} \frac{1}{2^k} = 2^n[/tex]

because the OP and the title both say completely different things.

Or is it

[tex]\sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n+k}{n} \frac{1}{2^k} = 2^n[/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #11
They are the same thing, since (n+k)Ck = (n+k)C[(n+k)-n]=(n+k)Cn.
I merely restated it in the two fashions, because perhaps one formulation is easier to prove than the other.
 
  • #12
nomadreid said:
They are the same thing, since (n+k)Ck = (n+k)C[(n+k)-n]=(n+k)Cn.
I merely restated it in the two fashions, because perhaps one formulation is easier to prove than the other.

Oh right, haha. Shame on me for missing that... I'm going to think about this for a while. I assume you have already tried induction?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #13
Thanks for considering it, micromass. Of course I tried induction, but got stuck. This does not mean that induction is not the right way to go; it could very well just mean that I am missing an obvious step in the induction. In the induction step I get
Assume
sum from k=0 to n of ([(n+k)C(k)]/2k) = 2n
Prove
sum from k=0 to n+1 of ([(n+k+1)C(k)]/2k) = 2n+1
Then
sum from k=0 to n+1 of ([(n+k+1)C(k)]/2k) = [sum from k=0 to n of ([(n+k+1)Ck]/2k)]+[(2n+1)C(n+1)/2n+1] and then?
(similarly with the other formulation)
 
  • #14
Thanks very much, micromass! That's a path I had not considered. Very elegant.:cool:
 
  • #15
nomadreid said:
Thanks very much, micromass! That's a path I had not considered. Very elegant.:cool:

Yeah, it's also not entirely correct. You need to do something with the Taylor series

[tex]\frac{y^n}{(1-y)^{n+1}} = \sum_{k=n}^{+\infty} \binom{k}{n} x^k[/tex]

But then you also need some formula for

[tex]\sum_{k=2n}^{+\infty} \binom{k}{n}x^k[/tex]

which I haven't found yet.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #16
Thanks again, micromass; at least for the moment it gives me another line of thought to pursue. Although this is in the "HW & HW-similar" section, it is not HW and so there is no "due date", so if you come up with something anytime in the future, I would be grateful to hear about it.
 
  • #17
OK, a highly nontrivial way is this:

We are interested in

[tex]x_a = \sum_{k=a}^{+\infty} \binom{k}{n} \frac{1}{2^k}[/tex]

If we found this, then your sum is simply ##x_{n} - x_{2n+1}##. Now, it is easily seen that

[tex]x_a = \binom{a}{n} \frac{1}{2^a} {}_2F_1(1,a+1;a-n+1;1/2)[/tex]

Where ##{}_2F_1## is the hypergeometric function (it's really easy to see, it just follows from the definition, I might have made some computation errors tho). So we want to calculate

[tex]{}_2F_1(1,n+1;1;1/2)~\text{and}~{}_2F_1(1,2n+2;n+3;1/2)[/tex]

The former can be calculated by applying a Euler transformation and yields ##2^{n+1}##: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergeometric_function#Fractional_linear_transformations

The first one, I can't find at the moment.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #18
Thanks, micromass. As you wrote, non-trivial, but it gives me some new techniques to get acquainted with.
 
  • #19
micromass said:
The first one, I can't find at the moment.

The second one [tex]{}_2F_1(1,2n+2;n+3;1/2)[/tex] can be calculated by applying Gauss' contiguous relations. Specifically, I'm applying

[tex]\frac{(c-a){}_2F_1(a-1,b;c;z) + (a -c + bz){}_2F_1(a,b;c;z)}{1-z} = (c-1)({}_2F_1(a,b;c-1;z) - {}_2F_1(a,b;c;z))[/tex]

This means that we simply need to find ##{}_2F_1(0,2n+2;n+3;1/2)## which is easily done by applying the definition. We also need to find ##{}_2F_1(1,2n+2;n+2;1/2)##. But this can be done by Gauss' second summation theorem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergeometric_function#Values_at_z.C2.A0.3D.C2.A01.2F2
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #20
Well, this works, but an elementary approach still eludes me.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #22
OK, but that solves it right? I don't get why you say "special case"? I'll write it here for future reference:

You need to find

[tex]\sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n+k}{n} \frac{1}{2^{n+k}}[/tex]

Multiply by ##4^n/4^n## to get

[tex]\frac{1}{4^n} \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n+k}{n} 2^{n-k}[/tex]

Apply the relation ##2^a = \sum_{j=0}^a \binom{a}{j}## to get

[tex]\frac{1}{4^n} \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n+k}{n} \sum_{j=0}^{n-k} \binom{n-k}{j}[/tex]

Switching around the sums and allowing the convention that if ##\binom{a}{b}=0## if ##b>a##, we get

[tex]\frac{1}{4^n} \sum_{j=0}^n \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n-k}{j}\binom{n+k}{n}[/tex]

the relation in Knuth is

[tex]\sum_{k=0}^l \binom{l-k}{m}\binom{q+k}{n} = \binom{l+q+1}{m+n+1}[/tex]

Thus we get

[tex]\frac{1}{4^n} \sum_{j=0}^n \binom{2n+1}{j+n+1}[/tex]

Change variables ##l=j+n+1##:

[tex]\frac{1}{4^n} \sum_{l=n+1}^{2n+1} \binom{2n+1}{l}[/tex]

Applying that ##\binom{2n+1}{l} = \binom{2n+1}{2n+1-l}##, we see that

[tex]\frac{1}{2^{2n-1}} \sum_{l=0}^{2n+1} \binom{2n+1}{l}[/tex]

Again applying ##2^a = \sum_{j=0}^a \binom{a}{j}##, we see that this is equal to

[tex]\frac{1}{2^{2n+1}}2^{2n+1} = 1[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #23
Thanks again, micromass. Yes, the phrase "a special case" was misplaced; I was being overly careful before I had seen the reference in Knuth et al. (I have in fact not yet obtained a copy, so I still need to look at it.) Apparently, as you say, this now solves it, and your exposition is nice and clear -- except that I think you left something out in the line
"Applying that ##\binom{2n+1}{l} = \binom{2n+1}{l}##, we see that..."
 
Last edited:
  • #24
nomadreid said:
Thanks again, micromass. Yes, the phrase "a special case" was misplaced; I was being overly careful before I had seen the reference in Knuth et al. (I have in fact only got a copy of it a few minutes ago, so I still need to look at it.) Apparently, as you say, this now solves it, and your exposition is nice and clear -- except that I think you left something out in the line
"Applying that ##\binom{2n+1}{l} = \binom{2n+1}{l}##, we see that..."

Thank you, that was a typo. Well, all that remains is proving the relation in Knuth, which is not done there. I think an induction proof works, but I don't like that. Consider the function

[tex]f_n(x) = \frac{x^n}{(1-x)^{n+1}}[/tex]

We know the binomial series

[tex]\frac{1}{(1-x)^{n+1}} = \sum_{k=0}^{+\infty} \binom{k+n}{n} x^k[/tex]

Thus

[tex]f_n(x) = \sum_{k=0}^{+\infty} \binom{k}{n} x^k[/tex]

with the usual convention that ##\binom{k}{n} = 0## if ##n>k##

Thus ##xf_n(x)f_m(x) = f_{n+m+1}(x)##. By the Cauchy product of series, we then see that

[tex]\sum_{k=-1}^{+\infty} \binom{k+1}{n+m+1} x^k = \sum_{k=0}^{+\infty} x^k \sum_{j=0}^k \binom{j}{n}\binom{k-j}{m}[/tex]

Thus we see the identity (with additionally substituting ##t=k##

[tex]\sum_{j=0}^k \binom{j}{n}\binom{t-j}{m} = \binom{t+1}{n+m+1}[/tex]

Substituting ##j=l-k##, we get

[tex]\sum_{k=0}^{l-k} \binom{l-k}{n}\binom{t-l+k}{m} = \binom{t+1}{n+m+1}[/tex]

The result now follows after substiting ##q=t-l##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #25
Excellent! Thanks so very much. Yes, I finally got hold of Knuth and was surprised not to find a derivation for the the principle in question. So your explanation definitely fills a gap, completing the answer to my question. I am very grateful.
 
  • #26
nomadreid said:
Excellent! Thanks so very much. Yes, I finally got hold of Knuth and was surprised not to find a derivation for the the principle in question. So your explanation definitely fills a gap, completing the answer to my question. I am very grateful.

Haha, I should be the one grateful here! It was fun and I learned some new techniques! If you have any more of these threads, be sure to shoot me a PM so I can join in the fun :biggrin:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K