Explicit formula for Euler zigzag numbers(Up/down numbers)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the derivation of an explicit formula for Euler zigzag numbers, also known as up/down numbers, which represent the number of alternating permutations for n elements. Participants explore the novelty of the formula, its computational efficiency, and its relation to existing mathematical concepts such as Entringer numbers and other sequences.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a new explicit formula for Euler zigzag numbers and questions its originality, seeking references if it is already known.
  • Another participant mentions the existence of Entringer numbers, suggesting a potential connection but noting they may not be the same as the Euler zigzag numbers.
  • A third participant points out that while there are many formulas listed in Sloane's sequences, the presented formula does not appear to be directly included, though it may be represented in a different form.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the computational efficiency of the new formula compared to existing methods, with a specific example illustrating longer computation times.
  • One participant clarifies their interest in the explicit form of the formula rather than its computational efficiency, highlighting the relationship of zigzag numbers to recurrence relations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the originality of the formula and its computational efficiency. There is no consensus on whether the formula is new or if it has been previously established in the literature.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various mathematical resources and sequences, indicating a potential complexity in the relationships between different number sequences and their representations. The discussion highlights the need for clarity on definitions and the explicit forms of mathematical expressions.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to mathematicians and researchers focused on combinatorial mathematics, number theory, and those exploring the properties of permutations and related sequences.

ross_tang
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
I have derived an explicit formula for the http://mathworld.wolfram.com/EulerZigzagNumber.html" , the number of alternating permutations for n elements:
[tex]A_j=i^{j+1}\sum _{n=1}^{j+1} \sum _{k=0}^n \frac{C_k^n(n-2k)^{j+1}(-1)^k}{2^ni^nn}[/tex]

For details, please refer to my article in http://www.voofie.com" :

http://www.voofie.com/content/117/an-explicit-formula-for-the-euler-zigzag-numbers-updown-numbers-from-power-series/"

I would like to ask, if my formula is new, or is it a well known result? Since I can't find it in Wikipedia or MathWorld. If it is an old formula, can anyone give me some reference to it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
There are many formulas at Sloane's http://www.research.att.com/~njas/sequences/A000111 though I don't see yours, at least directly. But it may be there in disguised form.

Computationally, your formula is not competitive with some of the others listed there. For example, given

Code:
a(n)=local(v=[1], t); if(n<0, 0, for(k=2, n+2, t=0; v=vector(k, i, if(i>1, t+=v[k+1-i])));v[2])
A(j)=I^(j+1)*sum(n=1,j+1,sum(k=0,n,binomial(n,k)*(n-2*k)^(j+1)*(-1)^k/2^n/I^n/n))
your code A(500) takes four times longer than Somos' code a(500). I don't know if yet more efficient code exists.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@arildno
Thank you for the link. I haven't read the "Entringer numbers" before. But I don't found explicit formula, and seems the Euler zigzag number is it's special case.

@CRGreathouse
I have read the link you send me before. Thank you. First, I found out the formula, not because it is computationally efficient. I am interested in the explicit form of it. Since the zigzag number sequence is solution to a few number of recurrence relation. And the Somo's code you mentioned used recurrence relation too. But I found none explicit form in the link.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
4K