Give a big-O estimate of the product of the first n odd positive integers

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on estimating the big-O notation for the product of the first n odd positive integers, represented as P(n) = 1 × 3 × 5 × ... × (2n-1). The initial estimate provided is O((2n)n), but further refinement leads to a more accurate estimate of O(2n n!). This is derived by comparing the product of odd integers to the factorial of even integers and applying Stirling's formula for precise upper and lower bounds.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of big-O notation and its mathematical implications.
  • Familiarity with factorial growth rates, specifically n! and (2n)!
  • Knowledge of Stirling's formula for approximating factorials.
  • Basic algebraic manipulation of sequences and inequalities.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Stirling's formula in detail for better understanding of factorial approximations.
  • Learn about the properties and applications of big-O notation in algorithm analysis.
  • Explore the relationship between odd and even integer products in combinatorial mathematics.
  • Investigate advanced topics in asymptotic analysis for deeper insights into growth rates.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in computer science, particularly those focusing on algorithm analysis, combinatorial mathematics, and asymptotic notation.

pc2-brazil
Messages
198
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


Give a big-O estimate of the product of the first n odd
positive integers.

Homework Equations


Big-O notation:
f(x) is O(g(x)) if there are constants C and k such that
|f(x)| ≤ C|g(x)| whenever x > k.

The Attempt at a Solution


The product of the first n odd integers can be given by:
P(n)=1\times 3\times 5\times 7\times...\times (2n-1)
For n > 0, no element in the above sequence will be greater than (2n-1). Thus:
1\times 3\times 5\times 7\times...\times (2n-1)\leq (2n-1)\times (2n-1)...\times (2n-1)=(2n-1)^n
So:
P(n) ≤ (2n-1)n whenever n > 0
I could stop here and say that
P(n) is O((2n-1)n)
But to simplify I think I could consider that:
P(n) ≤ (2n-1)n ≤ (2n)n
Thus,
P(n) is O((2n)n)

Is this reasoning correct?

Thank you in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
hi pc2-brazil! :smile:

it's correct, but it's not very accurate, is it? :redface:

do you know a big-O estimate for n! ? :wink:
 
tiny-tim said:
hi pc2-brazil! :smile:

it's correct, but it's not very accurate, is it? :redface:

do you know a big-O estimate for n! ? :wink:
A big-O estimate for n! would be O(nn).
I could say that, for n > 0,
1\times 3\times 5\times 7...\times (2n-1)\leq 1\times 2\times 3\times 4\times...\times (2n-1)=(2n-1)!\leq (2n)!=2^n n!
Thus, P(n) is O(2nn!). Since n! is O(nn), this estimate seems more accurate than the previous one (O(2nnn)).
 
If En = product of the even numbers from 2 to 2n - 2, your product is (2n-1)!/En, and En = 2^(n-1) * (n-1)! Now apply Stirling's formula to both factorials. Note: if you want a true upper bound, rather than just an *estimate* you can use the fact that if St(n) is defined as
sqrt(2pi)*n^(n + 1/2)*exp(-n), then we have St(n) <n! < St(n)*exp(1/(12n)), even if n is not large. You can use the upper bound on (2n-1)! in the numerator and the lower bound on (n-1)! in the denominator.

RGV

sqrt(2pi)*n
 

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K