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

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around estimating the big-O notation for the product of the first n odd positive integers, represented as P(n) = 1 × 3 × 5 × ... × (2n-1). Participants explore various approaches to derive an accurate estimate.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to establish an upper bound for P(n) and considers simplifications to derive a big-O estimate. Some participants question the accuracy of the initial estimate and suggest comparing it to known estimates for n!. Others introduce Stirling's formula as a method to refine the estimation further.

Discussion Status

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of distinguishing between estimates and true upper bounds, indicating a nuanced understanding of big-O notation in the context of factorial growth rates.

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:
[tex]P(n)=1\times 3\times 5\times 7\times...\times (2n-1)[/tex]
For n > 0, no element in the above sequence will be greater than (2n-1). Thus:
[tex]1\times 3\times 5\times 7\times...\times (2n-1)\leq (2n-1)\times (2n-1)...\times (2n-1)=(2n-1)^n[/tex]
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,
[tex]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![/tex]
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