MHB How to derive a recurrence relation from explicit form

Click For Summary
To derive a recurrence relation from an explicit formula, one can start by substituting the closed form into the recurrence relation. The explicit form provided is P_N = (A^N/N!)/(Σ(A^x/x!)), while the recurrence relation is P_i = (A P_{i-1})/(i + A P_{i-1}) for i=1 to N. It is suggested that the recurrence can be expressed as 1/P_i = (i/(A P_{i-1})) + 1, which may simplify the derivation. The discussion indicates that algebraic manipulation can be sufficient to establish the recurrence relation. Overall, the thread emphasizes the importance of understanding both forms to facilitate the derivation process.
find_the_fun
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
I am given a formula in explicit form and as a recurrence relation. It is asked to derive the recurrence relation from the explicit form. How is this done?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the closed, or explicit, form?
 
closed: [math]P_N=\frac{\frac{A^N}{N!}}{\sum\limits_{x=0}^N \frac{A^x}{x!}}[/math]

recurrence: [math]P_i = \frac{A p_{i-1}}{i+A p_{i-1}}[/math] for i=1 to N
 
Last edited:
I was hoping you would post a closed form solution in the form:

$$A_n=\sum_{k=0}^m\left(c_kr_k^n\right)$$

Leading to a linear recurrence.

I will have to defer here to someone more knowledgeable in this field. :D
 
find_the_fun said:
recurrence: [math]P_i = \frac{A p_{i-1}}{i+A p_{i-1}}[/math] for i=1 to N
I assume $P_{i-1}$ should be written with a capital $P$ in the right-hand side.

I'll have to think more how to derive the recurrence formula, but it is easy to prove it once it is known: just substitute the closed formula into it. It is probably easier to work with
\[
\frac{1}{P_i}=\frac{i}{AP_{i-1}}+1.
\]
 
Can this be done using nothing but algebraic manipulation? If so, I think I found a way.
 
Greetings, I am studying probability theory [non-measure theory] from a textbook. I stumbled to the topic stating that Cauchy Distribution has no moments. It was not proved, and I tried working it via direct calculation of the improper integral of E[X^n] for the case n=1. Anyhow, I wanted to generalize this without success. I stumbled upon this thread here: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-to-prove-the-cauchy-distribution-has-no-moments.992416/ I really enjoyed the proof...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K