MHB How to Prove Stirling Numbers of the First Kind for s(n,3)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter alyafey22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers Stirling
alyafey22
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
1,556
Reaction score
2
HI folks , working on Stirling nums , how to prove ?

$$s(n,3)=\frac{1}{2}(-1)^{n-1}(n-1)!\left(H_{n-1}^2-H_{n-1}^{(2)}\right)
$$

where we define $$H_k^{(n)}= \sum_{m=1}^k \frac{1}{m^n}$$

I don't how to start (Bandit)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
First, let us forget about the sign and work with unsigned Stirling numbers (so on the left you'd have $\left[{n\atop 3}\right]$, and on the right the same except that the factor $(-1)^{n-1}$ vanishes) . The result then will follow immediately.

Now, we have $\left[{n\atop 3}\right] = \left[{n-1\atop 2}\right] + (n-1)\times \left[{n-1\atop 3}\right]$

And here note that $\left[{n\atop 2}\right] = (n-1)! \times H_{n-1}$, a simpler identity. $(*)$

Having the identities above, try proving your identity (in an unsigned version) by induction. Don't forget that you have $H_n^2 = \left(H_{n-1}+1/n\right)^2$ and $H_n^{(2)} = H_{n-1}^{(2)} + 1/n^2$.

$(*)$ This one has a nicer combinatorial intepretation. First remember that $\left[{n\atop k}\right]$ counts the number of permutations having exactly $k$ cycles in its disjoint cycle decomposition.
Now $(n-1)\times H_{n-1} = \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \frac{(n-1)!}{k}$. Here interpret $(n-1)!$ as taking the permutations that fix $n$. Then, for each $k$, let $\pi_1,\ldots,\pi_{n-1},\pi_n=n$ translate into having the cycles $\pi_1\to \ldots \pi_k\to \pi_1$ and $\pi_{k+1}\to \ldots \to \pi_n\to \pi_{k+1}$. Here note that we are overcounting $k$ times (since $\pi_1,\ldots,\pi_k$ ; $\pi_2,\ldots,\pi_k,\pi_1$ ; ... ; $\pi_k,\pi_1,\ldots,\pi_{k-1}$ result int he same cycle structure, we don't have the same problem with the other cycle since $n$ is fixed), hence the division by $k$.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Back
Top