Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the identities involving Stirling numbers of the first kind, denoted as $s_{n,k}$, and the second kind, denoted as $S_{n,k}$. Participants explore the validity of a specific identity and its implications, as well as related mathematical properties and references.
Discussion Character
- Technical explanation
- Debate/contested
- Mathematical reasoning
Main Points Raised
- One participant, bkarpuz, requests a proof for the identity $\sum_{j=k}^{n}S(n,j)s(j,k)=\sum_{j=k}^{n}s(n,j)S(j,k)=\delta _{{n,k}}$.
- Another participant, PaulRS, asserts that the stated result is incorrect and proposes a corrected version involving alternating signs: $\sum_{j=k}^n (-1)^{n-j} S(n,j) s(j,k) = \sum_{j=k}^n (-1)^{n-j} s(n,j) S(j,k) =\delta_{n,k}$.
- PaulRS provides a detailed derivation involving generating functions and references to literature, including "Analytic Combinatorics" and "Generatingfunctionology".
- Bkarpuz counters by referencing the DLMF and claims to have verified the original identity through computation, suggesting a direct computation exists.
- Bkarpuz acknowledges a potential misunderstanding regarding the signed version of Stirling numbers and indicates a resolution in their definitions.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express disagreement regarding the correctness of the initial identity. While PaulRS presents a corrected identity, bkarpuz maintains that their original formulation holds, leading to an unresolved debate on the matter.
Contextual Notes
Participants reference specific mathematical literature and computations to support their claims, indicating a reliance on definitions and interpretations of Stirling numbers that may vary.