Proving asymptotics to sequences

CRGreathouse
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
2,832
Reaction score
0
Suppose I have a sequence

a_0 = 1

a_n = \sum_{k=1}^n f(k)\cdot a_{n-k}

where f(n) is a known function (in binomial coefficients, powers, and the like).

In general, how would I go about proving that a_n\sim g(n)? I'm working on more closely estimating the function by calculating its value for large n, along with first and second differences. (Suggestions on better methods are welcome, though I think I'm nearly there -- the second differences look suspiciously hyperbolic.)

Any help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
umm..if we had the sequence :

a_n +b_n = \sum_{k=1}^n f(k)\cdot a_{n-k}

replace the sum by an integral so:

a(n)+b(n) = \int_{k=1}^n dkf(k)a(n-k)

if you obtain A(s) F(s) and B(s) as the Laplace transform of a(n) b(n) and f(k)

A(s)+B(s)=F(s)A(s) (using the properties of "convolution" )

invertng you could get an asymptotic expression for a(n)
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
Back
Top