Stuck on the probability of rolling 'p' with 'n' s-sided dice

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the probability of rolling a specific total 'p' with 'n' s-sided dice using binomial expansion and Taylor series. The key formula derived is $$c = \sum_{k=0}^{n}(-1)^k\binom{n}{k}\binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}$$, which calculates the coefficient for the term $$x^p$$. The participants clarify the summation indices and the logic behind combining coefficients from two different series, ultimately concluding that the correct coefficient arises when terms are factored appropriately.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of binomial coefficients and their properties
  • Familiarity with Taylor series expansions
  • Knowledge of generating functions in combinatorics
  • Experience with polynomial manipulation and coefficient extraction
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of binomial coefficients in depth
  • Learn about generating functions and their applications in probability
  • Explore Taylor series and their role in combinatorial proofs
  • Investigate advanced topics in combinatorial mathematics, such as the principle of inclusion-exclusion
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, statisticians, and students studying combinatorial probability, particularly those interested in dice probability distributions and generating functions.

Potatochip911
Messages
317
Reaction score
3
TL;DR
Having trouble with math involving two series being multiplied together.
Hi, I've been following the derivation of wolfram mathworld for this problem and I'm running into some trouble regarding the summation indices. Currently I am at the step where we have found that (it's pretty much just binomial expansion and taylor series to get to this point)

$$ f(x) = x^n\left[\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\binom{n}{k}(-1)^kx^{sk}\right ]\sum_{l=0}^\infty\binom{n+l-1}{l}x^l $$

Now we're interested in finding the coefficient for the term ##x^p## to find how many possibilities there are to obtain that exponent ##p##. This gives the equality $$p = n + sk + l$$ which we can use to put ##l## in terms of ##k## in the 2nd summation via $$l = p-n-sk$$

This gives

$$x^n\left[\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\binom{n}{k}(-1)^kx^{sk}\right ]\sum_k \binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}x^{p-n-sk} $$

For the new summation indices we have ##k = (p-n-l)/s##, plugging in ##l=0## and ##l=\infty## gives lower index ##(p-n)/s## and upper index ##-\infty## which doesn't make sense. On wolfram they are just claiming that the coefficient of ##x^p## is given by

$$c = \sum_{k=0}^{n}(-1)^k\binom{n}{k}\binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}$$

I'm having trouble understanding this as they are simply multiplying the coefficients for the two different series together. If we consider as an example:

$$\sum_{k=0}^1\binom{3}{k}x^k\sum_{k=0}^1\binom{2}{k}x^k=(1+3x)(1+2x)=1+(3+2)x+6x^2 = 1+5x+6x^2$$

then multiplying the coefficients together only results in the correct coefficient for their proposed solution when there are no "interfering" (idk the proper math word) terms.

To summarize, I'm having trouble understanding how in their solution they don't change the limits of the sum by plugging in ##l##, and I'm also confused by the logic/math surrounding the coefficient of ##x^p##.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let us assume that ##k\leq n## has to hold for possible indices ##l##.

Then ##0\leq k \leq n## and thus ##p-n \leq l=p-n-sk \leq p-n-sn## which gives the claimed boundaries.

Now we check whether they match. Therefore we must check ##l+sk+n = p##.
Our value for ##l## at position ##k## is ##l=p-sk-n## (formula for c), hence ##(p-sk-n)+sk+n=p## holds.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Potatochip911
fresh_42 said:
Let us assume that ##k\leq n## has to hold for possible indices ##l##.

Then ##0\leq k \leq n## and thus ##p-n \leq l=p-n-sk \leq p-n-sn## which gives the claimed boundaries.

I'm still finding this quite confusing. I understand what you're saying here that these are the boundaries for ##l## using ##k##. Then it seems like the last summation can be written as

$$
\sum_{l=p-n}^{p-n-sn}\binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}x^{p-sk-n}
$$

but since ##l## has been replaced we also need to replace the summation index now using ##l=p-sk-n## which results in

$$
p-sk-n=p-n\Rightarrow k=0 \mbox{, for the lower bound} \\
p-sk-n=p-n-sn\Rightarrow k=n\mbox{, for the upper bound}
$$

so the last sum can now be rewritten as

$$
\sum_{k=0}^n \binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}x^{p-sk-n}
$$

Returning to the original expression (I accidentally had the first sum going to infinity in the orginal post)

$$
x^n\left [\sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k}(-1)^kx^{sk}\right ] \sum_{k=0}^n\binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}x^{p-sk-n}
$$

but ##x^p## and ##x^{-n}## are independent of the index ##k## therefore we can pull them out resulting in

$$
x^n\cdot x^{p-n}\left [\sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k}(-1)^kx^{sk}\right ] \sum_{k=0}^n\binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}x^{-sk} \\

= x^p\left [\sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k}(-1)^kx^{sk}\right ] \sum_{k=0}^n\binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}x^{-sk}
$$

Now I'm still struggling to see why we can just take the coefficients from two different sums.

Edit: Ok I see the key insight now. Since we have ##x^p## factored out on the outside then the only terms that will stay at ##x^p## will be terms with ##x^0## which happens when ##k## in the first sum equals ##k## in the second sum. Now it's clear the coefficient is given by ##\sum_{k=0}^{n}(-1)^k\binom{n}{k}\binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}##

Now I'm just stuck understanding this last step that since ##p-sk-n>0## only when ##k <(p-n)/s## that $$\binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n} = \binom{p-sk-1}{n-1}$$
 
Last edited:
Let's write it this way:
\begin{align*}
f(x)&=\left( \sum_{k=0}^\infty a_kx^{n+sk} \right)\cdot \left( \sum_{l=0}^\infty b_lx^l \right)\\
&= \sum_{k,l = 0}^\infty a_kb_lx^{n+sk+l}\\
&=\sum_{p=0}^\infty \sum_{n+sk+l=p} a_kb_lx^p\\
&=\sum_{p=0}^\infty x^p \left( \sum_{k=0}^n \underbrace{ a_kb_{\underbrace{p-n-sk}_{\text{ former }l}} }_{=c_k} \right)
\end{align*}
Now what's left to calculate is
\begin{align*}
c_k&=a_k \cdot b_{p-n-sk}\\&=(-1)^k\cdot \binom{n}{k} \cdot \binom{n+(p-n-sk)-1}{p-n-sk}\\&=(-1)^k\cdot \binom{n}{k} \cdot \binom{p-sk-1}{p-sk-n}
\end{align*}
and ##c=c_p=\sum_{k=0}^n c_k##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Potatochip911

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K