Summation Limits: Understanding When a>b

  • Thread starter Thread starter EngWiPy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Limits Summation
Click For Summary
When evaluating a summation \(\sum_{r=a}^{b}\) with \(a > b\), interpretations vary. One common view is that the summation equals zero, as there are no integers \(n\) satisfying \(a \leq n \leq b\). Others suggest that it could be interpreted differently, similar to integrals, where reversing limits changes the sign. The context of the application can influence the interpretation, particularly in finite calculus. Ultimately, the treatment of such summations depends on the specific mathematical context in which they arise.
EngWiPy
Messages
1,361
Reaction score
61
Hello,

If we get a summation \sum_{r=a}^{b}, where a > b, how to treat this summation?

Regards
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I don't know if it is official notation, but I think it is usually interpret it as just

\sum_{r = b}^a
 
Really? I'd interpret it as 0. That is, I take
\sum_{n=a}^bf(n)
as shorthand for
\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z},a\le n\le b}f(n)
 
CRGreathouse said:
Really? I'd interpret it as 0. That is, I take
\sum_{n=a}^bf(n)
as shorthand for
\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z},a\le n\le b}f(n)

What is zero, the whole summation, or the index r?
 
saeddawoud said:
What is zero, the whole summation, or the index r?

The whole summation.

To perform a sum, you start with zero, then for each value of n that satisfies the condition specified, you add f(n). In this case, there are no such values of n, so the answer remains zero.

That's my interpretation at least. But there may be other opinions.

Incidentally, some computer languages such as C work similarly. A loop of the form for(n=10; n<0; n++) is never executed.
 
Most of the time, it's best to assume the summation is zero, but it really depends on your application. If a sum like this pops up somewhere for some reason, you should interpret it in context to see if it makes sense at all.

In some cases, for instance in finite calculus, it might be more useful to interpret it slightly differently. It is well known that

\int_a^b f(x) dx = -\!\!\!\int_b^a f(x) dx,

and since integrals are sort of like infinite sums, perhaps sums should work similarly. If a &lt; b &lt; c, we have

\sum_{k = a}^b f(k) + \sum_{k = b + 1}^c f(k) = \sum_{k = a}^c f(k).

It might be nice to extend this to cases other than a &lt; b &lt; c. For example, we would have

\sum_{k = a}^{b - 1} f(k) + \sum_{k = b}^a f(k) = \sum_{k = a}^a f(k) = f(a),

which would imply that

\sum_{k = b}^a = f(a) - \sum_{k = a}^{b - 1} = -\!\!\!\sum_{k = a + 1}^{b - 1}.

We would then have

\sum_{k = a}^{a - 1} f(k) = 0,

but

\sum_{k = a}^{a - 2} f(k) = -f(a - 1).

Which interpretation you should choose is up to the application.
 
Last edited:
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K