Combinatorics- Stirling numbers of second kind Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate...
Is the Standard Deduction better than Itemized when both are the same amount?
Bonus calculation: Am I making a mountain out of a molehill?
How to motivate offshore teams and trust them to deliver?
Is there a documented rationale why the House Ways and Means chairman can demand tax info?
When to stop saving and start investing?
Should gear shift center itself while in neutral?
Antler Helmet: Can it work?
What are the motives behind Cersei's orders given to Bronn?
Do you forfeit tax refunds/credits if you aren't required to and don't file by April 15?
What is a Meta algorithm?
List *all* the tuples!
Does surprise arrest existing movement?
Did Kevin spill real chili?
Is there a Spanish version of "dot your i's and cross your t's" that includes the letter 'ñ'?
Why was the term "discrete" used in discrete logarithm?
If a contract sometimes uses the wrong name, is it still valid?
How widely used is the term Treppenwitz? Is it something that most Germans know?
Sorting numerically
What are 'alternative tunings' of a guitar and why would you use them? Doesn't it make it more difficult to play?
Is it true that "carbohydrates are of no use for the basal metabolic need"?
Doubts about chords
Java 8 stream max() function argument type Comparator vs Comparable
What is the longest distance a 13th-level monk can jump while attacking on the same turn?
What is the musical term for a note that continously plays through a melody?
Combinatorics- Stirling numbers of second kind
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Proving function for Stirling Numbers of the Second KindStirling Numbers of the Second KindStirling Numbers second KindClosed form for the Stirling numbers of the second kind.Maximizing Stirling numbers of the second kindstirling numbers of second kindStirling Numbers of second kind defined in terms of coefficientsStirling numbers of the second kind - proofSummation of Stirling numbers of second kindProduct of Stirling numbers of second kind
$begingroup$
I am looking for an approximation of $S(n,n/2)$ where $S$ denotes the second stirling numbers. The wikipedia article gives quite a few approximations but they do not fit my problem. I now tried to Plot the stirling numbers $S(n,n/2)$ in mathematica for $n$ up to about 10000 and fitted them. This way I received $log(S(n,n/2)) = 0.99n/2log(n/2) + + 0.82n - 0.62 log(n)$. This model fits pretty good however I have no idea how to justify it or how to approximate the value of $S(n,n/2)$ in another way. Thanks for any tips!!
combinatorics stirling-numbers
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am looking for an approximation of $S(n,n/2)$ where $S$ denotes the second stirling numbers. The wikipedia article gives quite a few approximations but they do not fit my problem. I now tried to Plot the stirling numbers $S(n,n/2)$ in mathematica for $n$ up to about 10000 and fitted them. This way I received $log(S(n,n/2)) = 0.99n/2log(n/2) + + 0.82n - 0.62 log(n)$. This model fits pretty good however I have no idea how to justify it or how to approximate the value of $S(n,n/2)$ in another way. Thanks for any tips!!
combinatorics stirling-numbers
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am looking for an approximation of $S(n,n/2)$ where $S$ denotes the second stirling numbers. The wikipedia article gives quite a few approximations but they do not fit my problem. I now tried to Plot the stirling numbers $S(n,n/2)$ in mathematica for $n$ up to about 10000 and fitted them. This way I received $log(S(n,n/2)) = 0.99n/2log(n/2) + + 0.82n - 0.62 log(n)$. This model fits pretty good however I have no idea how to justify it or how to approximate the value of $S(n,n/2)$ in another way. Thanks for any tips!!
combinatorics stirling-numbers
$endgroup$
I am looking for an approximation of $S(n,n/2)$ where $S$ denotes the second stirling numbers. The wikipedia article gives quite a few approximations but they do not fit my problem. I now tried to Plot the stirling numbers $S(n,n/2)$ in mathematica for $n$ up to about 10000 and fitted them. This way I received $log(S(n,n/2)) = 0.99n/2log(n/2) + + 0.82n - 0.62 log(n)$. This model fits pretty good however I have no idea how to justify it or how to approximate the value of $S(n,n/2)$ in another way. Thanks for any tips!!
combinatorics stirling-numbers
combinatorics stirling-numbers
edited Mar 19 '17 at 13:25
user404302
asked Mar 19 '17 at 7:22
user404302user404302
244
244
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Looking at sequence $A007820$ in $OEIS$, there is an asymptotics by Vaclav Kotesovec (2011) which write
$$left{{2p atop p}right}simfrac{2^{2 p-frac{1}{2}} e^{-p} left(frac{p}{(2-z) z}right)^p}{sqrt{pi }
sqrt{p (z-1)}}qquad text{where}qquad z=2+Wleft(-frac{2}{e^2}right)approx 1.59362$$ Replacing $z$ by its numerical value, this gives
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)approx p log (p)+0.820761 p-0.5 log (p)-0.658184$$
Edit
Repeating the curve fit for $100 leq pleq 5000$, what I obtained is
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)=1. p log (p)+0.820757 p-0.49903 log (p)-0.663801$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hi Claude, thanks for your answer!! I looked up that new paper, however honestly speaking I have difficulties understanding the Notation there. He seems to denote the stirling numbers by $S_{n,n+k}$ making the approximation you mention above. However I do not unterstand that, as $n+k$ can not be the second index of the stirling number, which should be less than the first
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:49
$begingroup$
or is the second index my first index and then you make the shift $n rightarrow n-k$?
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:52
$begingroup$
Thank you Claude for the info about this sequence
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 22 '17 at 9:20
1
$begingroup$
You are welcome ! $OEIS$ is a fantastic place to visit, be sure.
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Mar 22 '17 at 9:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wikipedia gives lower and upper bounds $L(n,k)$ and $U(n,k)$ for $left{n atop kright}$. For $k = frac n2$, dropping some less-significant factors in $L(n,k)$, we get $$left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2} < left{n atop n/2right} < binom{n}{n/2} left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2}$$
so
$$frac n2 log_2 frac n2 < log_2 left{n atop n/2right} < frac n2 log_2 frac n2 + n.$$
This confirms at least the leading term of your estimate, though we need better bounds if we want to improve it and get the coefficient of $n$ right: these bounds are genuinely off by a factor of $2^n cdot operatorname{poly}(n)$, which is why I take the log base $2$ above.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It already helps a lot, thank you!
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 7:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For large $n$, and for $v=n/m $ constant,
we have the following known precise asymptotic approximation (my deduction here):
$$ S_{n,m} approx binom{n}{m} frac{(n-m)!}{sqrt{2 pi n (lambda -v+1)}}
frac{(2-lambda)^m}{lambda^{n-m}} tag1$$
where $lambda$ is the positive root of $ lambda = v (1-e^{-lambda}) $ (explicitly: $lambda=v+W(-v /e^{v})$ where $W()$ is the Lambert W function, first branch).
In our case, with $n=2m$, $v=2$, $lambda= 1.593624260040cdots$, so
$$ S_{2m,m}approx binom{2m}{m} frac{m!}{sqrt{4 pi m (lambda -1)}}frac{1}{(2lambda - lambda^2)^m} tag2$$
Plugging the Stirling approximation for the factorials we get
$$ log(S_{2m,m}) approx m log m + beta , m - frac12 log(m) + gamma + o(1) tag3$$
with $beta = -log( frac{2 lambda -lambda^2}{4})-1 =0.820760609$, and
$gamma = -frac12 log(2 pi ,(lambda-1)) = -0.65818417389$
This coincides with Claude Leibovici's answer.
Some computed values of $log(S_{2m,m})$ along with the approximation $(3)$:
m log(S) approx abs err
10 29.408950 29.423980 0.015031
20 74.166315 74.173807 0.007493
40 177.879238 177.882979 0.003741
60 292.198461 292.200954 0.002493
80 413.371913 413.373782 0.001869
100 539.630815 539.632310 0.001495
120 669.937107 669.938352 0.001246
140 803.606351 803.607419 0.001068
160 940.152803 940.153737 0.000934
180 1079.213650 1079.214480 0.000830
200 1220.507505 1220.508252 0.000747
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2193227%2fcombinatorics-stirling-numbers-of-second-kind%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Looking at sequence $A007820$ in $OEIS$, there is an asymptotics by Vaclav Kotesovec (2011) which write
$$left{{2p atop p}right}simfrac{2^{2 p-frac{1}{2}} e^{-p} left(frac{p}{(2-z) z}right)^p}{sqrt{pi }
sqrt{p (z-1)}}qquad text{where}qquad z=2+Wleft(-frac{2}{e^2}right)approx 1.59362$$ Replacing $z$ by its numerical value, this gives
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)approx p log (p)+0.820761 p-0.5 log (p)-0.658184$$
Edit
Repeating the curve fit for $100 leq pleq 5000$, what I obtained is
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)=1. p log (p)+0.820757 p-0.49903 log (p)-0.663801$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hi Claude, thanks for your answer!! I looked up that new paper, however honestly speaking I have difficulties understanding the Notation there. He seems to denote the stirling numbers by $S_{n,n+k}$ making the approximation you mention above. However I do not unterstand that, as $n+k$ can not be the second index of the stirling number, which should be less than the first
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:49
$begingroup$
or is the second index my first index and then you make the shift $n rightarrow n-k$?
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:52
$begingroup$
Thank you Claude for the info about this sequence
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 22 '17 at 9:20
1
$begingroup$
You are welcome ! $OEIS$ is a fantastic place to visit, be sure.
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Mar 22 '17 at 9:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Looking at sequence $A007820$ in $OEIS$, there is an asymptotics by Vaclav Kotesovec (2011) which write
$$left{{2p atop p}right}simfrac{2^{2 p-frac{1}{2}} e^{-p} left(frac{p}{(2-z) z}right)^p}{sqrt{pi }
sqrt{p (z-1)}}qquad text{where}qquad z=2+Wleft(-frac{2}{e^2}right)approx 1.59362$$ Replacing $z$ by its numerical value, this gives
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)approx p log (p)+0.820761 p-0.5 log (p)-0.658184$$
Edit
Repeating the curve fit for $100 leq pleq 5000$, what I obtained is
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)=1. p log (p)+0.820757 p-0.49903 log (p)-0.663801$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Hi Claude, thanks for your answer!! I looked up that new paper, however honestly speaking I have difficulties understanding the Notation there. He seems to denote the stirling numbers by $S_{n,n+k}$ making the approximation you mention above. However I do not unterstand that, as $n+k$ can not be the second index of the stirling number, which should be less than the first
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:49
$begingroup$
or is the second index my first index and then you make the shift $n rightarrow n-k$?
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:52
$begingroup$
Thank you Claude for the info about this sequence
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 22 '17 at 9:20
1
$begingroup$
You are welcome ! $OEIS$ is a fantastic place to visit, be sure.
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Mar 22 '17 at 9:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Looking at sequence $A007820$ in $OEIS$, there is an asymptotics by Vaclav Kotesovec (2011) which write
$$left{{2p atop p}right}simfrac{2^{2 p-frac{1}{2}} e^{-p} left(frac{p}{(2-z) z}right)^p}{sqrt{pi }
sqrt{p (z-1)}}qquad text{where}qquad z=2+Wleft(-frac{2}{e^2}right)approx 1.59362$$ Replacing $z$ by its numerical value, this gives
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)approx p log (p)+0.820761 p-0.5 log (p)-0.658184$$
Edit
Repeating the curve fit for $100 leq pleq 5000$, what I obtained is
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)=1. p log (p)+0.820757 p-0.49903 log (p)-0.663801$$
$endgroup$
Looking at sequence $A007820$ in $OEIS$, there is an asymptotics by Vaclav Kotesovec (2011) which write
$$left{{2p atop p}right}simfrac{2^{2 p-frac{1}{2}} e^{-p} left(frac{p}{(2-z) z}right)^p}{sqrt{pi }
sqrt{p (z-1)}}qquad text{where}qquad z=2+Wleft(-frac{2}{e^2}right)approx 1.59362$$ Replacing $z$ by its numerical value, this gives
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)approx p log (p)+0.820761 p-0.5 log (p)-0.658184$$
Edit
Repeating the curve fit for $100 leq pleq 5000$, what I obtained is
$$logleft(left{{2p atop p}right}right)=1. p log (p)+0.820757 p-0.49903 log (p)-0.663801$$
edited Mar 21 '17 at 6:46
answered Mar 19 '17 at 10:31
Claude LeiboviciClaude Leibovici
126k1158135
126k1158135
$begingroup$
Hi Claude, thanks for your answer!! I looked up that new paper, however honestly speaking I have difficulties understanding the Notation there. He seems to denote the stirling numbers by $S_{n,n+k}$ making the approximation you mention above. However I do not unterstand that, as $n+k$ can not be the second index of the stirling number, which should be less than the first
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:49
$begingroup$
or is the second index my first index and then you make the shift $n rightarrow n-k$?
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:52
$begingroup$
Thank you Claude for the info about this sequence
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 22 '17 at 9:20
1
$begingroup$
You are welcome ! $OEIS$ is a fantastic place to visit, be sure.
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Mar 22 '17 at 9:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Hi Claude, thanks for your answer!! I looked up that new paper, however honestly speaking I have difficulties understanding the Notation there. He seems to denote the stirling numbers by $S_{n,n+k}$ making the approximation you mention above. However I do not unterstand that, as $n+k$ can not be the second index of the stirling number, which should be less than the first
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:49
$begingroup$
or is the second index my first index and then you make the shift $n rightarrow n-k$?
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:52
$begingroup$
Thank you Claude for the info about this sequence
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 22 '17 at 9:20
1
$begingroup$
You are welcome ! $OEIS$ is a fantastic place to visit, be sure.
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Mar 22 '17 at 9:26
$begingroup$
Hi Claude, thanks for your answer!! I looked up that new paper, however honestly speaking I have difficulties understanding the Notation there. He seems to denote the stirling numbers by $S_{n,n+k}$ making the approximation you mention above. However I do not unterstand that, as $n+k$ can not be the second index of the stirling number, which should be less than the first
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:49
$begingroup$
Hi Claude, thanks for your answer!! I looked up that new paper, however honestly speaking I have difficulties understanding the Notation there. He seems to denote the stirling numbers by $S_{n,n+k}$ making the approximation you mention above. However I do not unterstand that, as $n+k$ can not be the second index of the stirling number, which should be less than the first
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:49
$begingroup$
or is the second index my first index and then you make the shift $n rightarrow n-k$?
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:52
$begingroup$
or is the second index my first index and then you make the shift $n rightarrow n-k$?
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 10:52
$begingroup$
Thank you Claude for the info about this sequence
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 22 '17 at 9:20
$begingroup$
Thank you Claude for the info about this sequence
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 22 '17 at 9:20
1
1
$begingroup$
You are welcome ! $OEIS$ is a fantastic place to visit, be sure.
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Mar 22 '17 at 9:26
$begingroup$
You are welcome ! $OEIS$ is a fantastic place to visit, be sure.
$endgroup$
– Claude Leibovici
Mar 22 '17 at 9:26
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wikipedia gives lower and upper bounds $L(n,k)$ and $U(n,k)$ for $left{n atop kright}$. For $k = frac n2$, dropping some less-significant factors in $L(n,k)$, we get $$left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2} < left{n atop n/2right} < binom{n}{n/2} left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2}$$
so
$$frac n2 log_2 frac n2 < log_2 left{n atop n/2right} < frac n2 log_2 frac n2 + n.$$
This confirms at least the leading term of your estimate, though we need better bounds if we want to improve it and get the coefficient of $n$ right: these bounds are genuinely off by a factor of $2^n cdot operatorname{poly}(n)$, which is why I take the log base $2$ above.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It already helps a lot, thank you!
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 7:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wikipedia gives lower and upper bounds $L(n,k)$ and $U(n,k)$ for $left{n atop kright}$. For $k = frac n2$, dropping some less-significant factors in $L(n,k)$, we get $$left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2} < left{n atop n/2right} < binom{n}{n/2} left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2}$$
so
$$frac n2 log_2 frac n2 < log_2 left{n atop n/2right} < frac n2 log_2 frac n2 + n.$$
This confirms at least the leading term of your estimate, though we need better bounds if we want to improve it and get the coefficient of $n$ right: these bounds are genuinely off by a factor of $2^n cdot operatorname{poly}(n)$, which is why I take the log base $2$ above.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
It already helps a lot, thank you!
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 7:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wikipedia gives lower and upper bounds $L(n,k)$ and $U(n,k)$ for $left{n atop kright}$. For $k = frac n2$, dropping some less-significant factors in $L(n,k)$, we get $$left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2} < left{n atop n/2right} < binom{n}{n/2} left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2}$$
so
$$frac n2 log_2 frac n2 < log_2 left{n atop n/2right} < frac n2 log_2 frac n2 + n.$$
This confirms at least the leading term of your estimate, though we need better bounds if we want to improve it and get the coefficient of $n$ right: these bounds are genuinely off by a factor of $2^n cdot operatorname{poly}(n)$, which is why I take the log base $2$ above.
$endgroup$
Wikipedia gives lower and upper bounds $L(n,k)$ and $U(n,k)$ for $left{n atop kright}$. For $k = frac n2$, dropping some less-significant factors in $L(n,k)$, we get $$left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2} < left{n atop n/2right} < binom{n}{n/2} left(frac{n}{2}right)^{n/2}$$
so
$$frac n2 log_2 frac n2 < log_2 left{n atop n/2right} < frac n2 log_2 frac n2 + n.$$
This confirms at least the leading term of your estimate, though we need better bounds if we want to improve it and get the coefficient of $n$ right: these bounds are genuinely off by a factor of $2^n cdot operatorname{poly}(n)$, which is why I take the log base $2$ above.
answered Mar 19 '17 at 7:48
Misha LavrovMisha Lavrov
49.6k759109
49.6k759109
$begingroup$
It already helps a lot, thank you!
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 7:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It already helps a lot, thank you!
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 7:54
$begingroup$
It already helps a lot, thank you!
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 7:54
$begingroup$
It already helps a lot, thank you!
$endgroup$
– user404302
Mar 19 '17 at 7:54
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For large $n$, and for $v=n/m $ constant,
we have the following known precise asymptotic approximation (my deduction here):
$$ S_{n,m} approx binom{n}{m} frac{(n-m)!}{sqrt{2 pi n (lambda -v+1)}}
frac{(2-lambda)^m}{lambda^{n-m}} tag1$$
where $lambda$ is the positive root of $ lambda = v (1-e^{-lambda}) $ (explicitly: $lambda=v+W(-v /e^{v})$ where $W()$ is the Lambert W function, first branch).
In our case, with $n=2m$, $v=2$, $lambda= 1.593624260040cdots$, so
$$ S_{2m,m}approx binom{2m}{m} frac{m!}{sqrt{4 pi m (lambda -1)}}frac{1}{(2lambda - lambda^2)^m} tag2$$
Plugging the Stirling approximation for the factorials we get
$$ log(S_{2m,m}) approx m log m + beta , m - frac12 log(m) + gamma + o(1) tag3$$
with $beta = -log( frac{2 lambda -lambda^2}{4})-1 =0.820760609$, and
$gamma = -frac12 log(2 pi ,(lambda-1)) = -0.65818417389$
This coincides with Claude Leibovici's answer.
Some computed values of $log(S_{2m,m})$ along with the approximation $(3)$:
m log(S) approx abs err
10 29.408950 29.423980 0.015031
20 74.166315 74.173807 0.007493
40 177.879238 177.882979 0.003741
60 292.198461 292.200954 0.002493
80 413.371913 413.373782 0.001869
100 539.630815 539.632310 0.001495
120 669.937107 669.938352 0.001246
140 803.606351 803.607419 0.001068
160 940.152803 940.153737 0.000934
180 1079.213650 1079.214480 0.000830
200 1220.507505 1220.508252 0.000747
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For large $n$, and for $v=n/m $ constant,
we have the following known precise asymptotic approximation (my deduction here):
$$ S_{n,m} approx binom{n}{m} frac{(n-m)!}{sqrt{2 pi n (lambda -v+1)}}
frac{(2-lambda)^m}{lambda^{n-m}} tag1$$
where $lambda$ is the positive root of $ lambda = v (1-e^{-lambda}) $ (explicitly: $lambda=v+W(-v /e^{v})$ where $W()$ is the Lambert W function, first branch).
In our case, with $n=2m$, $v=2$, $lambda= 1.593624260040cdots$, so
$$ S_{2m,m}approx binom{2m}{m} frac{m!}{sqrt{4 pi m (lambda -1)}}frac{1}{(2lambda - lambda^2)^m} tag2$$
Plugging the Stirling approximation for the factorials we get
$$ log(S_{2m,m}) approx m log m + beta , m - frac12 log(m) + gamma + o(1) tag3$$
with $beta = -log( frac{2 lambda -lambda^2}{4})-1 =0.820760609$, and
$gamma = -frac12 log(2 pi ,(lambda-1)) = -0.65818417389$
This coincides with Claude Leibovici's answer.
Some computed values of $log(S_{2m,m})$ along with the approximation $(3)$:
m log(S) approx abs err
10 29.408950 29.423980 0.015031
20 74.166315 74.173807 0.007493
40 177.879238 177.882979 0.003741
60 292.198461 292.200954 0.002493
80 413.371913 413.373782 0.001869
100 539.630815 539.632310 0.001495
120 669.937107 669.938352 0.001246
140 803.606351 803.607419 0.001068
160 940.152803 940.153737 0.000934
180 1079.213650 1079.214480 0.000830
200 1220.507505 1220.508252 0.000747
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For large $n$, and for $v=n/m $ constant,
we have the following known precise asymptotic approximation (my deduction here):
$$ S_{n,m} approx binom{n}{m} frac{(n-m)!}{sqrt{2 pi n (lambda -v+1)}}
frac{(2-lambda)^m}{lambda^{n-m}} tag1$$
where $lambda$ is the positive root of $ lambda = v (1-e^{-lambda}) $ (explicitly: $lambda=v+W(-v /e^{v})$ where $W()$ is the Lambert W function, first branch).
In our case, with $n=2m$, $v=2$, $lambda= 1.593624260040cdots$, so
$$ S_{2m,m}approx binom{2m}{m} frac{m!}{sqrt{4 pi m (lambda -1)}}frac{1}{(2lambda - lambda^2)^m} tag2$$
Plugging the Stirling approximation for the factorials we get
$$ log(S_{2m,m}) approx m log m + beta , m - frac12 log(m) + gamma + o(1) tag3$$
with $beta = -log( frac{2 lambda -lambda^2}{4})-1 =0.820760609$, and
$gamma = -frac12 log(2 pi ,(lambda-1)) = -0.65818417389$
This coincides with Claude Leibovici's answer.
Some computed values of $log(S_{2m,m})$ along with the approximation $(3)$:
m log(S) approx abs err
10 29.408950 29.423980 0.015031
20 74.166315 74.173807 0.007493
40 177.879238 177.882979 0.003741
60 292.198461 292.200954 0.002493
80 413.371913 413.373782 0.001869
100 539.630815 539.632310 0.001495
120 669.937107 669.938352 0.001246
140 803.606351 803.607419 0.001068
160 940.152803 940.153737 0.000934
180 1079.213650 1079.214480 0.000830
200 1220.507505 1220.508252 0.000747
$endgroup$
For large $n$, and for $v=n/m $ constant,
we have the following known precise asymptotic approximation (my deduction here):
$$ S_{n,m} approx binom{n}{m} frac{(n-m)!}{sqrt{2 pi n (lambda -v+1)}}
frac{(2-lambda)^m}{lambda^{n-m}} tag1$$
where $lambda$ is the positive root of $ lambda = v (1-e^{-lambda}) $ (explicitly: $lambda=v+W(-v /e^{v})$ where $W()$ is the Lambert W function, first branch).
In our case, with $n=2m$, $v=2$, $lambda= 1.593624260040cdots$, so
$$ S_{2m,m}approx binom{2m}{m} frac{m!}{sqrt{4 pi m (lambda -1)}}frac{1}{(2lambda - lambda^2)^m} tag2$$
Plugging the Stirling approximation for the factorials we get
$$ log(S_{2m,m}) approx m log m + beta , m - frac12 log(m) + gamma + o(1) tag3$$
with $beta = -log( frac{2 lambda -lambda^2}{4})-1 =0.820760609$, and
$gamma = -frac12 log(2 pi ,(lambda-1)) = -0.65818417389$
This coincides with Claude Leibovici's answer.
Some computed values of $log(S_{2m,m})$ along with the approximation $(3)$:
m log(S) approx abs err
10 29.408950 29.423980 0.015031
20 74.166315 74.173807 0.007493
40 177.879238 177.882979 0.003741
60 292.198461 292.200954 0.002493
80 413.371913 413.373782 0.001869
100 539.630815 539.632310 0.001495
120 669.937107 669.938352 0.001246
140 803.606351 803.607419 0.001068
160 940.152803 940.153737 0.000934
180 1079.213650 1079.214480 0.000830
200 1220.507505 1220.508252 0.000747
edited Mar 30 at 18:57
answered Mar 23 at 21:28
leonbloyleonbloy
42.4k647108
42.4k647108
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2193227%2fcombinatorics-stirling-numbers-of-second-kind%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown