Proof explanation related to multinomial coefficients












1














Let $mathbf{X}= (X_1,cdots,X_d)$ be a $d$-variables and $mathbf{G}(n,d)$ denotes the set of all functions from ${1,cdots,n}$ into ${1,cdots,d}$.




If the variables $X_k$ are commuting i.e. $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin {1,cdots,d}$, why
$$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g=sum_{substack{|alpha|=n,\alphain mathbb{N}^d}}frac{n!}{alpha!}{mathbf{X}}^{alpha}?$$
where
$mathbf{X}_g:=prod_{i=1}^dX_{g(i)}$, for $gin mathbf{G}(n,d)$. Also $|alpha|=sum_{j=1}^d|alpha_j|$. Further, we write $alpha!: =prod_{i=1}^dalpha_i!$ and $mathbf{X}^alpha:=prod_{i=1}^dX_i^{alpha_i}$.




The following proof is inspired from this answer, however I don't understand the idea very well because I think, we should prove that
$$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}.$$
I hope also to understand the formula in the case when $d=3$ that is $mathbf{X}= (X_1,X_2,X_3)$.



Proof: For some chosen $g$, set $alpha_k:=|{jin{1,cdots,n};;g(j)=k}|$, where the bars $|,|$ means "cardinality of the set". In other words: $alpha_k=|g^{-1}({k})|$, the cardinality of the fiber of $k$ for some chosen $g$.



And because $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin{1,cdots,n}$ then $mathbf{X}_g=mathbf{X}^alpha$ for some $alphain mathbb{N}^d$ such that $|alpha|=n$.



But for each $alpha$ there are $binom{n}{alpha}$ distinct $g$ such that $mathbf{X}_g=mathbf{X}^alpha$ because $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin{1,cdots,n}$, that is there are $binom{n}alpha$ different ways to order the list $g(1),g(2),cdots, g(n)$ for some chosen $g$.



Remark: I ask this question because I want to understand the following problem related to operator theory.



For a given ${bf A}=(A_1,cdots,A_d) in mathcal{L}(E)^d$ which is not commuting, the joint spectral radius of ${bf A}$ is defined by
$$r({bf A })= inf_{ninmathbb{N}^*}bigg(bigg|sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}bigg|^{frac{1}{2n}} bigg).
$$

However, I don't understand why if ${bf A}$ is commuting, then
$$r({bf A}) = inf_{ninmathbb{N}^*}left|displaystylesum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}right|^{frac{1}{2n}}?$$










share|cite|improve this question
























  • The LHS is just $left(X_1 + cdots + X_dright)^n$, so you're trying to prove the multinomial formula. Myriad places where this is done.
    – darij grinberg
    Dec 23 at 10:36












  • @darijgrinberg Thank you for your comment. My question is not to show the multinomial formula.
    – Schüler
    Dec 23 at 10:41










  • I think, as the close-voters suggested, that you are going to have to provide more context if you are to obtain a useful answer to your question. In particular, how does your question relate to this answer, from which the proof you give seems to have been derived? Would a different proof do just as well? Where are you getting stuck? In fact I don't see an actual question in your post.
    – Will Orrick
    Dec 23 at 18:09












  • @WillOrrick Thank you for your comment. Please see my edit.
    – Schüler
    Dec 24 at 7:46










  • As @darijgrinberg said, the assertion in the block quote is the multinonomial expansion, so I'm still not sure why you say that your question is not to show the multinomial formula. The equation $$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}$$ can't hold since the set on the left has $d^n$ members, while the set on the right has $binom{d+n-1}{d-1}$ members. In the binomial case, there are $2^n$ functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2}$ but only $n+1$ ways to write $n$ as the sum of two non-negative integers.
    – Will Orrick
    Dec 24 at 12:16
















1














Let $mathbf{X}= (X_1,cdots,X_d)$ be a $d$-variables and $mathbf{G}(n,d)$ denotes the set of all functions from ${1,cdots,n}$ into ${1,cdots,d}$.




If the variables $X_k$ are commuting i.e. $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin {1,cdots,d}$, why
$$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g=sum_{substack{|alpha|=n,\alphain mathbb{N}^d}}frac{n!}{alpha!}{mathbf{X}}^{alpha}?$$
where
$mathbf{X}_g:=prod_{i=1}^dX_{g(i)}$, for $gin mathbf{G}(n,d)$. Also $|alpha|=sum_{j=1}^d|alpha_j|$. Further, we write $alpha!: =prod_{i=1}^dalpha_i!$ and $mathbf{X}^alpha:=prod_{i=1}^dX_i^{alpha_i}$.




The following proof is inspired from this answer, however I don't understand the idea very well because I think, we should prove that
$$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}.$$
I hope also to understand the formula in the case when $d=3$ that is $mathbf{X}= (X_1,X_2,X_3)$.



Proof: For some chosen $g$, set $alpha_k:=|{jin{1,cdots,n};;g(j)=k}|$, where the bars $|,|$ means "cardinality of the set". In other words: $alpha_k=|g^{-1}({k})|$, the cardinality of the fiber of $k$ for some chosen $g$.



And because $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin{1,cdots,n}$ then $mathbf{X}_g=mathbf{X}^alpha$ for some $alphain mathbb{N}^d$ such that $|alpha|=n$.



But for each $alpha$ there are $binom{n}{alpha}$ distinct $g$ such that $mathbf{X}_g=mathbf{X}^alpha$ because $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin{1,cdots,n}$, that is there are $binom{n}alpha$ different ways to order the list $g(1),g(2),cdots, g(n)$ for some chosen $g$.



Remark: I ask this question because I want to understand the following problem related to operator theory.



For a given ${bf A}=(A_1,cdots,A_d) in mathcal{L}(E)^d$ which is not commuting, the joint spectral radius of ${bf A}$ is defined by
$$r({bf A })= inf_{ninmathbb{N}^*}bigg(bigg|sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}bigg|^{frac{1}{2n}} bigg).
$$

However, I don't understand why if ${bf A}$ is commuting, then
$$r({bf A}) = inf_{ninmathbb{N}^*}left|displaystylesum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}right|^{frac{1}{2n}}?$$










share|cite|improve this question
























  • The LHS is just $left(X_1 + cdots + X_dright)^n$, so you're trying to prove the multinomial formula. Myriad places where this is done.
    – darij grinberg
    Dec 23 at 10:36












  • @darijgrinberg Thank you for your comment. My question is not to show the multinomial formula.
    – Schüler
    Dec 23 at 10:41










  • I think, as the close-voters suggested, that you are going to have to provide more context if you are to obtain a useful answer to your question. In particular, how does your question relate to this answer, from which the proof you give seems to have been derived? Would a different proof do just as well? Where are you getting stuck? In fact I don't see an actual question in your post.
    – Will Orrick
    Dec 23 at 18:09












  • @WillOrrick Thank you for your comment. Please see my edit.
    – Schüler
    Dec 24 at 7:46










  • As @darijgrinberg said, the assertion in the block quote is the multinonomial expansion, so I'm still not sure why you say that your question is not to show the multinomial formula. The equation $$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}$$ can't hold since the set on the left has $d^n$ members, while the set on the right has $binom{d+n-1}{d-1}$ members. In the binomial case, there are $2^n$ functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2}$ but only $n+1$ ways to write $n$ as the sum of two non-negative integers.
    – Will Orrick
    Dec 24 at 12:16














1












1








1


0





Let $mathbf{X}= (X_1,cdots,X_d)$ be a $d$-variables and $mathbf{G}(n,d)$ denotes the set of all functions from ${1,cdots,n}$ into ${1,cdots,d}$.




If the variables $X_k$ are commuting i.e. $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin {1,cdots,d}$, why
$$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g=sum_{substack{|alpha|=n,\alphain mathbb{N}^d}}frac{n!}{alpha!}{mathbf{X}}^{alpha}?$$
where
$mathbf{X}_g:=prod_{i=1}^dX_{g(i)}$, for $gin mathbf{G}(n,d)$. Also $|alpha|=sum_{j=1}^d|alpha_j|$. Further, we write $alpha!: =prod_{i=1}^dalpha_i!$ and $mathbf{X}^alpha:=prod_{i=1}^dX_i^{alpha_i}$.




The following proof is inspired from this answer, however I don't understand the idea very well because I think, we should prove that
$$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}.$$
I hope also to understand the formula in the case when $d=3$ that is $mathbf{X}= (X_1,X_2,X_3)$.



Proof: For some chosen $g$, set $alpha_k:=|{jin{1,cdots,n};;g(j)=k}|$, where the bars $|,|$ means "cardinality of the set". In other words: $alpha_k=|g^{-1}({k})|$, the cardinality of the fiber of $k$ for some chosen $g$.



And because $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin{1,cdots,n}$ then $mathbf{X}_g=mathbf{X}^alpha$ for some $alphain mathbb{N}^d$ such that $|alpha|=n$.



But for each $alpha$ there are $binom{n}{alpha}$ distinct $g$ such that $mathbf{X}_g=mathbf{X}^alpha$ because $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin{1,cdots,n}$, that is there are $binom{n}alpha$ different ways to order the list $g(1),g(2),cdots, g(n)$ for some chosen $g$.



Remark: I ask this question because I want to understand the following problem related to operator theory.



For a given ${bf A}=(A_1,cdots,A_d) in mathcal{L}(E)^d$ which is not commuting, the joint spectral radius of ${bf A}$ is defined by
$$r({bf A })= inf_{ninmathbb{N}^*}bigg(bigg|sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}bigg|^{frac{1}{2n}} bigg).
$$

However, I don't understand why if ${bf A}$ is commuting, then
$$r({bf A}) = inf_{ninmathbb{N}^*}left|displaystylesum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}right|^{frac{1}{2n}}?$$










share|cite|improve this question















Let $mathbf{X}= (X_1,cdots,X_d)$ be a $d$-variables and $mathbf{G}(n,d)$ denotes the set of all functions from ${1,cdots,n}$ into ${1,cdots,d}$.




If the variables $X_k$ are commuting i.e. $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin {1,cdots,d}$, why
$$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g=sum_{substack{|alpha|=n,\alphain mathbb{N}^d}}frac{n!}{alpha!}{mathbf{X}}^{alpha}?$$
where
$mathbf{X}_g:=prod_{i=1}^dX_{g(i)}$, for $gin mathbf{G}(n,d)$. Also $|alpha|=sum_{j=1}^d|alpha_j|$. Further, we write $alpha!: =prod_{i=1}^dalpha_i!$ and $mathbf{X}^alpha:=prod_{i=1}^dX_i^{alpha_i}$.




The following proof is inspired from this answer, however I don't understand the idea very well because I think, we should prove that
$$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}.$$
I hope also to understand the formula in the case when $d=3$ that is $mathbf{X}= (X_1,X_2,X_3)$.



Proof: For some chosen $g$, set $alpha_k:=|{jin{1,cdots,n};;g(j)=k}|$, where the bars $|,|$ means "cardinality of the set". In other words: $alpha_k=|g^{-1}({k})|$, the cardinality of the fiber of $k$ for some chosen $g$.



And because $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin{1,cdots,n}$ then $mathbf{X}_g=mathbf{X}^alpha$ for some $alphain mathbb{N}^d$ such that $|alpha|=n$.



But for each $alpha$ there are $binom{n}{alpha}$ distinct $g$ such that $mathbf{X}_g=mathbf{X}^alpha$ because $X_iX_j=X_jX_i$ for all $i,jin{1,cdots,n}$, that is there are $binom{n}alpha$ different ways to order the list $g(1),g(2),cdots, g(n)$ for some chosen $g$.



Remark: I ask this question because I want to understand the following problem related to operator theory.



For a given ${bf A}=(A_1,cdots,A_d) in mathcal{L}(E)^d$ which is not commuting, the joint spectral radius of ${bf A}$ is defined by
$$r({bf A })= inf_{ninmathbb{N}^*}bigg(bigg|sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}bigg|^{frac{1}{2n}} bigg).
$$

However, I don't understand why if ${bf A}$ is commuting, then
$$r({bf A}) = inf_{ninmathbb{N}^*}left|displaystylesum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}right|^{frac{1}{2n}}?$$







combinatorics multinomial-coefficients






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 24 at 8:11

























asked Dec 23 at 8:05









Schüler

1,5231421




1,5231421












  • The LHS is just $left(X_1 + cdots + X_dright)^n$, so you're trying to prove the multinomial formula. Myriad places where this is done.
    – darij grinberg
    Dec 23 at 10:36












  • @darijgrinberg Thank you for your comment. My question is not to show the multinomial formula.
    – Schüler
    Dec 23 at 10:41










  • I think, as the close-voters suggested, that you are going to have to provide more context if you are to obtain a useful answer to your question. In particular, how does your question relate to this answer, from which the proof you give seems to have been derived? Would a different proof do just as well? Where are you getting stuck? In fact I don't see an actual question in your post.
    – Will Orrick
    Dec 23 at 18:09












  • @WillOrrick Thank you for your comment. Please see my edit.
    – Schüler
    Dec 24 at 7:46










  • As @darijgrinberg said, the assertion in the block quote is the multinonomial expansion, so I'm still not sure why you say that your question is not to show the multinomial formula. The equation $$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}$$ can't hold since the set on the left has $d^n$ members, while the set on the right has $binom{d+n-1}{d-1}$ members. In the binomial case, there are $2^n$ functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2}$ but only $n+1$ ways to write $n$ as the sum of two non-negative integers.
    – Will Orrick
    Dec 24 at 12:16


















  • The LHS is just $left(X_1 + cdots + X_dright)^n$, so you're trying to prove the multinomial formula. Myriad places where this is done.
    – darij grinberg
    Dec 23 at 10:36












  • @darijgrinberg Thank you for your comment. My question is not to show the multinomial formula.
    – Schüler
    Dec 23 at 10:41










  • I think, as the close-voters suggested, that you are going to have to provide more context if you are to obtain a useful answer to your question. In particular, how does your question relate to this answer, from which the proof you give seems to have been derived? Would a different proof do just as well? Where are you getting stuck? In fact I don't see an actual question in your post.
    – Will Orrick
    Dec 23 at 18:09












  • @WillOrrick Thank you for your comment. Please see my edit.
    – Schüler
    Dec 24 at 7:46










  • As @darijgrinberg said, the assertion in the block quote is the multinonomial expansion, so I'm still not sure why you say that your question is not to show the multinomial formula. The equation $$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}$$ can't hold since the set on the left has $d^n$ members, while the set on the right has $binom{d+n-1}{d-1}$ members. In the binomial case, there are $2^n$ functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2}$ but only $n+1$ ways to write $n$ as the sum of two non-negative integers.
    – Will Orrick
    Dec 24 at 12:16
















The LHS is just $left(X_1 + cdots + X_dright)^n$, so you're trying to prove the multinomial formula. Myriad places where this is done.
– darij grinberg
Dec 23 at 10:36






The LHS is just $left(X_1 + cdots + X_dright)^n$, so you're trying to prove the multinomial formula. Myriad places where this is done.
– darij grinberg
Dec 23 at 10:36














@darijgrinberg Thank you for your comment. My question is not to show the multinomial formula.
– Schüler
Dec 23 at 10:41




@darijgrinberg Thank you for your comment. My question is not to show the multinomial formula.
– Schüler
Dec 23 at 10:41












I think, as the close-voters suggested, that you are going to have to provide more context if you are to obtain a useful answer to your question. In particular, how does your question relate to this answer, from which the proof you give seems to have been derived? Would a different proof do just as well? Where are you getting stuck? In fact I don't see an actual question in your post.
– Will Orrick
Dec 23 at 18:09






I think, as the close-voters suggested, that you are going to have to provide more context if you are to obtain a useful answer to your question. In particular, how does your question relate to this answer, from which the proof you give seems to have been derived? Would a different proof do just as well? Where are you getting stuck? In fact I don't see an actual question in your post.
– Will Orrick
Dec 23 at 18:09














@WillOrrick Thank you for your comment. Please see my edit.
– Schüler
Dec 24 at 7:46




@WillOrrick Thank you for your comment. Please see my edit.
– Schüler
Dec 24 at 7:46












As @darijgrinberg said, the assertion in the block quote is the multinonomial expansion, so I'm still not sure why you say that your question is not to show the multinomial formula. The equation $$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}$$ can't hold since the set on the left has $d^n$ members, while the set on the right has $binom{d+n-1}{d-1}$ members. In the binomial case, there are $2^n$ functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2}$ but only $n+1$ ways to write $n$ as the sum of two non-negative integers.
– Will Orrick
Dec 24 at 12:16




As @darijgrinberg said, the assertion in the block quote is the multinonomial expansion, so I'm still not sure why you say that your question is not to show the multinomial formula. The equation $$left{{bf X}_{g},;;gin {bf large G}(n,d) right}=left{frac{n!}{alpha!}{bf X}^{alpha},;;|alpha|=n right}$$ can't hold since the set on the left has $d^n$ members, while the set on the right has $binom{d+n-1}{d-1}$ members. In the binomial case, there are $2^n$ functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2}$ but only $n+1$ ways to write $n$ as the sum of two non-negative integers.
– Will Orrick
Dec 24 at 12:16










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1














The sum
$$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g
$$

is what you get when you expand a multinomial ($d$-nomial) raised to the $n^text{th}$ power without assuming commutativity.



The sum that appears in your application doesn't arise from the expansion of a power, but is otherwise similar. I think the smallest non-trivial case ($d=2$, $n=2$) illustrates what needs to be understood. On the left we have a sum
$$
sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}=A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1
+A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2
+A_2^*A_1^*A_2A_1
+A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
$$

in which the order of the operators in each product (in both the left half of the product, containing the operators $A_i*$, and in the right half, containing the operators $A_i$) is not necessarily lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ sometimes occurs to the left of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the left of $A_1^*$). On the right we have a sum
$$
sum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}=frac{2!}{2!,0!}A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1+frac{2!}{1!,1!}A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2+frac{2!}{0!,2!}A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
$$

in which the order of the operators in each product (again treating the half containing the $A_i^*$ separately from the half containing the $A_i$) is lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ always occurs to the right of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the right of $A_1^*$). We get from one side to the other by "combining like terms". It is commutativity of the operators that allows us to do this. The numerical coefficients in the sum on the right tell us how many "like terms" on the left contributed to each term on the right.



What needs to be shown is that these numerical coefficients have been chosen correctly, that is, that the number of functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,ldots,d}$ in which $kin{1,2,ldots,d}$ occurs as the image of some $jin{1,2,ldots,n}$ exactly $alpha_k$ times is given by $frac{n!}{alpha_1!,alpha_2!,ldots,alpha_d!}$.



Added: Since you ask about the case $d=3$, let's use that as an example. If
$$
(X_1+X_2+X_3)^n=(X_1+X_2+X_3)(X_1+X_2+X_3)ldots(X_1+X_2+X_3)quadtext{($n$ factors)}
$$

is expanded, without assuming commutativity of the $X_i$ we get $3^n$ terms. These terms are in one-to-one correspondence with the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. So, for example, if $n=4$, one of the terms is $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. It corresponds to the function $1mapsto2$, $2mapsto3$, $3mapsto2$, $4mapsto3$.



If we use commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. But $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is not the only term that equals $X_2^2X_3^2$: any term with two factors $X_2$ and two factors $X_3$ also equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. In the notation of the proof you adapted, $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ for the term $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. Furthermore, because of commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3=mathbf{X}^alpha=X_1^0X_2^2X_3^2X_4^0=X_2^2X_3^2$. So $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is one of the terms on the left that contributes to the term on the right containing $X_2^2X_3^2$. Other terms that contribute are other terms with $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ such as $X_2X_2X_3X_3$, $X_3X_2X_2X_3$, and so on. There are six such terms in all since there are $6=frac{4!}{2!,2!}$ ways to arrange the factors of $X_2X_3X_2X_3$.



The main difference between this standard multinomial expansion and your application is that your left-hand side cannot be written as an $n$-fold product. Instead, your left-hand side is defined directly in terms of the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. Most everything else works as before. So one of the terms on the left will be $A_2^*A_3^*A_2^*A_3^*A_2A_3A_2A_3$. It can be rearranged using commutativity to get $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$. There are again six terms in total on the left that contribute to $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer























    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3050154%2fproof-explanation-related-to-multinomial-coefficients%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1














    The sum
    $$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g
    $$

    is what you get when you expand a multinomial ($d$-nomial) raised to the $n^text{th}$ power without assuming commutativity.



    The sum that appears in your application doesn't arise from the expansion of a power, but is otherwise similar. I think the smallest non-trivial case ($d=2$, $n=2$) illustrates what needs to be understood. On the left we have a sum
    $$
    sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}=A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1
    +A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2
    +A_2^*A_1^*A_2A_1
    +A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
    $$

    in which the order of the operators in each product (in both the left half of the product, containing the operators $A_i*$, and in the right half, containing the operators $A_i$) is not necessarily lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ sometimes occurs to the left of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the left of $A_1^*$). On the right we have a sum
    $$
    sum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}=frac{2!}{2!,0!}A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1+frac{2!}{1!,1!}A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2+frac{2!}{0!,2!}A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
    $$

    in which the order of the operators in each product (again treating the half containing the $A_i^*$ separately from the half containing the $A_i$) is lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ always occurs to the right of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the right of $A_1^*$). We get from one side to the other by "combining like terms". It is commutativity of the operators that allows us to do this. The numerical coefficients in the sum on the right tell us how many "like terms" on the left contributed to each term on the right.



    What needs to be shown is that these numerical coefficients have been chosen correctly, that is, that the number of functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,ldots,d}$ in which $kin{1,2,ldots,d}$ occurs as the image of some $jin{1,2,ldots,n}$ exactly $alpha_k$ times is given by $frac{n!}{alpha_1!,alpha_2!,ldots,alpha_d!}$.



    Added: Since you ask about the case $d=3$, let's use that as an example. If
    $$
    (X_1+X_2+X_3)^n=(X_1+X_2+X_3)(X_1+X_2+X_3)ldots(X_1+X_2+X_3)quadtext{($n$ factors)}
    $$

    is expanded, without assuming commutativity of the $X_i$ we get $3^n$ terms. These terms are in one-to-one correspondence with the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. So, for example, if $n=4$, one of the terms is $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. It corresponds to the function $1mapsto2$, $2mapsto3$, $3mapsto2$, $4mapsto3$.



    If we use commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. But $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is not the only term that equals $X_2^2X_3^2$: any term with two factors $X_2$ and two factors $X_3$ also equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. In the notation of the proof you adapted, $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ for the term $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. Furthermore, because of commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3=mathbf{X}^alpha=X_1^0X_2^2X_3^2X_4^0=X_2^2X_3^2$. So $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is one of the terms on the left that contributes to the term on the right containing $X_2^2X_3^2$. Other terms that contribute are other terms with $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ such as $X_2X_2X_3X_3$, $X_3X_2X_2X_3$, and so on. There are six such terms in all since there are $6=frac{4!}{2!,2!}$ ways to arrange the factors of $X_2X_3X_2X_3$.



    The main difference between this standard multinomial expansion and your application is that your left-hand side cannot be written as an $n$-fold product. Instead, your left-hand side is defined directly in terms of the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. Most everything else works as before. So one of the terms on the left will be $A_2^*A_3^*A_2^*A_3^*A_2A_3A_2A_3$. It can be rearranged using commutativity to get $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$. There are again six terms in total on the left that contribute to $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      1














      The sum
      $$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g
      $$

      is what you get when you expand a multinomial ($d$-nomial) raised to the $n^text{th}$ power without assuming commutativity.



      The sum that appears in your application doesn't arise from the expansion of a power, but is otherwise similar. I think the smallest non-trivial case ($d=2$, $n=2$) illustrates what needs to be understood. On the left we have a sum
      $$
      sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}=A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1
      +A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2
      +A_2^*A_1^*A_2A_1
      +A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
      $$

      in which the order of the operators in each product (in both the left half of the product, containing the operators $A_i*$, and in the right half, containing the operators $A_i$) is not necessarily lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ sometimes occurs to the left of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the left of $A_1^*$). On the right we have a sum
      $$
      sum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}=frac{2!}{2!,0!}A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1+frac{2!}{1!,1!}A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2+frac{2!}{0!,2!}A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
      $$

      in which the order of the operators in each product (again treating the half containing the $A_i^*$ separately from the half containing the $A_i$) is lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ always occurs to the right of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the right of $A_1^*$). We get from one side to the other by "combining like terms". It is commutativity of the operators that allows us to do this. The numerical coefficients in the sum on the right tell us how many "like terms" on the left contributed to each term on the right.



      What needs to be shown is that these numerical coefficients have been chosen correctly, that is, that the number of functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,ldots,d}$ in which $kin{1,2,ldots,d}$ occurs as the image of some $jin{1,2,ldots,n}$ exactly $alpha_k$ times is given by $frac{n!}{alpha_1!,alpha_2!,ldots,alpha_d!}$.



      Added: Since you ask about the case $d=3$, let's use that as an example. If
      $$
      (X_1+X_2+X_3)^n=(X_1+X_2+X_3)(X_1+X_2+X_3)ldots(X_1+X_2+X_3)quadtext{($n$ factors)}
      $$

      is expanded, without assuming commutativity of the $X_i$ we get $3^n$ terms. These terms are in one-to-one correspondence with the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. So, for example, if $n=4$, one of the terms is $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. It corresponds to the function $1mapsto2$, $2mapsto3$, $3mapsto2$, $4mapsto3$.



      If we use commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. But $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is not the only term that equals $X_2^2X_3^2$: any term with two factors $X_2$ and two factors $X_3$ also equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. In the notation of the proof you adapted, $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ for the term $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. Furthermore, because of commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3=mathbf{X}^alpha=X_1^0X_2^2X_3^2X_4^0=X_2^2X_3^2$. So $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is one of the terms on the left that contributes to the term on the right containing $X_2^2X_3^2$. Other terms that contribute are other terms with $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ such as $X_2X_2X_3X_3$, $X_3X_2X_2X_3$, and so on. There are six such terms in all since there are $6=frac{4!}{2!,2!}$ ways to arrange the factors of $X_2X_3X_2X_3$.



      The main difference between this standard multinomial expansion and your application is that your left-hand side cannot be written as an $n$-fold product. Instead, your left-hand side is defined directly in terms of the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. Most everything else works as before. So one of the terms on the left will be $A_2^*A_3^*A_2^*A_3^*A_2A_3A_2A_3$. It can be rearranged using commutativity to get $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$. There are again six terms in total on the left that contribute to $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$.






      share|cite|improve this answer


























        1












        1








        1






        The sum
        $$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g
        $$

        is what you get when you expand a multinomial ($d$-nomial) raised to the $n^text{th}$ power without assuming commutativity.



        The sum that appears in your application doesn't arise from the expansion of a power, but is otherwise similar. I think the smallest non-trivial case ($d=2$, $n=2$) illustrates what needs to be understood. On the left we have a sum
        $$
        sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}=A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1
        +A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2
        +A_2^*A_1^*A_2A_1
        +A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
        $$

        in which the order of the operators in each product (in both the left half of the product, containing the operators $A_i*$, and in the right half, containing the operators $A_i$) is not necessarily lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ sometimes occurs to the left of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the left of $A_1^*$). On the right we have a sum
        $$
        sum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}=frac{2!}{2!,0!}A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1+frac{2!}{1!,1!}A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2+frac{2!}{0!,2!}A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
        $$

        in which the order of the operators in each product (again treating the half containing the $A_i^*$ separately from the half containing the $A_i$) is lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ always occurs to the right of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the right of $A_1^*$). We get from one side to the other by "combining like terms". It is commutativity of the operators that allows us to do this. The numerical coefficients in the sum on the right tell us how many "like terms" on the left contributed to each term on the right.



        What needs to be shown is that these numerical coefficients have been chosen correctly, that is, that the number of functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,ldots,d}$ in which $kin{1,2,ldots,d}$ occurs as the image of some $jin{1,2,ldots,n}$ exactly $alpha_k$ times is given by $frac{n!}{alpha_1!,alpha_2!,ldots,alpha_d!}$.



        Added: Since you ask about the case $d=3$, let's use that as an example. If
        $$
        (X_1+X_2+X_3)^n=(X_1+X_2+X_3)(X_1+X_2+X_3)ldots(X_1+X_2+X_3)quadtext{($n$ factors)}
        $$

        is expanded, without assuming commutativity of the $X_i$ we get $3^n$ terms. These terms are in one-to-one correspondence with the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. So, for example, if $n=4$, one of the terms is $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. It corresponds to the function $1mapsto2$, $2mapsto3$, $3mapsto2$, $4mapsto3$.



        If we use commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. But $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is not the only term that equals $X_2^2X_3^2$: any term with two factors $X_2$ and two factors $X_3$ also equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. In the notation of the proof you adapted, $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ for the term $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. Furthermore, because of commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3=mathbf{X}^alpha=X_1^0X_2^2X_3^2X_4^0=X_2^2X_3^2$. So $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is one of the terms on the left that contributes to the term on the right containing $X_2^2X_3^2$. Other terms that contribute are other terms with $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ such as $X_2X_2X_3X_3$, $X_3X_2X_2X_3$, and so on. There are six such terms in all since there are $6=frac{4!}{2!,2!}$ ways to arrange the factors of $X_2X_3X_2X_3$.



        The main difference between this standard multinomial expansion and your application is that your left-hand side cannot be written as an $n$-fold product. Instead, your left-hand side is defined directly in terms of the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. Most everything else works as before. So one of the terms on the left will be $A_2^*A_3^*A_2^*A_3^*A_2A_3A_2A_3$. It can be rearranged using commutativity to get $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$. There are again six terms in total on the left that contribute to $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        The sum
        $$sum_{gin mathbf{G}(n,d)} mathbf{X}_g
        $$

        is what you get when you expand a multinomial ($d$-nomial) raised to the $n^text{th}$ power without assuming commutativity.



        The sum that appears in your application doesn't arise from the expansion of a power, but is otherwise similar. I think the smallest non-trivial case ($d=2$, $n=2$) illustrates what needs to be understood. On the left we have a sum
        $$
        sum_{gin {bf large G}(n,d)} {bf A}_g^* {bf A}_{g}=A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1
        +A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2
        +A_2^*A_1^*A_2A_1
        +A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
        $$

        in which the order of the operators in each product (in both the left half of the product, containing the operators $A_i*$, and in the right half, containing the operators $A_i$) is not necessarily lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ sometimes occurs to the left of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the left of $A_1^*$). On the right we have a sum
        $$
        sum_{|alpha|=n}frac{n!}{alpha!}{{bf A}^*}^{alpha}{bf A}^{alpha}=frac{2!}{2!,0!}A_1^*A_1^*A_1A_1+frac{2!}{1!,1!}A_1^*A_2^*A_1A_2+frac{2!}{0!,2!}A_2^*A_2^*A_2A_2,
        $$

        in which the order of the operators in each product (again treating the half containing the $A_i^*$ separately from the half containing the $A_i$) is lexicographic. That is, $A_2$ always occurs to the right of $A_1$ (and $A_2^*$ to the right of $A_1^*$). We get from one side to the other by "combining like terms". It is commutativity of the operators that allows us to do this. The numerical coefficients in the sum on the right tell us how many "like terms" on the left contributed to each term on the right.



        What needs to be shown is that these numerical coefficients have been chosen correctly, that is, that the number of functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,ldots,d}$ in which $kin{1,2,ldots,d}$ occurs as the image of some $jin{1,2,ldots,n}$ exactly $alpha_k$ times is given by $frac{n!}{alpha_1!,alpha_2!,ldots,alpha_d!}$.



        Added: Since you ask about the case $d=3$, let's use that as an example. If
        $$
        (X_1+X_2+X_3)^n=(X_1+X_2+X_3)(X_1+X_2+X_3)ldots(X_1+X_2+X_3)quadtext{($n$ factors)}
        $$

        is expanded, without assuming commutativity of the $X_i$ we get $3^n$ terms. These terms are in one-to-one correspondence with the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. So, for example, if $n=4$, one of the terms is $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. It corresponds to the function $1mapsto2$, $2mapsto3$, $3mapsto2$, $4mapsto3$.



        If we use commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. But $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is not the only term that equals $X_2^2X_3^2$: any term with two factors $X_2$ and two factors $X_3$ also equals $X_2^2X_3^2$. In the notation of the proof you adapted, $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ for the term $X_2X_3X_2X_3$. Furthermore, because of commutativity, $X_2X_3X_2X_3=mathbf{X}^alpha=X_1^0X_2^2X_3^2X_4^0=X_2^2X_3^2$. So $X_2X_3X_2X_3$ is one of the terms on the left that contributes to the term on the right containing $X_2^2X_3^2$. Other terms that contribute are other terms with $alpha_2=alpha_3=2$ and $alpha_1=alpha_4=0$ such as $X_2X_2X_3X_3$, $X_3X_2X_2X_3$, and so on. There are six such terms in all since there are $6=frac{4!}{2!,2!}$ ways to arrange the factors of $X_2X_3X_2X_3$.



        The main difference between this standard multinomial expansion and your application is that your left-hand side cannot be written as an $n$-fold product. Instead, your left-hand side is defined directly in terms of the functions from ${1,2,ldots,n}$ to ${1,2,3}$. Most everything else works as before. So one of the terms on the left will be $A_2^*A_3^*A_2^*A_3^*A_2A_3A_2A_3$. It can be rearranged using commutativity to get $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$. There are again six terms in total on the left that contribute to $(A_2^*)^2(A_3^*)^2A_2^2A_3^2$.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited yesterday

























        answered Dec 24 at 14:02









        Will Orrick

        13.5k13359




        13.5k13359






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • 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.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3050154%2fproof-explanation-related-to-multinomial-coefficients%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Human spaceflight

            Can not write log (Is /dev/pts mounted?) - openpty in Ubuntu-on-Windows?

            File:DeusFollowingSea.jpg