Applying Burnside's lemma to show there are $k+n-1 choose k-1$ ways to store n stars in k bins?
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Usually it is proven using multisets I think, but I wondered how Burnside's lemma could be applied. Everytime I tried to wrap it around my head the indices didn't seem to fit. So I TeXed it and eventually I found out.
combinatorics group-actions algebraic-combinatorics
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Usually it is proven using multisets I think, but I wondered how Burnside's lemma could be applied. Everytime I tried to wrap it around my head the indices didn't seem to fit. So I TeXed it and eventually I found out.
combinatorics group-actions algebraic-combinatorics
1
Stars and Bars is the usual way that I see this shown.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 16:59
The wikipedia-proof is taking advantage of Multisets if it were to be formalised, isn't it?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:56
It is counting the number of ways to arrange $n$ stars and $k-1$ bars among each other.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 20:08
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Usually it is proven using multisets I think, but I wondered how Burnside's lemma could be applied. Everytime I tried to wrap it around my head the indices didn't seem to fit. So I TeXed it and eventually I found out.
combinatorics group-actions algebraic-combinatorics
Usually it is proven using multisets I think, but I wondered how Burnside's lemma could be applied. Everytime I tried to wrap it around my head the indices didn't seem to fit. So I TeXed it and eventually I found out.
combinatorics group-actions algebraic-combinatorics
combinatorics group-actions algebraic-combinatorics
edited Nov 17 at 18:11
asked Nov 17 at 16:23
Martin Erhardt
1859
1859
1
Stars and Bars is the usual way that I see this shown.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 16:59
The wikipedia-proof is taking advantage of Multisets if it were to be formalised, isn't it?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:56
It is counting the number of ways to arrange $n$ stars and $k-1$ bars among each other.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 20:08
add a comment |
1
Stars and Bars is the usual way that I see this shown.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 16:59
The wikipedia-proof is taking advantage of Multisets if it were to be formalised, isn't it?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:56
It is counting the number of ways to arrange $n$ stars and $k-1$ bars among each other.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 20:08
1
1
Stars and Bars is the usual way that I see this shown.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 16:59
Stars and Bars is the usual way that I see this shown.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 16:59
The wikipedia-proof is taking advantage of Multisets if it were to be formalised, isn't it?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:56
The wikipedia-proof is taking advantage of Multisets if it were to be formalised, isn't it?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:56
It is counting the number of ways to arrange $n$ stars and $k-1$ bars among each other.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 20:08
It is counting the number of ways to arrange $n$ stars and $k-1$ bars among each other.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 20:08
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
The $k$ bins can all be distinguished, so we're dealing with the trivial group whose one element is the identity permutation over $k$ elements.
Thus the cycle index is $Z = t_1^k$. There's one way of putting one star in a bin, one way of putting two stars, etc. so the final generating function is $f(z) = left(frac{1}{1-z}right)^k = (1-z)^{-k}$. Then the term with $z^n$ is $frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-z)^n$ with coefficient $$frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-1)^n = frac{(k+n-1)^{underline n}}{n!} = binom{k+n-1}{n}$$
Note that this is also $binom{k+n-1}{k-1}$, so maybe the reason the indexes always came out wrong for you is that you were trying to prove a statement with an out-by-one error.
Could you please elaborate on the set you are operating on and how? Operating with a cyclic group is obviously way more elegant, than with the Symmetric group -even though you do not seem to use burnside's lemma.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:30
1
Strictly I'm using Pólya's enumeration theorem, which is a generalisation of not-Burnside's lemma. $G$ contains only the identity element of $S_k$, so the sum is trivial.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 18:55
I'am reliefed to see, that I could not have come up with that with my limited knowledge :). I wonder: Would it be possible to stay that short, without this strong theorem?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:11
1
qchu.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/… might achieve that, although I personally could use an extra step or two of explanation. (The next two posts in the series may also interest you).
– Peter Taylor
Nov 18 at 8:48
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
EDIT: Substitute n=k, k=n. This proof follows the urn model -intuition.
Let $|N|=n$, $M=N^{k}/sim$ and:
$$x,yin N^k, x sim yLeftrightarrowexists sigma in S^k: (x_1,...,x_k)=(y_{sigma(1)},...,y_{sigma(k)})$$
Obviously M is the orbital space of a group action: $sigma.(x_1,...,x_k)=(x_{sigma(1)},...,x_{sigma(k)})$.
To proof: $|N^k/sim|={k+n -1choose k}$
Induction by k:
Trivially: $$|N^1/sim|overset{Burnside}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^1}|N|^1}{1!}=|N|=n={1+n-1choose 1}$$
$k-1 rightarrow k:$
Each $sigma$ in $S^{k-1}$ can be naturally identified by $sigma'in S^k$ $$sigma'(h)=left{begin{array}{cl} sigma(h), & hleq k-1\ k, & h=k end{array}right.$$
$$ forall h in {1,...,k}:omega_h:S^{k-1}rightarrow { sigma'' in S^k:sigma''(h)=k},sigmamapsto (sigma'(h), k) circ sigma' $$
$(sigma(h) k)$ is the transposition, that swaps $sigma(h)$ with k. $omega_h$
is bijective(trivially injective, surjective with inverse $sigma mapsto ((sigma(h),sigma(k))sigma)|_{{1,...,k-1}}$, which is well defined, because $sigma(h)=k$ and $sigma(k) in {1,..k-1}$ for $hneq k$)
Let $F_k$ be: $S^k rightarrow N^k, F_k(sigma)={x in N^k: sigma(x)=x}$
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|+sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
Moreover:
$$F_k(omega_k(sigma))=F_{k-1}(sigma)times N Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_k(sigma))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|n$$
Bijectivity of transposition leads to: $x in F_k(omega_h(sigma)) Rightarrow (x_1,...,x_{k-1})in F_{k-1}(sigma)$.
For each $hin {1,...,k-1}$ and $xin F_{k-1}(sigma)$ the k-th compononent is uniquely determined, by $x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}$.Since $omega_h(sigma(k))=sigma(h)$ and $x_{(omega_h circ sigma)^{-1}(k)}=x_h=x_{sigma(h)}=x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}=x_k$, $(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))})$ is actually in $F_k(omega_h(sigma))$. It follows, that:
$$F_k(omega_h(sigma))={(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}) : x in F_{k-1}(sigma)} Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_h(sigma(k)))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|$$
This yields: $$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_k(sigma))|n}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{n(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{n-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$
Now we are taking a closer look at the latter guys $forall h in{1,..k-1}:$
$$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)= i, i=1}^{k-1}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_i(sigma))|}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
We conclude:
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}+frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+
frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+{k+n-2 choose k-1 }={k+n-1 choose k}$$
1
The base case of the induction is wrong. Trivially, if you only have one bin there's only one way to store the stars.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 17:45
Oh I thought about pulling n balls out of an urn k - times neglecting sequence with replacement. This is dual in a way to the stars-bins-approach.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:09
So the proof is actually correct, but I confused two different models of the same problem.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:13
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
The $k$ bins can all be distinguished, so we're dealing with the trivial group whose one element is the identity permutation over $k$ elements.
Thus the cycle index is $Z = t_1^k$. There's one way of putting one star in a bin, one way of putting two stars, etc. so the final generating function is $f(z) = left(frac{1}{1-z}right)^k = (1-z)^{-k}$. Then the term with $z^n$ is $frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-z)^n$ with coefficient $$frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-1)^n = frac{(k+n-1)^{underline n}}{n!} = binom{k+n-1}{n}$$
Note that this is also $binom{k+n-1}{k-1}$, so maybe the reason the indexes always came out wrong for you is that you were trying to prove a statement with an out-by-one error.
Could you please elaborate on the set you are operating on and how? Operating with a cyclic group is obviously way more elegant, than with the Symmetric group -even though you do not seem to use burnside's lemma.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:30
1
Strictly I'm using Pólya's enumeration theorem, which is a generalisation of not-Burnside's lemma. $G$ contains only the identity element of $S_k$, so the sum is trivial.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 18:55
I'am reliefed to see, that I could not have come up with that with my limited knowledge :). I wonder: Would it be possible to stay that short, without this strong theorem?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:11
1
qchu.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/… might achieve that, although I personally could use an extra step or two of explanation. (The next two posts in the series may also interest you).
– Peter Taylor
Nov 18 at 8:48
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
The $k$ bins can all be distinguished, so we're dealing with the trivial group whose one element is the identity permutation over $k$ elements.
Thus the cycle index is $Z = t_1^k$. There's one way of putting one star in a bin, one way of putting two stars, etc. so the final generating function is $f(z) = left(frac{1}{1-z}right)^k = (1-z)^{-k}$. Then the term with $z^n$ is $frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-z)^n$ with coefficient $$frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-1)^n = frac{(k+n-1)^{underline n}}{n!} = binom{k+n-1}{n}$$
Note that this is also $binom{k+n-1}{k-1}$, so maybe the reason the indexes always came out wrong for you is that you were trying to prove a statement with an out-by-one error.
Could you please elaborate on the set you are operating on and how? Operating with a cyclic group is obviously way more elegant, than with the Symmetric group -even though you do not seem to use burnside's lemma.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:30
1
Strictly I'm using Pólya's enumeration theorem, which is a generalisation of not-Burnside's lemma. $G$ contains only the identity element of $S_k$, so the sum is trivial.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 18:55
I'am reliefed to see, that I could not have come up with that with my limited knowledge :). I wonder: Would it be possible to stay that short, without this strong theorem?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:11
1
qchu.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/… might achieve that, although I personally could use an extra step or two of explanation. (The next two posts in the series may also interest you).
– Peter Taylor
Nov 18 at 8:48
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
The $k$ bins can all be distinguished, so we're dealing with the trivial group whose one element is the identity permutation over $k$ elements.
Thus the cycle index is $Z = t_1^k$. There's one way of putting one star in a bin, one way of putting two stars, etc. so the final generating function is $f(z) = left(frac{1}{1-z}right)^k = (1-z)^{-k}$. Then the term with $z^n$ is $frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-z)^n$ with coefficient $$frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-1)^n = frac{(k+n-1)^{underline n}}{n!} = binom{k+n-1}{n}$$
Note that this is also $binom{k+n-1}{k-1}$, so maybe the reason the indexes always came out wrong for you is that you were trying to prove a statement with an out-by-one error.
The $k$ bins can all be distinguished, so we're dealing with the trivial group whose one element is the identity permutation over $k$ elements.
Thus the cycle index is $Z = t_1^k$. There's one way of putting one star in a bin, one way of putting two stars, etc. so the final generating function is $f(z) = left(frac{1}{1-z}right)^k = (1-z)^{-k}$. Then the term with $z^n$ is $frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-z)^n$ with coefficient $$frac{(-k)^{underline n}}{n!}(-1)^n = frac{(k+n-1)^{underline n}}{n!} = binom{k+n-1}{n}$$
Note that this is also $binom{k+n-1}{k-1}$, so maybe the reason the indexes always came out wrong for you is that you were trying to prove a statement with an out-by-one error.
answered Nov 17 at 17:43
Peter Taylor
8,33212240
8,33212240
Could you please elaborate on the set you are operating on and how? Operating with a cyclic group is obviously way more elegant, than with the Symmetric group -even though you do not seem to use burnside's lemma.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:30
1
Strictly I'm using Pólya's enumeration theorem, which is a generalisation of not-Burnside's lemma. $G$ contains only the identity element of $S_k$, so the sum is trivial.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 18:55
I'am reliefed to see, that I could not have come up with that with my limited knowledge :). I wonder: Would it be possible to stay that short, without this strong theorem?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:11
1
qchu.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/… might achieve that, although I personally could use an extra step or two of explanation. (The next two posts in the series may also interest you).
– Peter Taylor
Nov 18 at 8:48
add a comment |
Could you please elaborate on the set you are operating on and how? Operating with a cyclic group is obviously way more elegant, than with the Symmetric group -even though you do not seem to use burnside's lemma.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:30
1
Strictly I'm using Pólya's enumeration theorem, which is a generalisation of not-Burnside's lemma. $G$ contains only the identity element of $S_k$, so the sum is trivial.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 18:55
I'am reliefed to see, that I could not have come up with that with my limited knowledge :). I wonder: Would it be possible to stay that short, without this strong theorem?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:11
1
qchu.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/… might achieve that, although I personally could use an extra step or two of explanation. (The next two posts in the series may also interest you).
– Peter Taylor
Nov 18 at 8:48
Could you please elaborate on the set you are operating on and how? Operating with a cyclic group is obviously way more elegant, than with the Symmetric group -even though you do not seem to use burnside's lemma.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:30
Could you please elaborate on the set you are operating on and how? Operating with a cyclic group is obviously way more elegant, than with the Symmetric group -even though you do not seem to use burnside's lemma.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:30
1
1
Strictly I'm using Pólya's enumeration theorem, which is a generalisation of not-Burnside's lemma. $G$ contains only the identity element of $S_k$, so the sum is trivial.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 18:55
Strictly I'm using Pólya's enumeration theorem, which is a generalisation of not-Burnside's lemma. $G$ contains only the identity element of $S_k$, so the sum is trivial.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 18:55
I'am reliefed to see, that I could not have come up with that with my limited knowledge :). I wonder: Would it be possible to stay that short, without this strong theorem?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:11
I'am reliefed to see, that I could not have come up with that with my limited knowledge :). I wonder: Would it be possible to stay that short, without this strong theorem?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:11
1
1
qchu.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/… might achieve that, although I personally could use an extra step or two of explanation. (The next two posts in the series may also interest you).
– Peter Taylor
Nov 18 at 8:48
qchu.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/… might achieve that, although I personally could use an extra step or two of explanation. (The next two posts in the series may also interest you).
– Peter Taylor
Nov 18 at 8:48
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
EDIT: Substitute n=k, k=n. This proof follows the urn model -intuition.
Let $|N|=n$, $M=N^{k}/sim$ and:
$$x,yin N^k, x sim yLeftrightarrowexists sigma in S^k: (x_1,...,x_k)=(y_{sigma(1)},...,y_{sigma(k)})$$
Obviously M is the orbital space of a group action: $sigma.(x_1,...,x_k)=(x_{sigma(1)},...,x_{sigma(k)})$.
To proof: $|N^k/sim|={k+n -1choose k}$
Induction by k:
Trivially: $$|N^1/sim|overset{Burnside}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^1}|N|^1}{1!}=|N|=n={1+n-1choose 1}$$
$k-1 rightarrow k:$
Each $sigma$ in $S^{k-1}$ can be naturally identified by $sigma'in S^k$ $$sigma'(h)=left{begin{array}{cl} sigma(h), & hleq k-1\ k, & h=k end{array}right.$$
$$ forall h in {1,...,k}:omega_h:S^{k-1}rightarrow { sigma'' in S^k:sigma''(h)=k},sigmamapsto (sigma'(h), k) circ sigma' $$
$(sigma(h) k)$ is the transposition, that swaps $sigma(h)$ with k. $omega_h$
is bijective(trivially injective, surjective with inverse $sigma mapsto ((sigma(h),sigma(k))sigma)|_{{1,...,k-1}}$, which is well defined, because $sigma(h)=k$ and $sigma(k) in {1,..k-1}$ for $hneq k$)
Let $F_k$ be: $S^k rightarrow N^k, F_k(sigma)={x in N^k: sigma(x)=x}$
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|+sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
Moreover:
$$F_k(omega_k(sigma))=F_{k-1}(sigma)times N Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_k(sigma))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|n$$
Bijectivity of transposition leads to: $x in F_k(omega_h(sigma)) Rightarrow (x_1,...,x_{k-1})in F_{k-1}(sigma)$.
For each $hin {1,...,k-1}$ and $xin F_{k-1}(sigma)$ the k-th compononent is uniquely determined, by $x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}$.Since $omega_h(sigma(k))=sigma(h)$ and $x_{(omega_h circ sigma)^{-1}(k)}=x_h=x_{sigma(h)}=x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}=x_k$, $(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))})$ is actually in $F_k(omega_h(sigma))$. It follows, that:
$$F_k(omega_h(sigma))={(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}) : x in F_{k-1}(sigma)} Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_h(sigma(k)))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|$$
This yields: $$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_k(sigma))|n}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{n(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{n-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$
Now we are taking a closer look at the latter guys $forall h in{1,..k-1}:$
$$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)= i, i=1}^{k-1}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_i(sigma))|}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
We conclude:
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}+frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+
frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+{k+n-2 choose k-1 }={k+n-1 choose k}$$
1
The base case of the induction is wrong. Trivially, if you only have one bin there's only one way to store the stars.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 17:45
Oh I thought about pulling n balls out of an urn k - times neglecting sequence with replacement. This is dual in a way to the stars-bins-approach.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:09
So the proof is actually correct, but I confused two different models of the same problem.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:13
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
EDIT: Substitute n=k, k=n. This proof follows the urn model -intuition.
Let $|N|=n$, $M=N^{k}/sim$ and:
$$x,yin N^k, x sim yLeftrightarrowexists sigma in S^k: (x_1,...,x_k)=(y_{sigma(1)},...,y_{sigma(k)})$$
Obviously M is the orbital space of a group action: $sigma.(x_1,...,x_k)=(x_{sigma(1)},...,x_{sigma(k)})$.
To proof: $|N^k/sim|={k+n -1choose k}$
Induction by k:
Trivially: $$|N^1/sim|overset{Burnside}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^1}|N|^1}{1!}=|N|=n={1+n-1choose 1}$$
$k-1 rightarrow k:$
Each $sigma$ in $S^{k-1}$ can be naturally identified by $sigma'in S^k$ $$sigma'(h)=left{begin{array}{cl} sigma(h), & hleq k-1\ k, & h=k end{array}right.$$
$$ forall h in {1,...,k}:omega_h:S^{k-1}rightarrow { sigma'' in S^k:sigma''(h)=k},sigmamapsto (sigma'(h), k) circ sigma' $$
$(sigma(h) k)$ is the transposition, that swaps $sigma(h)$ with k. $omega_h$
is bijective(trivially injective, surjective with inverse $sigma mapsto ((sigma(h),sigma(k))sigma)|_{{1,...,k-1}}$, which is well defined, because $sigma(h)=k$ and $sigma(k) in {1,..k-1}$ for $hneq k$)
Let $F_k$ be: $S^k rightarrow N^k, F_k(sigma)={x in N^k: sigma(x)=x}$
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|+sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
Moreover:
$$F_k(omega_k(sigma))=F_{k-1}(sigma)times N Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_k(sigma))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|n$$
Bijectivity of transposition leads to: $x in F_k(omega_h(sigma)) Rightarrow (x_1,...,x_{k-1})in F_{k-1}(sigma)$.
For each $hin {1,...,k-1}$ and $xin F_{k-1}(sigma)$ the k-th compononent is uniquely determined, by $x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}$.Since $omega_h(sigma(k))=sigma(h)$ and $x_{(omega_h circ sigma)^{-1}(k)}=x_h=x_{sigma(h)}=x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}=x_k$, $(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))})$ is actually in $F_k(omega_h(sigma))$. It follows, that:
$$F_k(omega_h(sigma))={(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}) : x in F_{k-1}(sigma)} Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_h(sigma(k)))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|$$
This yields: $$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_k(sigma))|n}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{n(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{n-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$
Now we are taking a closer look at the latter guys $forall h in{1,..k-1}:$
$$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)= i, i=1}^{k-1}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_i(sigma))|}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
We conclude:
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}+frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+
frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+{k+n-2 choose k-1 }={k+n-1 choose k}$$
1
The base case of the induction is wrong. Trivially, if you only have one bin there's only one way to store the stars.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 17:45
Oh I thought about pulling n balls out of an urn k - times neglecting sequence with replacement. This is dual in a way to the stars-bins-approach.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:09
So the proof is actually correct, but I confused two different models of the same problem.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:13
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
EDIT: Substitute n=k, k=n. This proof follows the urn model -intuition.
Let $|N|=n$, $M=N^{k}/sim$ and:
$$x,yin N^k, x sim yLeftrightarrowexists sigma in S^k: (x_1,...,x_k)=(y_{sigma(1)},...,y_{sigma(k)})$$
Obviously M is the orbital space of a group action: $sigma.(x_1,...,x_k)=(x_{sigma(1)},...,x_{sigma(k)})$.
To proof: $|N^k/sim|={k+n -1choose k}$
Induction by k:
Trivially: $$|N^1/sim|overset{Burnside}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^1}|N|^1}{1!}=|N|=n={1+n-1choose 1}$$
$k-1 rightarrow k:$
Each $sigma$ in $S^{k-1}$ can be naturally identified by $sigma'in S^k$ $$sigma'(h)=left{begin{array}{cl} sigma(h), & hleq k-1\ k, & h=k end{array}right.$$
$$ forall h in {1,...,k}:omega_h:S^{k-1}rightarrow { sigma'' in S^k:sigma''(h)=k},sigmamapsto (sigma'(h), k) circ sigma' $$
$(sigma(h) k)$ is the transposition, that swaps $sigma(h)$ with k. $omega_h$
is bijective(trivially injective, surjective with inverse $sigma mapsto ((sigma(h),sigma(k))sigma)|_{{1,...,k-1}}$, which is well defined, because $sigma(h)=k$ and $sigma(k) in {1,..k-1}$ for $hneq k$)
Let $F_k$ be: $S^k rightarrow N^k, F_k(sigma)={x in N^k: sigma(x)=x}$
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|+sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
Moreover:
$$F_k(omega_k(sigma))=F_{k-1}(sigma)times N Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_k(sigma))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|n$$
Bijectivity of transposition leads to: $x in F_k(omega_h(sigma)) Rightarrow (x_1,...,x_{k-1})in F_{k-1}(sigma)$.
For each $hin {1,...,k-1}$ and $xin F_{k-1}(sigma)$ the k-th compononent is uniquely determined, by $x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}$.Since $omega_h(sigma(k))=sigma(h)$ and $x_{(omega_h circ sigma)^{-1}(k)}=x_h=x_{sigma(h)}=x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}=x_k$, $(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))})$ is actually in $F_k(omega_h(sigma))$. It follows, that:
$$F_k(omega_h(sigma))={(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}) : x in F_{k-1}(sigma)} Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_h(sigma(k)))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|$$
This yields: $$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_k(sigma))|n}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{n(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{n-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$
Now we are taking a closer look at the latter guys $forall h in{1,..k-1}:$
$$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)= i, i=1}^{k-1}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_i(sigma))|}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
We conclude:
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}+frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+
frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+{k+n-2 choose k-1 }={k+n-1 choose k}$$
EDIT: Substitute n=k, k=n. This proof follows the urn model -intuition.
Let $|N|=n$, $M=N^{k}/sim$ and:
$$x,yin N^k, x sim yLeftrightarrowexists sigma in S^k: (x_1,...,x_k)=(y_{sigma(1)},...,y_{sigma(k)})$$
Obviously M is the orbital space of a group action: $sigma.(x_1,...,x_k)=(x_{sigma(1)},...,x_{sigma(k)})$.
To proof: $|N^k/sim|={k+n -1choose k}$
Induction by k:
Trivially: $$|N^1/sim|overset{Burnside}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^1}|N|^1}{1!}=|N|=n={1+n-1choose 1}$$
$k-1 rightarrow k:$
Each $sigma$ in $S^{k-1}$ can be naturally identified by $sigma'in S^k$ $$sigma'(h)=left{begin{array}{cl} sigma(h), & hleq k-1\ k, & h=k end{array}right.$$
$$ forall h in {1,...,k}:omega_h:S^{k-1}rightarrow { sigma'' in S^k:sigma''(h)=k},sigmamapsto (sigma'(h), k) circ sigma' $$
$(sigma(h) k)$ is the transposition, that swaps $sigma(h)$ with k. $omega_h$
is bijective(trivially injective, surjective with inverse $sigma mapsto ((sigma(h),sigma(k))sigma)|_{{1,...,k-1}}$, which is well defined, because $sigma(h)=k$ and $sigma(k) in {1,..k-1}$ for $hneq k$)
Let $F_k$ be: $S^k rightarrow N^k, F_k(sigma)={x in N^k: sigma(x)=x}$
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|+sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
Moreover:
$$F_k(omega_k(sigma))=F_{k-1}(sigma)times N Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_k(sigma))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|n$$
Bijectivity of transposition leads to: $x in F_k(omega_h(sigma)) Rightarrow (x_1,...,x_{k-1})in F_{k-1}(sigma)$.
For each $hin {1,...,k-1}$ and $xin F_{k-1}(sigma)$ the k-th compononent is uniquely determined, by $x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}$.Since $omega_h(sigma(k))=sigma(h)$ and $x_{(omega_h circ sigma)^{-1}(k)}=x_h=x_{sigma(h)}=x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}=x_k$, $(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))})$ is actually in $F_k(omega_h(sigma))$. It follows, that:
$$F_k(omega_h(sigma))={(x,x_{omega_h(sigma(k))}) : x in F_{k-1}(sigma)} Rightarrow |F_{k}(omega_h(sigma(k)))|=|F_{k-1}(sigma)|$$
This yields: $$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_k(sigma))|n}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{n(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{n-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}$$
Now we are taking a closer look at the latter guys $forall h in{1,..k-1}:$
$$frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)= i, i=1}^{k-1}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}=frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}sum_{sigmain S^{k-1}}|F_{k-1}(omega_i(sigma))|}{k!}$$
$$overset{IH}{=}frac{sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(k-1)!{k+n-2 choose k-1}}{k!}=frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
We conclude:
$$|N^k/sim|=frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)=k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}+frac{sum_{sigmain S^{k},sigma(k)neq k}|F_k(sigma)|}{k!}$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+frac{1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1}+
frac{k-1}{k}{k+n-2 choose k-1 }$$
$$={k+n-2 choose k}+{k+n-2 choose k-1 }={k+n-1 choose k}$$
edited Nov 17 at 18:21
answered Nov 17 at 16:23
Martin Erhardt
1859
1859
1
The base case of the induction is wrong. Trivially, if you only have one bin there's only one way to store the stars.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 17:45
Oh I thought about pulling n balls out of an urn k - times neglecting sequence with replacement. This is dual in a way to the stars-bins-approach.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:09
So the proof is actually correct, but I confused two different models of the same problem.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:13
add a comment |
1
The base case of the induction is wrong. Trivially, if you only have one bin there's only one way to store the stars.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 17:45
Oh I thought about pulling n balls out of an urn k - times neglecting sequence with replacement. This is dual in a way to the stars-bins-approach.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:09
So the proof is actually correct, but I confused two different models of the same problem.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:13
1
1
The base case of the induction is wrong. Trivially, if you only have one bin there's only one way to store the stars.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 17:45
The base case of the induction is wrong. Trivially, if you only have one bin there's only one way to store the stars.
– Peter Taylor
Nov 17 at 17:45
Oh I thought about pulling n balls out of an urn k - times neglecting sequence with replacement. This is dual in a way to the stars-bins-approach.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:09
Oh I thought about pulling n balls out of an urn k - times neglecting sequence with replacement. This is dual in a way to the stars-bins-approach.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:09
So the proof is actually correct, but I confused two different models of the same problem.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:13
So the proof is actually correct, but I confused two different models of the same problem.
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 18:13
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.
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.
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%2f3002539%2fapplying-burnsides-lemma-to-show-there-are-kn-1-choose-k-1-ways-to-store-n%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
1
Stars and Bars is the usual way that I see this shown.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 16:59
The wikipedia-proof is taking advantage of Multisets if it were to be formalised, isn't it?
– Martin Erhardt
Nov 17 at 19:56
It is counting the number of ways to arrange $n$ stars and $k-1$ bars among each other.
– robjohn♦
Nov 17 at 20:08