Asymptotic approximation of the expression $sum _i=0^n log (binomni+1)$
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am trying to work out the asymptotic approximation (for large $n$) of the following:
$$sum _i=0^n log (binomni+1)$$
So far I tried to write the expression as,
$$sum^n_i=0log(x)=-sum^n_i=0xint^infty_0e^-xtlog tdt-gamma$$
where I took $x=binomni+1$ and $gamma$ is Euler gamma, but I am not sure if this method is so useful. Any other approach is appreciated.
summation asymptotics binomial-coefficients approximation
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am trying to work out the asymptotic approximation (for large $n$) of the following:
$$sum _i=0^n log (binomni+1)$$
So far I tried to write the expression as,
$$sum^n_i=0log(x)=-sum^n_i=0xint^infty_0e^-xtlog tdt-gamma$$
where I took $x=binomni+1$ and $gamma$ is Euler gamma, but I am not sure if this method is so useful. Any other approach is appreciated.
summation asymptotics binomial-coefficients approximation
1
Is the $+1$ (under the logarithm) essential for the result you need? What is the precision you require?
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:51
(For the main term you can just drop it and apply the Stirling's formula.)
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:55
1
@metamorphy so if one drops 1, then one can write the sum in terms of Gamma and Barnes G functions. I was wondering about keeping +1 to have as much as precision as possible.
â William
Aug 28 at 15:24
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am trying to work out the asymptotic approximation (for large $n$) of the following:
$$sum _i=0^n log (binomni+1)$$
So far I tried to write the expression as,
$$sum^n_i=0log(x)=-sum^n_i=0xint^infty_0e^-xtlog tdt-gamma$$
where I took $x=binomni+1$ and $gamma$ is Euler gamma, but I am not sure if this method is so useful. Any other approach is appreciated.
summation asymptotics binomial-coefficients approximation
I am trying to work out the asymptotic approximation (for large $n$) of the following:
$$sum _i=0^n log (binomni+1)$$
So far I tried to write the expression as,
$$sum^n_i=0log(x)=-sum^n_i=0xint^infty_0e^-xtlog tdt-gamma$$
where I took $x=binomni+1$ and $gamma$ is Euler gamma, but I am not sure if this method is so useful. Any other approach is appreciated.
summation asymptotics binomial-coefficients approximation
edited Aug 28 at 13:16
asked Aug 28 at 12:46
William
124111
124111
1
Is the $+1$ (under the logarithm) essential for the result you need? What is the precision you require?
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:51
(For the main term you can just drop it and apply the Stirling's formula.)
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:55
1
@metamorphy so if one drops 1, then one can write the sum in terms of Gamma and Barnes G functions. I was wondering about keeping +1 to have as much as precision as possible.
â William
Aug 28 at 15:24
add a comment |Â
1
Is the $+1$ (under the logarithm) essential for the result you need? What is the precision you require?
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:51
(For the main term you can just drop it and apply the Stirling's formula.)
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:55
1
@metamorphy so if one drops 1, then one can write the sum in terms of Gamma and Barnes G functions. I was wondering about keeping +1 to have as much as precision as possible.
â William
Aug 28 at 15:24
1
1
Is the $+1$ (under the logarithm) essential for the result you need? What is the precision you require?
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:51
Is the $+1$ (under the logarithm) essential for the result you need? What is the precision you require?
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:51
(For the main term you can just drop it and apply the Stirling's formula.)
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:55
(For the main term you can just drop it and apply the Stirling's formula.)
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:55
1
1
@metamorphy so if one drops 1, then one can write the sum in terms of Gamma and Barnes G functions. I was wondering about keeping +1 to have as much as precision as possible.
â William
Aug 28 at 15:24
@metamorphy so if one drops 1, then one can write the sum in terms of Gamma and Barnes G functions. I was wondering about keeping +1 to have as much as precision as possible.
â William
Aug 28 at 15:24
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
The proposer has pointed out the dominant term and the addition of 1 within the log argument is a minor correction.
$$S:=sum_k=0^nlog(1+binomnk) =sum_k=0^n log(binomnk(1+1/binomnk)sim$$
$$simsum_k=0^n log(binomnk)+sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk-frac12sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2+...$$
where a Taylor series of $log(1+x)$ has been used.
It can be shown that
$$sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk =2(1+frac1n+...) text and sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2=2(1+1/n^2+...)$$
We will always know the leading coefficient is 2 because of the $k=0$ and $k=n$ terms. We have an infinite sum of these terms, which fortunately converges because of their alternating weight of $(-1)^m/m.$ The log-binomial sum can be done in closed form:
$$sum_k=0^n log(binomnk)=logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big). $$
$G$ is the Barne's G and its asymptotic expansion is well-known.
Collecting,
$$Ssim logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big) + 2log2+frac2n+O(frac1n^2) $$
Use this expansion for $n=20$ and 4 correct digits are obtained.
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
The proposer has pointed out the dominant term and the addition of 1 within the log argument is a minor correction.
$$S:=sum_k=0^nlog(1+binomnk) =sum_k=0^n log(binomnk(1+1/binomnk)sim$$
$$simsum_k=0^n log(binomnk)+sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk-frac12sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2+...$$
where a Taylor series of $log(1+x)$ has been used.
It can be shown that
$$sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk =2(1+frac1n+...) text and sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2=2(1+1/n^2+...)$$
We will always know the leading coefficient is 2 because of the $k=0$ and $k=n$ terms. We have an infinite sum of these terms, which fortunately converges because of their alternating weight of $(-1)^m/m.$ The log-binomial sum can be done in closed form:
$$sum_k=0^n log(binomnk)=logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big). $$
$G$ is the Barne's G and its asymptotic expansion is well-known.
Collecting,
$$Ssim logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big) + 2log2+frac2n+O(frac1n^2) $$
Use this expansion for $n=20$ and 4 correct digits are obtained.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
The proposer has pointed out the dominant term and the addition of 1 within the log argument is a minor correction.
$$S:=sum_k=0^nlog(1+binomnk) =sum_k=0^n log(binomnk(1+1/binomnk)sim$$
$$simsum_k=0^n log(binomnk)+sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk-frac12sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2+...$$
where a Taylor series of $log(1+x)$ has been used.
It can be shown that
$$sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk =2(1+frac1n+...) text and sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2=2(1+1/n^2+...)$$
We will always know the leading coefficient is 2 because of the $k=0$ and $k=n$ terms. We have an infinite sum of these terms, which fortunately converges because of their alternating weight of $(-1)^m/m.$ The log-binomial sum can be done in closed form:
$$sum_k=0^n log(binomnk)=logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big). $$
$G$ is the Barne's G and its asymptotic expansion is well-known.
Collecting,
$$Ssim logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big) + 2log2+frac2n+O(frac1n^2) $$
Use this expansion for $n=20$ and 4 correct digits are obtained.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
The proposer has pointed out the dominant term and the addition of 1 within the log argument is a minor correction.
$$S:=sum_k=0^nlog(1+binomnk) =sum_k=0^n log(binomnk(1+1/binomnk)sim$$
$$simsum_k=0^n log(binomnk)+sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk-frac12sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2+...$$
where a Taylor series of $log(1+x)$ has been used.
It can be shown that
$$sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk =2(1+frac1n+...) text and sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2=2(1+1/n^2+...)$$
We will always know the leading coefficient is 2 because of the $k=0$ and $k=n$ terms. We have an infinite sum of these terms, which fortunately converges because of their alternating weight of $(-1)^m/m.$ The log-binomial sum can be done in closed form:
$$sum_k=0^n log(binomnk)=logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big). $$
$G$ is the Barne's G and its asymptotic expansion is well-known.
Collecting,
$$Ssim logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big) + 2log2+frac2n+O(frac1n^2) $$
Use this expansion for $n=20$ and 4 correct digits are obtained.
The proposer has pointed out the dominant term and the addition of 1 within the log argument is a minor correction.
$$S:=sum_k=0^nlog(1+binomnk) =sum_k=0^n log(binomnk(1+1/binomnk)sim$$
$$simsum_k=0^n log(binomnk)+sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk-frac12sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2+...$$
where a Taylor series of $log(1+x)$ has been used.
It can be shown that
$$sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk =2(1+frac1n+...) text and sum_k=0^nfrac1binomnk^2=2(1+1/n^2+...)$$
We will always know the leading coefficient is 2 because of the $k=0$ and $k=n$ terms. We have an infinite sum of these terms, which fortunately converges because of their alternating weight of $(-1)^m/m.$ The log-binomial sum can be done in closed form:
$$sum_k=0^n log(binomnk)=logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big). $$
$G$ is the Barne's G and its asymptotic expansion is well-known.
Collecting,
$$Ssim logBig(fracn!^n+1G(n+2)^2Big) + 2log2+frac2n+O(frac1n^2) $$
Use this expansion for $n=20$ and 4 correct digits are obtained.
answered Aug 28 at 17:01
skbmoore
1,47229
1,47229
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
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
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2897220%2fasymptotic-approximation-of-the-expression-sum-i-0n-log-binomni1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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
1
Is the $+1$ (under the logarithm) essential for the result you need? What is the precision you require?
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:51
(For the main term you can just drop it and apply the Stirling's formula.)
â metamorphy
Aug 28 at 14:55
1
@metamorphy so if one drops 1, then one can write the sum in terms of Gamma and Barnes G functions. I was wondering about keeping +1 to have as much as precision as possible.
â William
Aug 28 at 15:24