3
$\begingroup$

So, it is well-known that $$ \gcd \left(\binom{m}{k}\mid 1\leq k\lt m \right) = e^{\Lambda(m)}$$ which can incidentally be sparsified for prime $p$ $$ \gcd \left(\binom{p^{r+1}}{1},\binom{p^{r+1}}{p^r}\right) = p $$ and composite $m$ $$ \gcd \left(m,\binom{m}{p^k} \mid p^k \| m\right) = 1 $$

While Understanding that it'll be tricky to get out something as intermittent as von-Mangoldt without putting in something fiddly (like, say, Möbius ...)

  1. Are there clean/effective realizations of these $\gcd$s as particular integer combinations?

    1.1. in particular, is there one that, in some natural sense, treats the prime and composite cases the same?

  2. Have you a favourite such?


For example, it is far from a proof or algorithm, but several small cases can be worked-out, with various tricks, from the fact that for $\omega$ a primitive 3rd root of unity, $1+\omega$ is a square root of $\omega$, e.g.: $$ \omega^2 = (1+\omega)^4 = 1 + \binom{4}{1} \omega + \binom{4}{2} \omega^2 + \binom{4}{3} \omega^3 + \omega^4 $$ $$ 1 = \omega + \binom{4}{1} \omega^2 + \binom{4}{2} + \binom{4}{1} \omega + \omega^2 $$ $$ 2 = \binom{4}{2} - \binom{4}{1} $$ I anticipate, however, that these various tricks probably won't work for $\binom{25}{n}$.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is related to mathoverflow.net/questions/167901 $\endgroup$ Sep 4, 2015 at 13:43
  • $\begingroup$ @JesseC.McKeown what is $\Lambda(m),\mbox{ }\|m$? $\endgroup$
    – Turbo
    Oct 19, 2015 at 16:15
  • $\begingroup$ $\Lambda$ is the von-Mangoldt function; $ p^r \| m $ here means that $p^r | m $ and $p^{r+1} \not | m$ $\endgroup$ Oct 19, 2015 at 16:34

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

It can be done in the following way (this construction is taken from the paper Coefficient rings of formal groups, it was also a part of the answer to the question Is there a better proof of this fact in number theory/formal group theory?).

If $n=p^k$ then $\binom{n}{p^{k-1}}\equiv p\pmod{p^2},$ so we can easely find $\lambda_{p^{k-1}}$ such that $\lambda_{p^{k-1}}\binom{p^k}{p^{k-1}}\equiv p\pmod {p^{k}}$. So for some $\lambda_{1}$ $$\lambda_{p^{k-1}}\binom{p^k}{p^{k-1}}+\lambda_{1}\binom{p^k}{1}=p.$$

Now let $n=p_1^{k_1}\ldots p_s^{k_s}$, where $s>1$. Then by Kummer's theorem $\mathrm{ord}_{p_i}\binom{n}{p_i^{k_i}}=0$ and $\mathrm{ord}_{p_j}\binom{n}{p_i^{k_i}}\ge k_j$ ($j\ne i$). Taking $\lambda_{p_i^{k_i}}\equiv \binom{n}{p_i^{k_i}}^{-1}\pmod{p_i^{k_i}}$ we'll have

$$\lambda_{p_1^{k_1}}\binom{n}{p_1^{k_1}}+\ldots+\lambda_{p_s^{k_s}}\binom{n}{p_s^{k_s}}\equiv 1\pmod n.$$ So for some $\lambda_1$ $$\lambda_{p_1^{k_1}}\binom{n}{p_1^{k_1}}+\ldots+\lambda_{p_s^{k_s}}\binom{n}{p_s^{k_s}}+\lambda_{1}\binom{n}{1}=1.$$

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Hmmm. I agree that this is a good recipe, and I agree that this contains more than "the relevant binomials have THIS gcd", in that most of "The Same" inverse coefficients get used for all composite cases... I do want to say I wasn't lacking for an algorithm to find solutions. Still, this IS already better than that! $\endgroup$ Oct 19, 2015 at 13:57

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.