This should also be a comment. Most combinatorialists (for example, Enumerative Combinatorics, v.1, by R.P. Stanley, page 18) define the Stirling numbers of the first kind to be $(-1)^{(k-m)}c(k,m)$. s(k,m) := (-1)^{(k-m)}c(k,m)$. With that definition, you have the identity $\sum_{k \geq 0} S(n,k)s(k,m) = \delta_{n,m}$ (ibid., p. 35). The sum you give does not always yield 0. When $n=2$ and $m=1$, for example, it equals 2.
|
2 | added 10 characters in body | ||
|
|
||||
|
|
1 |
|
||
|
This should also be a comment. Most combinatorialists (for example, Enumerative Combinatorics, v.1, by R.P. Stanley, page 18) define the Stirling numbers of the first kind to be $(-1)^{(k-m)}c(k,m)$. With that definition, you have the identity $\sum_{k \geq 0} S(n,k)s(k,m) = \delta_{n,m}$ (ibid., p. 35). The sum you give does not always yield 0. When $n=2$ and $m=1$, for example, it equals 2. |
||||
