Impact
~17k
people reached
- 0 posts edited
- 0 helpful flags
- 14 votes cast
Feb
1 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Dec
28 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Dec
19 |
awarded | Nice Question |
Sep
24 |
awarded | Autobiographer |
Jul
2 |
awarded | Curious |
Feb
28 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Jun
19 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Apr
9 |
awarded | Yearling |
Feb
28 |
awarded | Popular Question |
Sep
16 |
answered | differential-difference three-term recursion |
Aug
18 |
accepted | Why relativization can't solve NP !=P? |
Aug
15 |
asked | Why relativization can't solve NP !=P? |
Aug
6 |
comment |
Recursions which define polynomials
From another comment: "Can you give me some hints on how to generate (say, nontrivially) polynomials from your final formula, having a rational function a(t) ? Thanks! " He asked for method to generate polynomial from Max Alekseyev's formula. So I think providing a method is good enough. |
Aug
6 |
comment |
Recursions which define polynomials
"I could not find any other example of a polynomial sequence generated in this way. I simply look for another such sequence of polynomials, so if you've ever seen something similar, please let me know. One more example would be a good answer to my question.", from author's comment. He just asked for 1 more example. And there is no mention of surprise? |
Aug
6 |
revised |
Recursions which define polynomials
added 299 characters in body; added 80 characters in body |
Aug
6 |
answered | Recursions which define polynomials |
Aug
2 |
revised |
Solving partial difference equation
edited tags |
Aug
1 |
comment |
Solving partial difference equation
Furthermore, for the Eulerian numbers, the order of difference equation for both the variables k and n are 1. But for the equation I asked, it is first order in n, but 2nd order in k. So I think they differ quite a lot. |
Jul
27 |
comment |
Explicit formula for Euler zigzag numbers(Up/down numbers)
Wadim, you are right. It is really an explicit formula. I didn't notice it since I don't know Euler polynomials has explicit expansion. However, the formula you provided has an absolute sign. I think it will make all the manipulation and computation inconvenient? |
Jul
27 |
comment |
Solving partial difference equation
You are right, Zudilin. Are you interested in finding a close form solution? Btw, the zigzags are just the tangent and secant number. Therefore that's not really mine. |