Timeline for Evaluation of a combinatorial sum (that comes from random matrices)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Feb 27, 2018 at 16:42 | history | suggested | jeq | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Replaced double-backslashes with single-backslashes, to fix rendering.
|
| Feb 27, 2018 at 16:25 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 27, 2018 at 16:42 | |||||
| Jul 8, 2010 at 9:58 | history | edited | Pietro Majer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 1 characters in body
|
| Jul 8, 2010 at 9:39 | comment | added | Pietro Majer | Yes, "concentration" does not tell the whole story, for it still does not explain the role of the Bessel function. Actually, I would have trusted more in: find a convenient equation satisfied by the complete sum, and prove that it identifies the exponential function (that's what I had in mind with that integral representation...). | |
| Jul 8, 2010 at 8:37 | comment | added | Brad Rodgers | This is an interesting idea. I have to admit, an expansion of Bessel functions (and some rearrangement) is how I originally came to this identity. To me it would be a bit surprising if the behavior of $S_\lambda(x)$ follows from some sort of concentration, but I could very well be wrong. | |
| Jul 7, 2010 at 21:02 | history | edited | Pietro Majer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 374 characters in body
|
| Jul 7, 2010 at 11:00 | history | edited | Pietro Majer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 1 characters in body
|
| Jul 7, 2010 at 9:37 | history | edited | Pietro Majer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 38 characters in body
|
| Jul 7, 2010 at 0:02 | history | edited | Pietro Majer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 12 characters in body
|
| Jul 6, 2010 at 23:06 | history | edited | Pietro Majer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 4 characters in body; added 13 characters in body
|
| Jul 6, 2010 at 22:33 | history | answered | Pietro Majer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |