Timeline for Lower bound for sum of binomial coefficients?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S May 15 at 15:46 | history | suggested | DroneBetter | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
link is dead but was archived once on May 6, 2021 which redirected to its seeming present location, change link to that
|
| May 15 at 15:40 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 15 at 15:46 | |||||
| Feb 16, 2011 at 17:07 | comment | added | user13006 | indeed, I spoke too soon. Doing math immediately after waking up doesn't work so well. | |
| Feb 16, 2011 at 13:39 | comment | added | Emil Jeřábek | Note that the paper only approximates the sums up to a factor of $k$. | |
| Feb 16, 2011 at 12:59 | vote | accept | user13006 | ||
| Feb 16, 2011 at 16:37 | |||||
| Feb 16, 2011 at 12:53 | comment | added | user13006 | Yes! Lemma 2.3 and 2.4 in particular (and, less importantly but still a part, Lemma 2.8) is what is needed to get a tight bound. Interesting that $e^{1/e}$ makes an appearance (via $\min x^{1/x}$ of course). The paper only considers the sums (i.e. probability $1/2$), but with these issues resolved it should be easy to generalize to any $p$. The paper also gets $O(\ldots)$ bounds instead of determining the constants, but the constants can be determined using some of the bounds that Stanica, for example, cites. Looks great! | |
| Feb 16, 2011 at 12:46 | vote | accept | user13006 | ||
| Feb 16, 2011 at 12:59 | |||||
| Feb 16, 2011 at 11:02 | history | answered | Max Alekseyev | CC BY-SA 2.5 |