I am interested in the field with one element. I am thus interested in combinatorial interpretations of the Gaussian binomial coefficients. Richard Stanley's "Enumerative combinatorics" mentions that they count the number of $k$-dimensional vector subspaces of an $n$-dimensional vector space over a finite field $F_q$ of characteristic $q$. He mentions that they also count the number of Young tableaux that fit in a $k \times (n-k)$ rectangle where each cell has weight $q$. However, he doesn't mention the following interpretation in terms of simplexes and I would like to know if there is any related literature or if it seems original.

Give the vertices of an $n$-simplex weights $1,$ $q,$ $q^2,$ $\ldots,$ $q^{n-1}$ and give weight $1/q$ to each edge. Define the weight of a $k$-simplex to be the product of the weights of its vertices and edges. Then the Gaussian binomial coefficients enumerate the $k$-simplexes within the $n$-simplex. This can be seen by induction from the recurrence relation where given a new vertex of weight $q^{n-1}$, and calculating the polynomial for the $k$-simplexes, we sum the "existing solutions" $[n-1 \:\: k]$ and the "newly possible solutions" $[n-1 \:\: k-1]$ times the weight $q^{n-k}$. The $n$-th vertex, when used in a newly possible solution, contributes weight $q^{n-1}$ and its $k-1$ edges to the other vertices of the $k$-simplex contribute weight $q^{-(k-1)}$ for a total contribution of $q^{n-1}/q^{k-1} = q^{n-k}$.

The $n$-simplex models a total order, that is, an ordered set. The $k$-simplex models an ordered subset. When $q=1$, then we get unordered subsets of an unordered set. This sheds light on a vector space as intrinsically having, in practice, an ordered canonical basis which is constructed or deconstructed. Typically, in constructing the basis, we create elements $e_1$, then $e_2 + f_1\cdot e_1$, $e_3 + f_2\cdot e_2 + f_1\cdot e_1$ where each field element $f_i$ contributes weight $q$. The exponents of these weights indicate an order on the basis elements. When $q=1$, then there is only one scalar, there is no real choice and so there is no way to order the basis elements based on that choice. I wish to know what is known about all of this and where I might take this further? Thank you!

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Welcome to MathOverflow! You can use LaTeX in your question and title: simply use \$ ... \$ for displaying inline maths, and \$\$ ... \$\$ for displaying block equations (centred and on a separate line). $\endgroup$ – R. van Dobben de Bruyn Jun 22 '16 at 2:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ (I think you mean weights $1,q,q^2,...$ for the vertices.) This can easily be seen to be equivalent to the Young diagram interpretation: Young diagrams inside a $k \times (n-k)$ rectangle are in bijection with $k$-subsets of $\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, and the bijection is such that the size of the diagram corresponds to the sum of the subset (minus $1+2+\cdots+k$, the minimum possible sum). $\endgroup$ – Sam Hopkins Jun 22 '16 at 13:52
  • $\begingroup$ R, thank you! and thank you especially to Mee Seong Im for converting my post to LaTex. That makes me feel I can learn it. :) $\endgroup$ – Andrius Kulikauskas Jun 22 '16 at 19:15
  • $\begingroup$ Sam, thank you. I like your bijection. That's helpful. $\endgroup$ – Andrius Kulikauskas Jun 22 '16 at 19:18
  • $\begingroup$ You can also make sure individuals are notified of your responses by prefixing their names with '@'. I can't demonstrate here, because one can't '@'-notify the original poster (but you will see that you as OP get the notification anyway). $\endgroup$ – LSpice Aug 15 '16 at 2:17

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.