4
$\begingroup$

With $f(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_1+x_2+x_3;\,1/3,1/3,1/3):= \frac{(x_1+x_2+x_3)!}{x_1!\,x_2!\,x_3!\, 3^{x_1+x_2+x_3}}$ denoting the probability mass function of the equiprobable trinomial distribution as in wiki/Multinomial_distribution, for any $x\in \mathbb N$ it holds, $$\sum_{k_1,k_2\in \mathbb N_0} f(x-1,x+k_1,x+k_2;\, 1/3,1/3,1/3)=1.$$

Because by rewriting $((x-1)+(x+k_1)+(x+k_2))! = \Gamma(3x+k_1+k_2)=\int_0^\infty e^{-t} t^{3x+k_1+k_2-1} \,dt$ and applying $\sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{z^k}{\Gamma(s+k+1)}=\frac{e^z}{z^s\,\Gamma(s)} \, \gamma(s,z)$ (cf. wiki/Incomplete_gamma_function) both sums may be calculated separately and afterwards the $t$ may be integrated out again. (cf. math.SE/double-series-equals-gamma-function.) Therefore, the identity is true even for $x\in [1,\infty)$ if the factorials are replaced by gamma functions.

Is there an intuitive reason behind the identity? (Combinatorial/probabilistic/anything other than mere calculation)

Also, is it true that for $0<\alpha<1/2$, it holds, $$ \lim_{\substack{x\to\infty\\x\in\mathbb N}} \sum_{\substack{k_1,k_2\in \mathbb N_0\\k_1 < \alpha(k_1+k_2)}} f(x-1,x+k_1,x+k_2;\, 1/3,1/3,1/3)=0.$$

This is an open question on math.SE/calculating-parameter-limit-in-some-infinite-double-series.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Suppose we have three bins and are throwing balls with equal probability into each. I think your sum is three times the probability that 1 is the last bin to get $x$ balls in it. $\endgroup$ Sep 23, 2019 at 23:19
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This also makes it clear why the answer to your question is no. If 1 is the last bin to get to $x$ balls (a large number), then at that time, (bin2,bin3) is approximately $\sqrt x$ times some jointly absolutely continuous random variable, supported on all of $\mathbb R_+^2$. The probability that this variable lies outside a wedge is bounded away from 0. $\endgroup$ Sep 23, 2019 at 23:25
  • $\begingroup$ @AnthonyQuas To be sure: You mean (bin2,bin3)-(x,x) [instead of (bin2,bin3)], am I right? Very good answer by the way $\endgroup$
    – maliesen
    Sep 24, 2019 at 13:25
  • $\begingroup$ sorry. Yes. That’s what I meant $\endgroup$ Sep 24, 2019 at 16:06

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

$\newcommand{\Pr}{\mathbb{P}}$

I claim that this limit is in fact not zero. For each $N$, write $\Pr_N$ to be the probability measure on the triple $(X_1,X_2,X_3)$ that is trinomial with $N$ trials and parameters all equal to $1/3$. Then the sum you are interested in is \begin{align}\sum_{N} \Pr_N(X_1 = x-1, 0 \leq (X_2 - x) \leq \alpha(X_2 + X_3 - x - x) ) = \sum_{N} \Pr_N(X_1 = x-1,0 \leq (X_2 - x) \leq \alpha(N - 3x + 1) ) \,. \end{align}

I'll show that the above sum restricted to $3x - 1 \leq N \leq 3x - 1 + O(\sqrt{x})$ is bounded below. Note that \begin{align}\Pr_N(X_1 = x- 1,& 0 \leq (X_2 - x) \leq \alpha(N - 3x + 1)) \\ &= \Pr_N(X_1 = x-1) \cdot \Pr_N(0 \leq (X_2 - x) \leq \alpha(N - 3x + 1)\,|\,X_1 = x-1)\,.\end{align}

Note that for $3x-1 \leq N \leq 3x - 1 + O(\sqrt{x})$, we have that $\Pr_N(X_1 = x-1) = \Omega(1/\sqrt{x})$. You can either compute this precisely with Stirling's formula, or use a local central limit theorem.

Now, note that the law of $X_2$ conditioned on $X_1 = x -1$ is that of a binomial random variable with $N - x + 1$ trials and success probability $1/2$. Writing $M = N - x - 1$, we then have $$\Pr_N(0 \leq (X_2 - x) \leq \alpha(N - 3x + 1)\,|\,X_1 = x-1)= \Pr(0 \leq (Y - x) \leq \alpha(M - 2x))$$

where $Y$ is the aforementioned binomial random variable. We can rewrite this last probability as $$\Pr\left(-\frac{1}{2}(M - 2x) \leq Y - \mathbb{E} Y \leq -(\frac{1}{2} - \alpha)(M - 2x)\right)\,.$$

By the central limit theorem, this is bounded below for $M \leq 2x + O(\sqrt{x})$.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

$\newcommand{\al}{\alpha} \newcommand{\be}{\beta}$ The conjecture about the limit can written as \begin{equation*} S:=\sum_{j=0}^\infty\sum_{k=m_j}^\infty a_{k,j}\underset{x\to\infty}\longrightarrow0, \tag{1} \end{equation*} where \begin{equation*} m_j=\lfloor\be j\rfloor+1,\quad \be:=(1-\al)/\al>1, \end{equation*} \begin{equation*} a_{k,j}:=\frac{(3x+k+j-1)!}{(x-1)!(x+k)!(x+j)!\,3^{3x+k+j-1}}. \end{equation*}

This conjecture is false. Indeed, let $x\to\infty$. Let us write $A\ll B$ and/or $B\gg A$ if $B>0$ and $|A|=O(B)$, and let us write $A\asymp B$ if $A\ll B\ll A$. Let \begin{equation*} r_{k,j}:=\frac{a_{k+1,j}}{a_{k,j}}. \end{equation*} Then, assuming that $0\le k\ll\sqrt x$ and $0\le j\ll\sqrt x$, we have
\begin{equation*} r_{k,j}-1=\frac{j-2k-3}{3x+3k+3}\ll\frac1{\sqrt x}, \end{equation*} whence $a_{k,j}\asymp a_{0,j}$, and similarly $a_{0,j}\asymp a_{0,0}$, so that \begin{equation*} a_{k,j}\asymp a_{0,0}. \end{equation*} In turn, by Stirling's formula, \begin{equation*} a_{0,0}\asymp1/x. \end{equation*} Thus, \begin{equation*} S\ge\sum_{\sqrt x\le j\le2\sqrt x}\;\sum_{k=m_j}^{2m_j} a_{k,j} \gg\sum_{\sqrt x\le j\le2\sqrt x}\;\sum_{k=m_j}^{2m_j} a_{0,0}\gg1, \end{equation*} so that (1) does not hold.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.