17
$\begingroup$

A natural question in combinatorics is, why are certain families of generating functions combinatorially useful, like $\Sigma_n a_n x^n$ and $\Sigma_na_n\frac{x^n}{n!}$, why are other families are not, like $\Sigma_na_n\frac{x^n}{n^2+1}$? Doubilet, Rota, and Stanley proposed in this 1972 paper that $\Sigma a_n\frac{x^n}{B_n}$ is combinatorially useful if and only if $B_n$ is the factorial function of some binomial poset. They justify this on the basis of an isomorphism between the reduced incidence algebra of a binomial poset and the ring of formal power series (viewed as an algebra).

But my question is, what alternate theories are there concerning when a family of generating function is and is not combinatorially useful?

This 1978 paper by Richard Stanley contains the following statement:

Two abstract theories of generating functions have been formulated to try to solve this problem - the Doubilet-Rota-Stanley theory of “reduced incidence algebras”, and the Bender-Goldman theory of “prefabs” (cf. also the “dissect” theory of M. Henley which combines features of both the preceding theories).

But I’m not familiar with either the prefab theory or the dissect theory, so can anyone tell me what alternative account they give for which families of generating functions are combinatorially meaningful? And also have additional theories been developed since Stanley wrote this in 1978? For instance, does Joyal’s theory of combinatorial species address which families of generating functions are combinatorially meaningful?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I would say yes about species. For example, in the notes at the end of Chapter 3 in EC1, Stanley writes: "Among the many alternative theories to binomial posets for unifying various aspects of enumerative combinatorics and generating functions, we mention the theory of prefabs of Bender and Goldman [3.7], dissects of Henle [3.42], linked sets of Gessel [3.31], and species of Joyal [3.44]. The most powerful of these theories is perhaps that of species, which is based on category theory." But someone more expert will probably answer... $\endgroup$ Commented May 8, 2021 at 21:57
  • $\begingroup$ @SamHopkins Yeah I saw that, but because he said “various aspects” I didn’t know if all of those answered the specific question of which families of generating functions are combinatorially useful, as opposed to merely addressing other aspects like the combinatorial meaning of generating function operations. Plus aren’t combinatorial species always used with exponential generating functions? $\endgroup$ Commented May 8, 2021 at 22:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @KeshavSrinivasan: note that also the Dirichlet generating function $\sum_n \frac{a_n}{n! n^s}$ found its way into combinatorial species, see Maia, Méndez, On the arithmetic product of combinatorial species. Furthermore there are analogues for the wreath product groups $Z_r\wr \mathfrak S_n$. But this doesn't answer your question. $\endgroup$ Commented May 9, 2021 at 17:40
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ While not exactly an answer to your question, the umbral calculus can be regarded as an example of something that, as far as I know, isn't neatly subsumed by any of the the theories you mentioned. See for example Ira Gessel's Applications of the classical umbral calculus. $\endgroup$ Commented May 9, 2021 at 23:11

3 Answers 3

6
+50
$\begingroup$

This is just a comment, but too long to fit in the 600 character limit. It would be interesting for someone to compile a list of all functions $B(n)$ for which some combinatorial use has been found for a generating function $\sum a_n\frac{x^n}{B(n)}$. Moreover, for which of these functions $B(n)$ can an example of such a generating function be given that can be explained in a natural way by some existing theory (binomial posets, prefabs, dissects, species, $\dots$)? For example, what about $B(n)=(q^n-1)(q^n-q)\cdots(q^n-q^{n-1})$, which occurs in the enumeration of linear transformations over $\mathbb{F}_q$ (EC1, second ed., Section 1.10)? This function $B(n)$ is the factorial function of a binomial poset (see EC1, second ed., Example 3.18.3(c) and last sentence of Example 3.18.3(e)), but can this poset actually be used to obtain some of the generating functions in EC1, Section 1.10?

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A new kind of generating function $\sum_n a_n x^n/B(n)$ can be found in arxiv.org/abs/1909.01550. Here $B(n) = (1+y)^{\binom{n}{2}} n!_q$ where $q=(1+uy)/(1+y)$. $\endgroup$
    – Ira Gessel
    Commented May 13, 2021 at 21:29
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Richard Stanley It cannot be that $B(n) = (q^n-1)(q^n-q) \cdots(q^n-q^{n-1}) $ is the factorial function for any binomial poset because for $q \geq 3$ we do not have $B(1)=1$. I have that $\mathcal{E}$, the poset of idempotent matrices over $\mathbb{F}_q$ ordered by $A \leq B$ iff $AB=BA=A$ is a binomial poset with factorial function $\frac{|GL_n(\mathbb{F}_q)|}{(q-1)^n}$. Viewing the elements of $\mathcal{E}$ as ordered direct sum decompositions of $\mathbb{F}_q^n$ , i.e., Image(A) $ \oplus$ null(A),, the poset is useful in deriving the generating functions in EC1, Section 1.10 $\endgroup$
    – geoffrey
    Commented Sep 30, 2022 at 19:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @geoffrey: we can make $B(1)=1$ by substituting $(q-1)x$ for $x$. I should have asked about $(q^n-1)(q^n-q)\cdots(q^n-q^{n-1})/(q-1)^n$, not $(q^n-1)(q^n-q)\cdots(q^n-q^{n-1})$. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 30, 2022 at 22:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Continuing my previous comment, in fact $(q^n-1)(q^n-q)\cdots (q^n-q^{n-1})/(q-1)^n$ is the factorial function of a binomial poset when $q$ is a prime power. That is because $(q^n-1)(q^{n-1}-1)\cdots (q-1)/(q-1)^n$ is a factorial function (EC1, second ed., Example 3.18(c)), as is $q^{{n\choose 2}}$ for any positive integer $q$ (stated without proof on page 323 of EC1). Moreover, the product of factorial functions is a factorial function (Example 3.18.3(d). $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 1, 2022 at 14:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ Richard Stanley Yes Thank you I agree. The poset $\mathcal{E}$ In my comment above has the desired factorial function. The ordering I give above is equivalent to the ordering $A \leq B$ iff image(A) $\subseteq$ image(B) and null(A) $\supseteq$ null(B). Viewing the idempotents $E$ as direct sum decompositions of $\mathbb{F}_q^n$ = image(E) $\oplus$ null(E) we can obtain generating functions of the form $ \displaystyle \sum_{n\geq 0} a_n \frac{u^n}{B(n)}$ where $a_n$ counts some class of matrices. I gave some examples in my answer below. $\endgroup$
    – geoffrey
    Commented Oct 6, 2022 at 15:56
5
$\begingroup$

For Bender and Goldman's theory of prefabs, see http://www.iumj.indiana.edu/docs/20060/20060.asp.

Michael Henle's theory of dissects is introduced in Dissection of generating functions, Studies in Appl. Math. 51 (1972), 397–410. A follow-up paper is available at https://www.ams.org/journals/tran/1975-202-00/S0002-9947-1975-0357133-8/S0002-9947-1975-0357133-8.pdf.

Joyal’s theory of combinatorial species does not address which families of generating functions are combinatorially meaningful.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ But what do these two theories say about which families of generating functions are combinatorially meaningful? $\endgroup$ Commented May 9, 2021 at 21:17
  • $\begingroup$ They give some examples, but they don't explain why some kinds of generating functions arise in enumeration and other conceivable kinds don't. These papers aren't hard to read; you can see for yourself. $\endgroup$
    – Ira Gessel
    Commented May 10, 2021 at 4:43
  • $\begingroup$ OK, if they don’t address that specific question, then maybe you should delete this answer and just post these links in a comment? $\endgroup$ Commented May 10, 2021 at 5:48
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @KeshavSrinivasan I found your comment to be rude. This answer provides helpful information and is too long for the comment. Why do you ask Ira to delete it? $\endgroup$ Commented May 13, 2021 at 19:13
  • $\begingroup$ @OlegEroshkin I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to be rude. I assumed that this would be short enough for a comment, so I made a suggestion accordingly to encourage fuller answers to be posted. But if it is too long then fair enough. $\endgroup$ Commented May 13, 2021 at 19:16
3
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathcal{E}$ be the poset of all idempotent matrices over $\mathbb{F}_q$ having only finitely many nonzero entries with the ordering $A \leq B$ iff $AB=BA=A$. Then $\mathcal{E}$ is a binomial poset with factorial function $B(n) = \frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n} $ where $\gamma_n = |GL_n(\mathbb{F}_q)|$. Here are some examples of generating functions of the form $\sum_{n \geq 0}a_n\frac{x^n}{B(n)}$ that stem directly from the binomial poset $\mathcal{E}$ and the isomorphism from the reduced incidence algebra to the ring of formal power series. Let $E_{\mathcal{E}}(u) = \sum_{n \geq 0}\frac{u^n}{B(n)} $

Let $a_n$ be the number of idempotent matrices in $\text{Mat}_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}a_n \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}= E_\mathcal{E}^2(u)$

Let $a_{n,k}$ be the number of idempotent matrices in $\text{Mat}_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$ having rank $k$.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}\sum_{k=0}^{n} a_{n,k} v^k \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}= E_\mathcal{E}(v u) E_\mathcal{E}(u)$

Let $a_n$ be the number of relations in the poset $\mathcal{E}_n$, i.e., the number of ordered pairs $(A,B)$ such that $A \leq B$ with $A,B \in \mathcal{E}_n $.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}a_n \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}= E_\mathcal{E}^3(u)$

Let $a_n$ be the number of covering relations in the poset $\mathcal{E}_n$, i.e., the number of ordered pairs $(A,B)$ such that $A$ is covered by $ B$ with $A,B \in \mathcal{E}_n $.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}a_n \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}= u E_\mathcal{E}^2(u)$

Let $a_n$ be the number of diagonalizable matrices in $\text{Mat}_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}a_n \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}= E_\mathcal{E}^q(u)$

Let $a_n$ be the number of diagonalizable matrices in $\text{Mat}_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$ having rank $k$.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}\sum_{k=0}^{n}a_{n,k}v^k \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}= E_\mathcal{E}(u) E_\mathcal{E}^{q-1}(v u)$

Let $a_{n,k}$ be the number of diagonalizable matrices in $GL_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$ with exactly $k$ distinct eigenvalues.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}\sum_{k=0}^{q}a_{n,k}v^k \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}=(v E_\mathcal{E}( u) - v +1)^q$

Let $a_{n}$ be the number of direct sum decompositions of $\mathbb{F}_q^n$.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}a_n \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}= \exp(E_{\mathcal{E}}(u) -1)$

Let $a_{n,k}$ be the number of direct sum decompositions of $\mathbb{F}_q^n$ into exactly $k$ subspaces.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}\sum_{k=0}^{q}a_{n,k}v^k \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}=\exp(v (E_{\mathcal{E}}(u) -1))$

Let $a_n$ be the number of periodic matrices, i.e., elments that are contained in some (maximal) subroup of $\text{Mat}_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$. In other words, $ \displaystyle a_n = \sum_{e \in \mathcal{E}_n}|G_e|$.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}a_n \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}=E_{\mathcal{E}}(u) /(1- (q-1)u)$

Let $a_{n,k}$ be the number of ordered direct sum decompositions of $\mathbb{F}_q^n$ into exactly $k$ subspaces.

$\displaystyle \sum_{n \geq 0}\sum_{k=0}^{q}a_{n,k}v^k \frac{u^n}{\frac{\gamma_n}{(q-1)^n}}=1/(1- v (E_{\mathcal{E}}(u) -1))$

Substituting $v = -1$ in the generating function above gives $\frac{1}{E_{\mathcal{E}}(u)}$ (the image of the Moebius function $\mu$ under our isomorphism). So for the poset $\mathcal{E}_n$, we have that $\mu(\hat{0},\hat{1})$ is equal to the number of ordered direct sum decompositions of $\mathbb{F}_q^n$ into an even number of subspaces minus the number of such decompositions into an odd number of subspaces. This is an instance of Phillip Hall's Theorem.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .