This paper investigates the arithmetic properties of permutations composed of disjoint cycles of fixed length, including periodicity, divisibility, and p-adic valuations, extending previous research in the field.
Contribution
It introduces new polynomial families related to these permutations and provides a comprehensive analysis of their arithmetic and divisibility properties, extending prior work.
Findings
01
Characterization of periodicity modulo integers
02
Analysis of p-adic valuations of permutation counts
03
Identification of divisibility patterns and properties
Abstract
Let d≥2 be an integer. In this paper we study arithmetic properties of the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N, where Hd(n) is the number of permutations in Sn being products of pairwise disjoint cycles of a fixed length d. In particular we deal with periodicity modulo a given positive integer, behaviour of the p-adic valuations and various divisibility properties. Moreover, we introduce some related families of polynomials and study they properties. Among many results we obtain qualitative description of the p-adic valuation of the number Hd(n) extending in this way earlier results of Ochiai and Ishihara, Ochiai, Takegehara and Yoshida.
\displaystyle H_{p-2}(n)\equiv\begin{cases}\begin{array}[]{lll}1,&&\mbox{ if }n\not\equiv-1,-2\pmod{p}\\
\frac{p+1}{2},&&\mbox{ if }n\equiv-2\pmod{p}\\
\frac{p+3}{2},&&\mbox{ if }n\equiv-1\pmod{p}\end{array}\end{cases}\pmod{p}.
\displaystyle H_{p-2}(n)\equiv\begin{cases}\begin{array}[]{lll}1,&&\mbox{ if }n\not\equiv-1,-2\pmod{p}\\
\frac{p+1}{2},&&\mbox{ if }n\equiv-2\pmod{p}\\
\frac{p+3}{2},&&\mbox{ if }n\equiv-1\pmod{p}\end{array}\end{cases}\pmod{p}.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Full text
On some properties of the number of permutations being products of pairwise disjoint d-cycles
Piotr Miska and Maciej Ulas
Abstract.
Let d≥2 be an integer. In this paper we study arithmetic properties of the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N, where Hd(n) is the number of permutations in Sn being products of pairwise disjoint cycles of a fixed length d. In particular we deal with periodicity modulo a given positive integer, behaviour of the p-adic valuations and various divisibility properties. Moreover, we introduce some related families of polynomials and study they properties. Among many results we obtain qualitative description of the p-adic valuation of the number Hd(n) extending in this way earlier results of Ochiai and Ishihara, Ochiai, Takegehara and Yoshida.
The research of the first author was partially supported by the grant of the Polish National Science Centre no. UMO-2018/29/N/ST1/00470
1. Introduction
We let N denote the set of non-negative integers, N+ the set of positive integers, P the set of prime numbers and finally we write N≥k for the set {n∈N:n≥k}. In the sequel we will also need the notion of the p-adic valuation of an integer, where p∈P is fixed. More precisely, if n∈Z then the number
[TABLE]
is called the p-adic valuation of n. We also adopt the standard convention that νp(0)=+∞. From the definition we easily deduce that for each n1,n2∈Z the following properties hold:
[TABLE]
If νp(n1)=νp(n2), then the inequality can be replaced by equality. Moreover, one can easily extend the notion of p-adic valuation to rational numbers x=a/b,b=0, in the following way: νp(x)=νp(a)−νp(b).
Let d∈N≥2, n∈N and consider the number Hd(n) of those σ∈Sn which are products of pairwise disjoint cycles of length d. As usual, the identity permutation is also counted as a product of [math] cycles of length d. In particular, if d=p∈P is a prime number, then Hp(n) counts the number of solutions in Sn of the equation σp=id.
In the paper [1] the authors initiated the study of arithmetic properties of the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N for d=2. In this case, the number H2(n) is the number of involutions in the group Sn. In particular, they obtained several combinatorial identities, presented description of the 2-adic valuation of H2(n) and gave precise information about the rates of growth of H2(n). The mentioned paper can be seen as a complement of case p=2 of the papers [5, 10, 6, 7] concerning p-adic valuations of numbers Hp(n), where p is a prime number. The study of the sequence (Hp(n))n∈N with p-prime, is quite natural because the number Hp(n) counts the elements of order p in the group Sn. However, it seems that there are no results concerning the general sequence (Hd(n))n∈N, where d∈N≥2 is not necessarily a prime. In particular, it should be stressed that there is no results on p-adic valuations of numbers Hd(n), where p is a prime number greater than d (even in the case when d is a prime). Our first aim is to fill this gap and present broad spectrum of results concerning various arithmetic properties of the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N and also some families of polynomials related to them.
Let us introduce the content of the paper.
Section 2 is devoted to basic properties of the general sequence (Hd(n))n∈N. In particular, we recall the standard recurrence relation and closed formula for our sequence. Moreover, we present the expression for the exponential generating function
[TABLE]
With the help of the function Hd(x) we obtain several interesting identities involving elements of our sequence and related sequences (such as roots of unity or Bernoulli numbers).
In Section 3 we study periodicity properties of the sequences of remainders of numbers Hd(n) modulo a given positive integer c. We start with the results for c∈{d+1,d+2}. We continue the work with the case of c being of the form d+k, where k is a fixed positive integer. Next we show that if c is a power of a prime number not equal to d, then c is a period of the sequence (Hd(n)(modc))n∈N. At the end of the section, the result for composite d and arbitrary c or for c co-prime to d is given.
Section 4 begins with a revision of a lower estimate of the p-adic valuation of the number Hp(n):
[TABLE]
where the prime number p is fixed. We give a new proof of this known fact in order to obtain some results on periodicity of sequences (pβnHp(n)(modpr))n∈N, where r∈N+ and βn is mentioned lower bound of νp(Hp(n)) or βn=νp(Hp(n)). Moreover, we show that for each prime number p and j∈{0,...,p−1} there exists a bj∈{0,...,p−1} such that Hp(kp2+jp+bj)=k(p−1)+j for any k∈N. These results can be seen as a complement of the series of papers [5, 10, 6, 7].
In Section 5 we describe the p-adic valuations of the numbers Hd(n), where p>d. In order to do this, we show that the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N is a restriction of a differentiable function fd:Zp→Zp, where Zp is a ring of p-adic integers. Then, we prove that there exists a function gd:Zp×pZp→Qp such that for any x∈Zp and h∈pZp we have
[TABLE]
and gd(x,h)∈Zp if d≥3 or p∣f2(x). At last, we obtain a qualitative description of the sequence (νp(Hd(n)))n∈N using Hensel’s lemma.
Section 6 is devoted to study of a family of polynomials Wd,m(x) which are closely related to m-th derivative of the generating function Hd(x). More precisely, we have Hd(m)(x)=Wd,m(x)Hd(x). We show that Wd,m(x) is a monic polynomial with integral coefficients and we give a formula for its coefficients in case of odd d. These coefficients are expressed in terms of (shifted) elements of the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N. Next, we compute the exponential generating function Wd(x,t) of the sequence (Wd,m(x))m∈N and prove identities and congruences involving these polynomials. We finish the section with the proof of periodicity of the sequence (x⌊pm⌋p(1−p)Wp,m(x)(modp))m∈N.
In Section 7 we deal with divisors of the number Hd(n). The section is divided into three parts. In the first part we show that for each d≥2 the set of prime divisors of numbers Hd(n) is infinite. In the second part we compute the greatest common divisor of numbers Hd(n)−1 and n. As a consequence, we get that the set prime divisors of numbers Hd(n)−1, n∈N, is whole P. The last part is devoted to the study of values 2≤a<b, n∈N and c∈N≥2 such that c divides both Ha(n) and Hb(n).
In Section 8 we introduce the sequence of polynomials (Hd(n,x))n∈N being a generalizations of the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N. Namely, Hd(n,1)=Hd(n) and the coefficient near the xk in the polynomial Hd(n,x) is the number of those permutations in Sn which are products of pairwise disjoint d-cycles and have exactly k fixed points. After that, we compute the remainders of polynomials Hd(n,x) modulo d and study coefficients of the polynomials H2(n−1,x)H2(n+1,x)−H2(n,x)2 and Hd(n−d,x)Hd(n+d,x)−Hd(n,x)2. In particular, we prove that if U(n,x)=H2(n−1,x)H2(n+1,x)−H2(n,x)2, then U(n,x)=V(n,x2), where V∈Z[x] has degree n−1 and all the coefficients of V near xi,i=0,n−1 are positive. Moreover, among some identities and congruences the most interesting result of this section is the result which says that the congruence Hd(n−d,x)Hd(n+d,x)≡Hd(n,x)2(modd!) is true if and only if d is a prime number or a square of a prime number.
Section 9 collects some observations, questions and conjectures related to objects introducted in previous sections.
2. First results
For d∈N≥2 we have Hd(i)=1 for i∈{0,1,…,d−1} by definition and for n≥d the standard combinatorial argument shows that
[TABLE]
where as usual, for m∈N the symbol (u)(m) denotes the falling factorial defined as
[TABLE]
Indeed, let us fix σ∈Sd,n. If σ(n)=n then σ=σ1 for some σ1∈Sd,n−1 and it can be chosen by Hd(n−1) ways. If σ(n)=n then σ=σ1∘π, where π is a d-cycle containing n and σ1 is a product of pairwise disjoint d-cycles on a set {1,...,n}\\mboxsupp(π). Then σ1 can be treated as a member of the set Sd,n−d. Thus, it can be chosen by Hd(n−d) ways. Moreover, π can be chosen in (n−1)(d−1) ways.
Furthermore, in the sequel we will also use the convention Hd(n)=0 for n<0. As a simple consequence of the recurrence formula we see that if q∈N, with q∣(d−1)!, then Hd(n)≡1(modq) for each n∈N. In particular, if d is a composite number >4, then Hd(n)≡1(modd). Moreover, if p is a prime number <d, then νp(Hd(n))=0 for each n∈N.
It is well known that the exponential generating function for the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N is given by
[TABLE]
In consequence, the exact expression for Hd(n) is given by
[TABLE]
The knowledge of the closed form of exponential generating function allows us to obtain some identities involving numbers Hd(n).
Theorem 2.1**.**
The following identities are true.
(1)
[TABLE]
2. (2)
For n∈N+ and d∈N≥3 an odd number we have
[TABLE]
3. (3)
For n∈N+ and d∈N≥2 an even number we have
[TABLE]
4. (4)
Let ζd be a d-th root of unity. Then
[TABLE]
5. (5)
Let ζ2d be a 2d-th root of unity satisfying ζ2dd=−1. Then
[TABLE]
6. (6)
Let d be an even number and (Bn)n∈N denote the sequence of Bernoulli numbers. Then
[TABLE]
7. (7)
For n∈N we have the identity
[TABLE]
Proof.
The identities (1)-(6) can be easily proved with the help of generating functions technique. Indeed, it is well known that for
[TABLE]
we have f(x)g(x)=∑n=0∞n!cnxn with
[TABLE]
In order to get the first identity we write f(x)=Hd(x) and g(x)=e−x and get f(x)g(x)=edxd. Comparing the coefficients on the both sides of this identity we get the result.
In order to get the second identity we put f(x)=Hd(x),g(x)=Hd(−x). Because d≥3 is odd then f(x)g(x)=1 and hence the result.
The third identity can be proved in the same way. Taking d even and f(x)=Hd(x),g(x)=Hd(−x) we get f(x)g(x)=e2dxd and hence the result.
In order to get the fourth identity we put f(x)=e(1−ζd)x,g(x)=Hd(ζdx). Then f(x)g(x)=Hd(x) and the identity follows.
The fifth identity follows by taking f(x)=Hd(ζ2dx),g(x)=Hd(x). In this case f(x)g(x)=e(1+ζ2d)x and we get required identity.
In order to get the sixth identity we put
[TABLE]
i.e., f is the exponential generating function of the sequence (2nBn)n∈N, and
[TABLE]
where An=0 for n odd and An=Hd(n+1)/(n+1) for n even. With f,g chosen in this way we get f(x)g(x)=Hd(−x) and comparing the coefficients near xn on both sides of this identity we get the result.
The last identity is a consequence of the recurrence relation (1). Indeed, rewriting (1) as Hd(m)−Hd(m−1)=(m−1)(d−1)Hd(m−d) and summing from m=1 to n on both sides we get telescoping sum on the left and get
[TABLE]
The result follows.
∎
3. Periodicity of the numbers Hd(n) modulo a given positive integer
We know that if c<d or c=d>4 is a composite number then the sequence (Hd(n)(modc))n∈N is constant and equal to 1. In this section we present some results concerning periodicity of the sequences (Hd(n)(modc))n∈N when c>d. We start with cases c∈{d+1,d+2}. As we will see, the behaviour of the sequence (Hd(n)(modc))n∈N depends mainly on the question whether c is a prime or not.
Proposition 3.1**.**
Let p be an odd prime number. Then for each n∈N we have
[TABLE]
In particular, νp(Hp−1(n))=0 for any n∈N.
If additionally p>3, then
[TABLE]
As a result, νp(Hp−2(n))=0 for any n∈N.
Proof.
We start with the computation of Hp−1(n)(modp). We proceed by induction on n∈N. For n∈{0,...,p−2} we have Hp−1(n)=1. Let us fix now N≥p−1 and assume that congruence (3) is satisfied for each n<N. If N≡−1,0(modp) then by (1) we have
[TABLE]
since in the product of numbers N−1,...,N−p+2 there is a number divisible by p and N−1≡−1(modp), which means that Hp−1(N−1)≡1(modp). If N≡0(modp), then
[TABLE]
since N−1≡−1(modp), N−p+1≡1≡−1(modp) (p>2) and by Wilson’s theorem (p−1)!≡−1(modp). If N≡−1(modp), then
[TABLE]
since N−1 and N−p+1 are not congruent to −1 modulo p and (p−2)!≡1(modp) as an immediate consequence of Wilson’s theorem.
The proof of congruence (4) is analogous. We proceed by induction on n∈N. For n∈{0,...,p−3} we have Hp−2(n)=1. Let us fix now N≥p−2 and assume that congruence (4) is satisfied for each n<N. If N≡−2,−1,0(modp), then by (1) we have
[TABLE]
since in the product of numbers N−1,...,N−p+3 there is a number divisible by p and N−1≡−2,−1(modp), which means that Hp−1(N−1)≡1(modp). If N≡0(modp), then
[TABLE]
since N−1≡−1(modp), N−p+2≡2≡−2,−1(modp) (p≥5) and by Wilson’s theorem (p−1)!≡−1(modp). If N≡−1(modp), then
[TABLE]
since N−1≡−2(modp), N−p+2≡1≡−2,−1(modp) (p≥5) and (p−2)!≡1(modp) as an immediate consequence of Wilson’s theorem. If N≡−2(modp), then
[TABLE]
since N−1≡−3≡−2,−1(modp), N−p+2≡0≡−2,−1(modp) (p≥5) and (p−3)!≡−21(modp) as an easy consequence of Wilson’s theorem.
∎
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let d be a positive integer at least 5. If d+1 is a composite number, then for each n∈N we have Hd(n)≡1(modd+1).
Let d be a positive integer at least 4. If d+2 is a composite number, then for each n∈N we have Hd(n)≡1(modd+2).
Proof.
Since Hd(n)=1 for n∈{0,...,d−1}, Hd(n)=Hd(n−1)+(n−1)(d−1)Hd(n−d) for n≥d and (d−1)!∣(n−1)(d−1) for any n∈N, it suffices to prove that d+1∣(d−1)! in the first part of the statement of our theorem and d+2∣(d−1)! in the second part.
At first, we show d+1∣(d−1)! if d≥5 and d+1 is a composite number. Let q be the least divisor of d+1 greater than 1. Then qd+1≤2d+1<d−1, since d≥5. If q<qd+1, then q and qd+1 are two distinct positive integers appearing as factors in (d−1)!, thus d+1∣(d−1)!. If q=qd+1 then d+1=q2. Since d+1≥6 thus q≥3. Then 2q<q2−2=d−1 and q,2q appear as factors in (d−1)!. Hence d+1∣(d−1)!.
Now we prove d+2∣(d−1)! if d≥4 and d+2 is a composite number. Let q be the least divisor of d+2 greater than 1. Then qd+2≤2d+2≤d−1, since d≥4. If q<qd+2, then q and qd+2 are two distinct positive integers appearing as factors in (d−1)!, thus d+2∣(d−1)!. If q=qd+2 then d+2=q2. Since d+2≥6 thus q≥3. Then 2q≤q2−3=d−1 and q,2q appear as factors in (d−1)!. Hence d+1∣(d−1)!.
∎
According to the last proposition and numerical computations, we prove that for a fixed positive integer k and sufficiently large positive integer d such that d+k is a composite number, the sequence (Hd(n)(modd+k))n∈N is constant and equal to 1.
Theorem 3.3**.**
Let us fix k∈N+. Then for each positive integer d≥max{k+2,3+2k+2} such that d+k is a composite number there holds Hd(n)≡1(modd+k) for all n∈N.
Proof.
Similarly as in the proof of the previous proposition, it suffices to show that d+k∣(d−1)!. Let q be the least divisor of d+k greater than 1. Then qd+k≤2d+k≤d−1, since d≥k+2. If q<qd+k, then q and qd+k are two distinct positive integers appearing as factors in (d−1)!, thus d+k∣(d−1)!. If q=qd+k then d+k=q2. Since 3+2k+2=(1+k+2)2−k and d≥(1+k+2)2−k, we have q=d+k≥1+k+2. As a consequence, 2q≤q2−k−1=d−1 and q,2q appear as factors in (d−1)!. Hence d+k∣(d−1)!.
∎
For our next result, we need the following auxiliary lemma.
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let p be a prime number and d be a composite positive integer divisible by p. Assume that (p,d)=(2,4). Then pd−2≥νp(d).
Proof.
If νp(d)=1 then d≥2p as d is a composite number. We thus have
[TABLE]
as p≥2. If p≥3 and νp(d)≥2 or p=2 and ν2(d)≥3 then
[TABLE]
which implies pd−2≥νp(d). If p=2, ν2(d)=2 and d=4 then d≥3⋅4 and
[TABLE]
Our lemma is proved.
∎
We are ready to prove the main result of the section. It concerns periodicity of the sequence (Hd(n)(modpr))n∈N, where p is a prime number not equal to d and r is any positive integer. More precisely, we have the following
Theorem 3.5**.**
Let d,r be positive integers with d≥2. Let p be a prime number not equal to d. Assume that (d,p,r)=(4,2,2). Then the sequence (Hd(n)(modpr))n∈N is periodic of period pr. Moreover, if p>d, then pr is the basic period of the sequence (Hd(n)(modpr))n∈N.
Proof.
Let us notice that for the proof that pr is a period of (Hd(n)(modpr))n∈N we only need to show that
[TABLE]
Then, using (1) and a simple induction on n∈N, we prove that Hd(n+pr)≡Hd(n)(modpr).
In order to prove (5) we will use the exact formula
[TABLE]
and show that for k>1, the k-th summand in the above sum has the p-adic valuation greater than r. We write this summand:
[TABLE]
It suffices to show, that νp(k!(pr−1)(dk−1)dk1)≥0. If νp(d)=0 then the mentioned inequality is true. We thus assume that νp(d)>0. Since (dk−1)!∣(pr−1)(dk−1), we have
[TABLE]
We estimate νp((dk−1)((d−1)k−1)) from below by number of multiples of p among factors dk−1,dk−2,...,k+1 and use Lemma 3.4 to obtain the following.
[TABLE]
This implies νp(k!(pr−1)(dk−1)dk1)≥0 and finishes the proof of (5).
We need to show that pr is the basic period of the sequence (Hd(n)(modpr))n∈N provided that p>d. Let us assume by contrary that pr−1 is a period of (Hd(n)(modpr))n∈N. If r=1 then we directly obtain a contradiction, since the sequence (Hd(n)(modp))n∈N is not constant. Indeed, Hd(d)=1+(d−1)!≡1(modp) as d<p. If r>1, then we consider the congruences
[TABLE]
that are equivalent to
[TABLE]
Since Hd(pr−1+d−1)≡Hd(d−1)(modpr), Hd(pr−1+d)≡Hd(d)(modpr) and Hd(pr−1)≡Hd(0)≡Hd(pr−1+1)≡Hd(1)≡1(modpr), we get the following:
[TABLE]
and equivalently
[TABLE]
After simplification (where we divide by (d−1)! and d!, respectively, and these numbers are coprime to p) we obtain two congruences
[TABLE]
Subtracting the second congruence from the first one, we get 1−d1≡0(modp), or equivalently dd−1≡0(modp). This is impossible since 0<d−1<p. Hence pr must be the basic period of the sequence (Hd(n)(modpr))n∈N.
∎
Remark 3.6**.**
In the case of (d,p,r)=(4,2,2) the sequence (H4(n)(mod4))n∈N has the basic period 8. More precisely, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We prove by induction on m∈N that
[TABLE]
We check that congruence (6) holds for m=0 and i∈{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7}. Assume now that it is satisfied by some m∈N. By direct calculations we show (6) for m+1.
∎
Example 3.7**.**
If p<d, then it is possible that pr is not the basic period of the sequence (Hd(n)(modpr))n∈N. For example, if d=5, p=2, r=4, then we obtain a sequence (H5(n)(mod16))n∈N, which has a period 8<24.
Another example is for d=10, p=3, r=5. The basic period of the sequence (H10(n)(mod243))n∈N is 27<35.
Based on the above considerations we can give precise value of the period of the sequence (Hd(n)(modc))n∈N provided that d is a composite number or d∤c.
Corollary 3.8**.**
Let c,d∈N+ and d>1. Assume additionally that d is a composite number or d∤c. Then the sequence (Hd(n)(modc))n∈N is periodic of period 2c if d=4 and ν2(c)=2 and c otherwise.
4. The behaviour of the p-adic valuation of Hp(n) for some p
Amdeberhan and Moll were able to compute the exact value of the 2-adic valuation of H2(n) for n∈N. Quite unexpected they proved that for given i∈{0,1,2,3} the sequence (ν2(H2(4n+i))−n)n∈N is constant. This raises natural question whether the sequence of p-adic valuations of Hp(n) can share similar property. In fact, this question was studied earlier by Ochiai in [10]. In the cited paper the reader can find the formulae for the p-adic valuation of the numbers Hp(n), n∈N, where p is a prime number at most equal to 11. Actually, Ochiai in his paper gave a qualitative description of the sequence (νp(Hp(n)))n∈N for any prime number p≤23. Further, Ishihara, Ochiai, Takegahara and Yoshida extend this result for any prime number p in [6]. In particular, the following inequality holds true
[TABLE]
for all n∈N, where the equality holds if p∣⌊pn⌋. This inequality was proved for p=2 by Chowla, Herstein and Moore in [3]. In general, this inequality was proved by Grady and Newman in [5]. Moreover, in 2010 Kim and Kim gave a combinatorial proof of the above inequality. Despite this facts we would like to give the proof of (7) different than the ones presented by mentioned authors. In consequence, we will be able to prove the following two results which have not appeared yet in the literature.
Theorem 4.1**.**
For each odd prime number p the sequence
[TABLE]
is periodic with the basic period p2. Moreover, the sequence
[TABLE]
has basic period equal to 2p2.
Proposition 4.2**.**
For each prime number p there are numbers b0,...,bp−1∈{0,...,p−1} such that b0=p−1, bj−1−bj∈{0,1} for j∈{1,...,p−1} and νp(Hp(kp2+jp+bj))=k(p−1)+j for all k∈N and j∈{0,...,p−1}. In particular, bj≥p−j−1.
We start with one lemma. We omit its proof as it can be found in [6, Lemma 2.1].
Lemma 4.3**.**
If p is an odd prime number and k is a positive integer then
[TABLE]
At this moment, we give a result on congruences involving numbers Hp(n), n∈N. This result is crucial in the proof of Theorem 4.1.
Theorem 4.4**.**
For odd prime number p, a non-negative integer k and integers i,j∈{0,1,...,p−1} we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We prove the congruences concerning numbers Hp(n) for n∈N. We proceed by induction on n. We write n=kp2+jp+i with k∈N and i,j∈{0,...,p−1}. If k=j=0, then the statement of the theorem holds for all i∈{0,...,p−1}.
Let us assume that n=kp2 for some k∈N+. By induction hypothesis for (k−1)p2+(p−1)p+p−1 and (k−1)p2+(p−1)p, Wilson’s theorem and Lemma 4.3 we obtain
[TABLE]
Assume now that n=kp2+jp for k∈N and j∈{1,...,p−1}. By the recurrence (1), induction hypothesis for n=kp2+(j−1)p+p−1, Lemma 4.3 and Wilson’s theorem we have
[TABLE]
since pk(p−1)+j−1−t∣Hp(kp2+(j−1−t)p).
At this moment we assume that n=kp2+jp+i for k∈N and i,j∈{0,...,p−1}. If i=0, then the third congruence obviously is true. For i>0, by (1), induction hypothesis for n=kp2+jp+i−1 and Wilson’s theorem we have
[TABLE]
∎
We are ready to prove the lower bound for the p-adic valuation of Hp(n).
Corollary 4.5**.**
For odd prime number p, non-negative integer k and integers i,j∈{0,1,...,p−1} we have νp(Hp(kp2+jp+i))≥k(p−1)+j, where the inequality is in fact equality for j=0. In other words,
[TABLE]
for all n∈N.
Proof.
We only need to prove that νp(Hp(kp2+jp+i))=k(p−1)+j for j=0. We proceed by induction on i∈{0,...,p−1}. The equality νp(Hp(kp2+i))=k(p−1) holds for i=0 by Theorem 4.4. If i>0, then we write
[TABLE]
Then νp((kp2+i−1)(p−1))≥2, since kp2 appears as a factor in (kp2+i−1)(p−1). We know that νp(Hp((k−1)p2+(p−1)p+i))≥(k−1)(p−1)+(p−1)=k(p−1). Thus the summand (kp2+i−1)(p−1)Hp((k−1)p2+(p−1)p+i) has the p-adic valuation at least k(p−1)+2 while, by induction hypothesis νp(Hp(kp2+i−1))=k(p−1). Hence, we get νp(Hp(kp2+i))=k(p−1).
∎
Now we give the proofs of the main results of this section.
Let us define γn=⌊p2n⌋⋅(p−1)+(⌊pn⌋(modp)) for simplicity of notation. At first, we show that
[TABLE]
for each n∈N. We write n=kp2+jp+i, k∈N, i,j∈{0,1,...,p−1}, and proceed by induction on jp+i. By Theorem 4.4 we see that the congruence (8) is satisfied for jp+i=0. If jp+i>0 and i>0 then
[TABLE]
If jp+i>0 and i=0 then we perform similar computations as in the proof of Theorem 4.4.
[TABLE]
We are left with proving that p2 is a basic period of the sequence ((−1)⌊p2n⌋pγnHp(n)(modp))n∈N. It suffices to show that p is not a period of the sequence ((−1)⌊p2n⌋pγnHp(n)(modp))n∈N. In order to do this, we assume the contrary. In particular, we have pHp(p+1)≡Hp(1)=1(modp). Using recurrence relation for numbers Hp(n) we obtain the congruences
[TABLE]
or equivalently
[TABLE]
Since p is a period of the sequence ((−1)⌊p2n⌋pγnHp(n)(modp))n∈N, we thus have pHp(p)≡Hp(0)=1(modp). Hence,
[TABLE]
which means that
[TABLE]
However, the number (p−1)(p−2) is not divisible by p. A contradiction shows that p is not a period of the sequence ((−1)⌊p2n⌋pγnHp(n)(modp))n∈N.
The sequence (pγnHp(n)(modp))n∈N is thus periodic with period 2p2. We know, that p2 is not a period of this sequence, as pk(p−1)Hp(kp2)≡(−1)k(modp). The number 2 also cannot be a period of this sequence. If we assume the contrary then, since Hp(0)≡Hp(1)≡1(modp), we have pγnHp(n)≡1(modp). This stays in contradiction with the fact, that pp−1Hp(p2)≡−1(modp). It suffices to show that 2p is not a period of the sequence (pγnHp(n)(modp))n∈N. In order to do this, we assume the contrary. In particular, we have p2Hp(2p+1)≡Hp(1)=1(modp) and p2Hp(2p+2)≡Hp(2)=1(modp). Using recurrence relation for numbers Hp(n) we obtain the congruences
[TABLE]
or equivalently
[TABLE]
Since 2p is a period of the sequence (pγnHp(n)(modp))n∈N, we thus have p2Hp(2p)≡Hp(0)=1(modp) and p2Hp(2p+1)≡Hp(1)=1(modp). Hence,
[TABLE]
which means that
[TABLE]
The numbers 2(p−1)(p−2) and 2(2p+1)(2p−1)(p−3) are both not divisible by p. Hence, the numbers Hp(p+1) and Hp(p+2) are divisible by p2. On the other hand, Hp(p+2)=Hp(p+1)+(p+1)(p−1)Hp(2)=Hp(p+1)+(p+1)p(p−1)(p−3). The number (p+1)p(p−1)(p−3) is not divisible by p2. This is why the numbers Hp(p+1) and Hp(p+2) cannot be both divisible by p2. A contradiction shows that p is not a period of the sequence (pγnHp(n)(modp))n∈N.
∎
If p=2, then the result is well known (see for example [1, Theorem 4.1]). From Corollary 4.5 we know that νp(Hp(p−1))=0. Hence we put b0=p−1. Let us fix j∈{1,...,p−1} and assume by induction hypothesis that we have bj−1∈{p−j,...,p−1} satisfies the equality νp(Hp((j−1)p+bj−1))=j−1. By Corollary 4.5 we have νp(Hp(jp+bj−1−1))≥j and νp(Hp(jp+bj−1))≥j. Moreover, νp((jp+bj−1−1)(p−1))=1. By the equality
[TABLE]
since νp((jp+bj−1−1)(p−1)Hp((j−1)p+bj−1))=j, we infer that at least one of the numbers Hp(jp+bj−1), Hp(jp+bj−1−1) has the p-adic valuation equal to j. We thus take bj as one of the values bj−1−1, bj−1 such that νp(Hp(jp+bj))=j. In particular, bj≥p−j−1. At last, we use Theorem 4.1 to obtain
[TABLE]
since νp(Hp(jp+bj))=j. Hence νp(Hp(kp2+jp+bj))=k(p−1)+j for each k∈N.
∎
In Theorem 4.1 we proved periodicity of the sequence (Hp(n)/pγp(n))n∈N, where
[TABLE]
In general, we ask the following.
Question 4.6**.**
For which p∈P and w∈N+ the sequence
[TABLE]
is periodic?
Theorem 4.7**.**
For each prime number p and positive integer w the sequence
[TABLE]
is periodic with period p2w+1(p−1).
Proof.
By [6, Theorem B] we know that there exist power series λ,fr∈Zp[[x]], r∈{0,...,p2−1}, convergent on Zp such that Hp(kp2+r)=pk(p−1)fr(k)∏l=1kλ(l) for each k∈N and νp(Hp(kp2+r))=k(p−1)+νp(fr(k)). Let us take any n∈N and write n=kp2+r for some k∈N and r∈{0,...,p2−1}. Then, by the above fact we have the following chain of congruences for any t∈N:
[TABLE]
where we use Euler’s theorem as p∤λ(l) for any l∈N.
∎
Let us define a particular subset of the set of prime numbers:
[TABLE]
Then we are able to give a partial answer to Question 4.6.
Corollary 4.8**.**
If p∈A then for each w∈N+ the sequence (pνp(Hp(n))Hp(n)(modpw))n∈N is periodic with period p2w+2α(p)+1(p−1), where α(p)=maxr∈{p,...,p2−1}αr(p)
Proof.
By the previous theorem we have
[TABLE]
for each t∈N. After division by pαr(p), where r=n(modp2), we get
[TABLE]
Since α(p)−αr(p)≥0, we thus obtain
[TABLE]
as we wanted to prove.
∎
Corollary 4.9**.**
The sequence
[TABLE]
is periodic of period 16.
Proof.
Since 2∈A and α(2)=2 (see for example [1, Theorem 4.1]), by the previous corollary we know that the sequence (2ν2(H2(n))H2(n)(mod4))n∈N is periodic with period 29. Hence it suffices to check the values 2ν2(H2(n))H2(n) modulo 4 for n∈{0,...,511} one by one.
∎
In case of p∈A we predict that the sequence (pνp(Hp(n))Hp(n)(modpw))n∈N is not periodic for any w∈N+ but proving this fact seems to be out of reach for us.
5. The behaviour of the p-adic valuation of Hd(n), where p>d
On the beginning of the paper we marked that if p is a prime number <d, then νp(Hd(n))=0 for each n∈N. The problem of computation of the p-adic valuations of the numbers Hd(n) in case p=d was considered in the previous section and it was studied in several publications. In the opposition to this fact the question concerning the computation of the p-adic valuations of the numbers Hd(n), where p>d, is almost unexplored. It was first considered by Amdeberhan and Moll in [1]. According to results on periodicity of the sequence (H2(n)(modc))n∈N they claimed that if p is an odd prime number not dividing the values H2(n) for n∈{0,...,p−1}, then νp(Hd(n))=0 for each n∈N. The situation is more complicated if p divides some of those values. It happens for p=5. Based on numerical computations they stated a conjecture which equivalent version is as follows
Conjecture 5.1**.**
If p is an odd prime number such that p∣H2(n) for some n∈{0,...p−1} then for each k∈N+ there exists a unique nk modulo pk such that pk∣H2(n) if and only if n≡nk(modpk).
The above conjecture is not true for two reasons. The first reason is that there exist prime numbers p and positive integers n1 such that νp(H2(n))=1 for each n≡n1(modp), for example (p,n1)=(19,6). The second one is that for some prime numbers p, for example 59 and 61, there exist more than one value n1 modulo p such that p∣H2(n) for n≡n1(modp).
The aim of this section is to shed some light on the behaviour of νp(Hd(n)) in the case when p>d.
We use the exact formula for the number Hd(n) and make some modifications:
[TABLE]
The above notation suggests us to define the function fd(x)=∑k=0+∞k!dk(x)(dk), x∈Zp. This function is well defined for each x∈Zp as
[TABLE]
where the last value in the above inequalities tend to +∞ when k→+∞. The following three lemmas show that
•
fd is a p-adic differentiable function,
•
there exists a function gd:Zp×pZp→Qp such that fd(x+h)=fd(x)+hfd′(x)+h2gd(x,h) for any x∈Zp, h∈pZp and gd(x,h)∈Zp if only d≥3 or p∣f2(x),
•
fd′(x1)≡fd′(x2)(modpr) if x1≡x2(modpr).
By the above facts we will be able to describe behaviour of the p-adic valuations of numbers Hd(n), n∈N, using classical Hensel’s lemma.
Lemma 5.2**.**
The function fd is differentiable and fd′(x)=∑k=1+∞∑j=0dk−1k!dk(x)(j)(x−j−1)(dk−j−1)∈Zp for each x∈Zp.
Proof.
We compute the derivative from the very definition:
[TABLE]
where we put ∑0≤j1<...<jt≤dk−1(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jt)(x)(dk)=(x)(dk) for t=0. We estimate the p-adic valuation of k!dk(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jt)ht−2(x)(dk) from below. We will do this by estimating the p-adic valuation of the product (x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−l), where 0≤j1<...<jdk−l≤dk−1, from below by the number of factors x−j1,...,x−jdk−l divisible by p. This number is at least equal to ⌊pdk⌋−l. Indeed, we have at least ⌊pdk⌋ numbers divisible by p among all the p-adic integers x−dk+1,x−dk+2,...,x and we cancel at most l numbers divisible by p from them. Hence,
[TABLE]
where we assumed that νp(h)≥1 and use the Legendre formula νp(k!)=p−1k−sp(k). Here, sp(k) is the sum of digits of the number k written in the (unique) p-ary expansion. Hence, the p-adic valuation of
[TABLE]
is at least −2 and it tends to +∞ when k→+∞. Thus, the series
[TABLE]
is convergent and its p-adic valuation is at least −2. We infer that
[TABLE]
when h→0. This is why fd′(x)=∑k=1+∞∑j=0dk−1k!dk(x−j)(x)(dk)=∑k=1+∞∑j=0dk−1k!dk(x)(j)(x−j−1)(dk−j−1). This series is convergent, as
[TABLE]
when k→+∞, where we used the fact that j,dk−j−1<dk, so j,dk−j−1 have at most ⌊logpdk⌋+1p-ary digits. Moreover,
[TABLE]
as at least one of the numbers j,dk−j−1 is greater than or equal to k. Thus the p-adic valuation of ∑k=1+∞∑j=0dk−1k!dk(x)(j)(x−j−1)(dk−j−1) is non-negative.
∎
Lemma 5.3**.**
For each x,h∈Zp with νp(h)≥1 we have fd(x+h)=fd(x)+hfd′(x)+h2gd(x,h), where gd(x,h)=∑l=2+∞xl−2∑k=⌈dl⌉+∞k!dk1∑0≤j1<...<jdk−l≤dk−1(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−l). Moreover, if d≥3 or νp(f2(x))≥1, then gd(x,h)∈Zp.
Proof.
Let us fix x,h∈Zp with νp(h)≥1. We then have:
[TABLE]
For the change of the order of summation, we will show that
[TABLE]
Let us estimate the p-adic valuation of the number ∑0≤j1<...<jdk−l≤dk−1(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−l) from below. We have the inequality
[TABLE]
Since p>d≥2, we thus have
[TABLE]
Then we change summation in the last expression in (9) and get the following:
[TABLE]
where gd(x,h)=∑l=2+∞hl−2∑k=⌈dl⌉+∞k!dk1∑0≤j1<...<jdk−l≤dk−1(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−l). Now, we are left with the proof that νp(gd(x,h))≥0 provided that νp(fd(x))≥1 or d≥3. If k<p, where d≥2 is arbitrary, then, of course, νp(k!dkhl−2∑0≤j1<...<jdk−l≤dk−1(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−l))≥0. By (10) we know that
[TABLE]
We check that p(p−1)[(d−1)(p−1)−1]k+psp(k)−2≥p(p−1)[2(p−1)−1](p+1)−2=p(p−1)(2p−3)(p+1)−2≥0 for p>d≥3 and k≥p+1. If d≥3 and k=p, then either l≥3 and then νp(hl−2)≥l−2≥1=νp(p!) or l=2 an then in each product of the form (x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−2), where 0≤j1<...<jdk−2≤dk−1 there is a factor with the p-adic valuation at least equal to 1. Hence, νp(k!dkhl−2∑0≤j1<...<jdk−l≤dk−1(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−l))≥0 for d≥3 and k=p. If d=2, then p(p−1)[(d−1)(p−1)−1]k+psp(k)−2≥p(p−1)[(p−1)−1](2p+4)−2=p(p−1)(p−2)(2p+4)−2≥0 for p≥5 and k≥2p+4 (we do not need to consider the case of p=3 as 3∤H2(n) for any n∈N). If d=2, p≤k≤2p−1 and l≥3, then νp(hl−2)≥l−2≥1=νp(k!). Hence, νp(k!dkhl−2∑0≤j1<...<jdk−l≤dk−1(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−l))≥0 for d=2, p≤k≤2p−1 and l≥3. If d=2 and 2p≤k≤2p+3, where p≥5, then either l≥4 and then νp(hl−2)≥l−2≥2=νp(k!) or l∈{2,3} and then in each product of the form (x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−j2k−l), where 0≤j1<...<j2k−l≤2k−1 there are at least 4−l factors with the p-adic valuation at least equal to 1. Hence, νp(hl−2∑0≤j1<...<j2k−l≤dk−1(x−j1)⋅...⋅(x−jdk−l))≥l−2+4−l=2=νp(k!). We left with the case of d=2, p≤k≤2p−1 and l=2. Let us assume that νp(f2(x))≥1 and write r=x(modp). We then compute modulo p:
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
This ends the proof of the fact that gd(x,h)∈Zp on condition that νp(fd(x))≥1 or d≥3.
∎
Lemma 5.4**.**
Let x,h∈Zp with νp(h)≥1. If d≥3 or νp(f2(x))≥1, then fd′(x+h)≡fd′(x)(modpνp(h)).
Proof.
By the previous lemma we can write
[TABLE]
After adding the above two equalities and simplifying we obtain
[TABLE]
Since d≥3 or νp(f2(x))≥1, by the previous lemma we have that νp(gd(x,h)),νp(gd(x+h,−h))≥0. Thus, p2νp(h)∣h2(gd(x,h)+gd(x+h,−h)), which implies that p2νp(h)∣h(fd′(x)−fd′(x+h)). Hence, pνp(h)∣fd′(x)−fd′(x+h), or equivalently, fd′(x+h)≡fd′(x)(modpνp(h)).
∎
At this moment we are prepared to state the theorem on qualitative description of the sequence (νp(Hd(n))n∈N.
Theorem 5.5**.**
Let d be a positive integer at least equal to 2, p>d be a prime number and k be a positive integer. Assume that Hd(nk)≡0(modpk) for some integer nk. Then the number of solutions n modulo pk+1 of the congruence Hd(n)≡0(modpk+1), satisfying the condition n≡nk(modpk), is equal to:
•
1, when fd′(nk)≡0(modp);
•
[math], when fd′(nk)≡0(modp) and Hd(nk)≡0(modpk+1);
•
p, when fd′(nk)≡0(modp) and Hd(nk)≡0(modpk+1).
In particular, if p∣Hd(n1) for some n1∈N and νp(fd′(n1))=0, then for each k∈N+ there exists a unique value nk modulo pk such that if n≡n1(modp), then pk∣Hd(n) if and only if n≡nk(modpk). In other words there exists a unique p-adic integer b≡n1(modp) such that νp(Hd(n))=νp(n−b) for each non-negative integer n≡n1(modp).
Proof.
We have Hd(n)=fd(n) for each n∈N. Moreover, we know that fd(x+h)=fd(x)+hfd′(x)+h2gd(x,h) for x,h∈Zp with νp(h)≥1. Furthermore, if d≥3 or νp(f2(x))≥1, then gd(x,h)∈Zp and fd′(x1)≡fd′(x2)(modp) for congruent p-adic integers x1,x2 modulo p. These all facts make the proof of our theorem exactly the same as the proof of classical Hensel’s lemma from [9, p. 44].
∎
Remark 5.6**.**
Let us compute fd′(n)(modp) for n∈N:
[TABLE]
as k!(dk−n−1)!=(kdk−n−1)((d−1)k−n−1)! and p∣((d−1)k−n−1)! if p≤(d−1)k−n−1. That is a way to compute the value fd′(n)(modp) by adding only finitely many summands.
However, in many cases, having d∈N≥2, a prime number p and n1∈{d,...,p−1} such that p∣Hd(n1) (recall that Hd(n)=1 for n∈{0,...,d−1}), we do not need to compute fd′(n)(modp). Instead of this, it suffices to compute νp(Hd(n1)). If νp(Hd(n1))=1, then we check p-adic valuations of numbers Hd(n1+pt) for t∈{1,...,p−1}. If νp(Hd(n1+pt))≥2 for some t∈{1,...,p−1} then for each k∈N+ there exists a unique value nk modulo pk such that if n≡n1(modp) then pk∣Hd(n) if and only if n≡nk(modpk). Otherwise, νp(Hd(n))=1 for any n≡n1(modp). If νp(Hd(n1))≥2 then we only check p-adic valuation of the number Hd(n1+p). If νp(Hd(n1+p))=1 then for each k∈N+ there exists a unique value nk modulo pk such that if n≡n1(modp) then pk∣Hd(n) if and only if n≡nk(modpk). Otherwise, νp(Hd(n))≥2 for any n≡n1(modp).**
Remark 5.7**.**
We found all the triples (d,p,n1) for d∈{2,3,4,5}, first 25 prime numbers p and numbers n1∈{d,...,p−1} such that p∣Hd(n1). We checked the behaviour of the p-adic valuations of numbers Hd(n) where n≡n1(modp). The only triples (d,p,n1) such that νp(Hd(n))=1 for all n≡n1(modp) are (2,19,6), (3,13,7). For any other triple and a positive integer k we have the existence of a unique nk modulo pk such that if n≡n1(modp) then pk∣Hd(n) if and only if n≡nk(modpk).**
6. Properties of polynomials attained during differentiation the exponential generating function of the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N
Let m∈N and for m-th derivative of Hd(x) we write Hd(m)(x)=Wd,m(x)Hd(x). We have Wd,0(x)=1 and due to the identity
[TABLE]
we immediately deduce the recurrence relation
[TABLE]
We summarize the basic properties of the sequence (Wd,m(x))m∈N in the following:
Theorem 6.1**.**
The following properties hold:
(1)
Wd,n(x)* is unitary polynomial with non-negative integer coefficients and degWd,n(x)=(d−1)n;*
2. (2)
Wd,n(0)=Hd(n);
3. (3)
For d∈N≥2 and m∈N let us write
[TABLE]
If d∈N≥3 is an odd number then
[TABLE]
4. (4)
The exponential generating function for the sequence (Wd,n(x))n∈N takes the form
[TABLE]
Proof.
(1) This is clear. Because Wd,0(x)=1 is a polynomial and on the right hand side of the recurrence Wd,m(x)=Wd,m−1′(x)+(1+xd−1)Wd,m−1(x), m∈N+, we have only addition and multiplication then simple induction gives the result. Similarly simple induction shows the equality degWd,m(x)=(d−1)m.
(2) Because Hd(0)=1 then Hd(m)(0)=Wd,m(0) and thus Wd,m(0) is just the coefficient near xm/m! in the power series expansion of Hd(x) in the neighborhood of the point x=0. Hence the result.
(3) The stated identity is a simple consequence of the definition of the sequence (Wd,m(x))m∈N. Indeed, in the case of odd d we have Hd(x)−1=Hd(−x). Let us also note that
[TABLE]
In consequence, from the identity
[TABLE]
we see that the coefficient near xn in the power series expansion of the function Hd(m)(x)Hd(−x) is just the coefficient of Wd,m(x) near xn. But in this case the n-th coefficient is exactly the sum stated in the statement of our result.
(4) It is clear that the function Hd(x)Wd,n(x) is the coefficient near tn/n! in the power series expansion of the function Hd(x)Wd(x,t) in the neighborhood of the point t=x. Indeed,
[TABLE]
Multiplying both sides by Hd(x)−1 we get
[TABLE]
and hence the result.
∎
As an immediate consequence of the shape of exponential generating function for (Wd,n(x))n∈N we get the following:
Corollary 6.2**.**
The sequence (Wd,n(x))n∈N satisfies the following recurrence relation: Wd,n(x)=0 for n<0, Wd,0(x)=1 and
[TABLE]
for n≥1.
Proof.
By comparing the coefficients near tn in the identity
[TABLE]
we get the equality
[TABLE]
Multiplying both sides by n!, writing n!/(n−i)! as (n)(i−1) and replacing n by n−1 and i by j−1 we get the result (with the convention Wd,n(x)≡0 for n<0).
∎
Remark 6.3**.**
In the proof of Corollary 6.2 we proved recurrence relation for the sequence (Wd,n(x))n∈N by manipulating of exponential generating functions. One can also consider the (formal) ordinary generating function of the sequence (Wd,n(x))n∈N and get a relation of a different kind. Indeed, it is an easy exercise to prove that the (formal) power series Sd(x,t)=∑n=0∞Wd,n(x)tn satisfies the differential equation
[TABLE]
Multiplying both sides of the above identity by (1−(1+xd−1)t)−1 and comparing coefficients near tn we easily deduce the following relation
[TABLE]
This gives us an expression of Wd,n(x) in terms of the sequence (Wd,n′(x))n∈N.
**
Remark 6.4**.**
Let us note that the sequence (W2,m(x))m∈N was implicitly studied by Amdeberhan and Moll (Corollary 2.6 in [1]). Although the mentioned authors did not find recurrence relation for this sequence they were able to get the closed form
[TABLE]
From our result we get W2,0(x)=1,W2,1(x)=1+x and for n≥2 we have
[TABLE]
This allows us to deduce the following nice identity:
[TABLE]
Indeed, taking x=−1 in the recurrence relation for W2,n(x) we get W2,n(−1)=(n−1)W2,n−2(−1). Because W2,0(−1)=1 and W2,1(−1)=0 by a simple iteration of the above recurrence we get the formula presented above.
Let us also note that the value of W2,n(x) at x=1 has striking combinatorial interpretation. Indeed, the sequence (W2,n(1))n∈N satisfies the recurrence relation: W2,0(1)=1,W2,1(1)=2 and
[TABLE]
In particular, (W2,n(1))n∈N is a binomial transform of the sequence (H2(n))n∈N. Moreover, as was observed by Donaghey in [4], this sequence enumerates the general switchboard problem, i.e., it enumerates the states of a telephone exchange with n subscribers which is provided with means to connect subscribers singly to outside lines and in pairs internally (no conference circuits).
**
The last results of this section are devoted to the behaviour of sequences (Wd,m(x)(modc))m∈N where c=d−1 or c=d=p is a prime number.
Theorem 6.5**.**
The following congruence holds for each d≥2 and m∈N:
[TABLE]
In particular, if p is a prime number then
[TABLE]
for any m∈N.
Proof.
We proceed by induction on m∈N. If m=0 then Wd,0(x)=1, hence the statement of our theorem is true. If m>0 then we use Corollary 6.2 and the induction hypothesis for m−1 and get
[TABLE]
∎
Theorem 6.6**.**
For each prime p we have Wp,p(x)≡xp(p−1)(modp).
Proof.
We easily check that we have W2,2(x)=x2+2x+2, so assertion holds for p=2. Now we assume that p is an odd prime number. We will show that all the coefficients of the polynomial Wp,p(x) except for the leading one are divisible by p. We use the formula
[TABLE]
from the third part of the statement of Theorem 6.1. It suffices to prove that for each n∈{0,...,p(p−1)−1} and k∈{0,...,n} we have νp(k!Hp(p+k)⋅(n−k)!Hp(n−k))≥1. By Corollary 4.5, νp(Hp(p+k))≥1+⌊pk⌋ and νp(Hp(n−k))≥⌊pn−k⌋. On the other hand, it is easy to see that νp(k!)=⌊pk⌋ and νp((n−k)!)=⌊pn−k⌋. Summing up the above observations, we get νp(k!Hp(p+k)⋅(n−k)!Hp(n−k))≥1 and the statement of our corollary follows for any odd prime p.
∎
Theorem 6.7**.**
The sequence
[TABLE]
is periodic and the length of the period is p.
In particular
[TABLE]
Proof.
First, we prove by induction on m∈N that
[TABLE]
The above congruence is satisfied for m=0 by the Theorem 6.6. Assume now that (12) holds for some m∈N and we will show that it holds for m+1. By (11) we get
[TABLE]
Now we have congruence (12) proved. Let us fix m∈N and write m=jp+i. Then, using (12) j times, we get
[TABLE]
After multiplication by xp(1−p)j and substitution j=⌊pm⌋ and i=m(modp) we obtain
[TABLE]
and get the result
∎
7. Divisors of numbers Hd(n)
In this section we study various properties of the numbers Hd(n) and Hd(n)−1. We are interested in prime divisors and various GCD properties.
7.1. Prime divisors of numbers Hd(n)
Let us denote Pd={p∈P:p∣Hd(n)\mboxforsomen∈N}.
Theorem 7.1**.**
For each d∈N≥2 the set Pd is infinite.
Proof.
Assume by the contrary that p1<...<ps are all the elements of the set Pd. We consider two cases. The first case is when d is a composite number. We put P=p1⋅...⋅ps. By Corollary 3.8 we know that the sequence (Hd(n)(modP))n∈N is periodic of period P, as 2<d and thus 2 is not a divisor of any number Hd(n). In particular, the numbers Hd(Pm), m∈N, are congruent to 1 modulo P. Hence these numbers have no prime divisors. This combined with the fact that Hd(Pm)>0 implies Hd(Pm)=1 for any m∈N. However, this is a contradiction with the fact that the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N is an ultimately strictly increasing sequence of positive integers.
The second case is when d is a prime number. Then p1=d=Hd(d). We put P=p12⋅p2⋅...⋅ps and Q=p2⋅...⋅ps. By Corollary 3.8 we know that the sequence (Hd(n)(modQ))n∈N is periodic of the period Q, as d is a prime number not dividing Q. In particular, since Q∣P, we have Hd(Pm)≡Hd(Pm+1)≡1(modpi) for m∈N and i∈{2,...,s}. According to Corollary 4.5, νp1(Hd(Pm))=νp1(Hd(Pm+1))=Qm(p1−1). Since Hd(Pm)>0 and p1,...,ps are all possible divisors of the numbers Hd(n), n∈N, thus Hd(Pm)=Hd(Pm+1)=p1Qm(p1−1) for any m∈N. However, Hd(Pm+1)=Hd(Pm)+(Pm)(d−1)Hd(Pm−d+1)>Hd(Pm) for m≥Pd−1 - a contradiction.
∎
Conjecture 7.2**.**
For each d∈N≥2 the set P\Pd is infinite and its asymptotic density in P is equal to e1.
The following heuristic reasoning allows us to claim the second statement in the conjecture above. If we fix a prime number p and randomly choose a sequence (an)n∈N such that the sequence (an(modp))n∈N has the period p, then the probability that p does not divide any term of this sequence is equal to (1−p1)p. The probability tends to e1 with p→+∞. Note that p>d belongs to the set P\Pd if and only if p does not divide any number Hd(n) for n∈{d,...,p−1}. Moreover, the sequence (Hd(n)(modp))n∈N is periodic of the period p. Therefore we suppose that the probability that p∈P\Pd equals to (1−p1)p−d. Thus, this probability tends to e1 with p→+∞ and hence the asymptotic density of the set P\Pd in the set P is expected to be equal to e1.
Remark 7.3**.**
We performed small numerical search in order to check whether our expectations are likely to be true. More precisely, for d∈{2,…,10},k≤4000 and n∈{d,…,pk} we computed the number of primes pi such that pi∣Hd(n). In the table below we present the result of our computations.
[TABLE]
Table 1. The number of integers k≤4000 such that Hd(n)≡0(modpk) for some positive integer n≤pk and d∈{2,…,10}.
The numbers in the last row in the table above are quite close to the number 1−1/e≃0.63212, which is the conjectured density of the set Pd in the set P.
**
7.2. Greatest common divisors of numbers Hd(n)−1 and n
Performing numerical computations, we observed a quite interesting formula for the greatest common divisor of the number Hd(n) and its index n.
Theorem 7.4**.**
Let d,n∈N with d≥2. Then the number GCD(Hd(n)−1,n) is equal to
•
n* if d is a composite number not equal to 4 or d=4 and ν2(n)=2;*
•
2n* if d=4 and ν2(n)=2;*
•
dνd(n)n* if d is a prime number.*
Proof.
At first, let us prove the theorem for d composite. Let us note the equality:
[TABLE]
For d=4 it suffices to show that dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1) is an integer for each k∈{1,...,⌊dn⌋}. If k=1, then
[TABLE]
as d is a composite number greater than 4. If k=2 then
[TABLE]
where d(d−1)! is an integer and 2 divides some of the d−1 factors d+1,...,2d−1 as d≥6. Assume that k≥3. In order to prove that dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1) is an integer, we will show that νp(dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1))≥0 for each prime number p. Let us write:
[TABLE]
We see that if νp(d)=0 then νp(dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1))≥0. Thus, assume now that p∣d. Then, we estimate νp((dk−1)⋅...⋅(k+1)) from below by the number of multiplicities of p among the integers from k+1 to dk−1. This number is at least equal to ⌊p(d−1)k−1⌋. Hence,
[TABLE]
If νp(d)≥3 or p>2 and νp(d)≥2 then d≥pνp(d). Thus the last expression in (14) is bounded from below by k(pνp(d)−1−νp(d))−pk+p+1. We have the following chain of equivalences:
[TABLE]
The left hand side of the last inequality is at least equal to 1. Since k≥3 and p∈P then p1+k1+kp1≤1. In consequence νp(dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1))≥0 for any prime p such that νp(d)≥3 or p>2 and νp(d)≥2.
If νp(d)=1 or p=2 and ν2(d)=2 then d≥2pνp(d). Thus the last expression in (14) is bounded from below by k(2pνp(d)−1−νp(d))−pk+p+1. We have the following chain of equivalences:
[TABLE]
The left hand side of the last inequality is at least equal to 1 and the right hand side, as we have seen earlier, is at most equal to 1. Validity of the last inequality implies that νp(dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1))≥0 for any prime p such that νp(d)=1 or p=2 and ν2(d)=2.
We have just proven that dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1) is an integer for each k∈{1,...,⌊dn⌋}. Thus ∑k=1⌊dn⌋(dk−1n−1)⋅dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1)∈Z and, as a result, n∣Hd(n)−1 in the case of d>4 composite.
Let us consider now the case of d=4. By (13) we know that H4(n)−1=n∑k=1⌊4n⌋(4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!. If p is an odd prime number, then νp(k!4k(4k−1)!)=νp((4k−1)(3k−1))≥0. We have
[TABLE]
In the above computation we used the Legendre formula ν2(m!)=m−s2(m) and its corollary ν2((lm))=s2(l)+s2(m−l)−s2(m) for 0≤l≤m. The value k−2−ν2(k) is non-negative for k≥3 and equal to −1 for k∈{1,2}. Hence, the value of (4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)! is an integer for k≥3. Meanwhile for k∈{1,2} we compute ν2((4k−1n−1)). For k=1 we have
[TABLE]
which is equal to [math] if and only if 4∣n. For k=2 we have
[TABLE]
which is equal to [math] if and only if 8∣n. If ν2(n)<2 then ν2((4k−1n−1))≥1 for k∈{1,2} and, as a consequence, ν2((4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!)≥0 for any k≤⌊4n⌋. If ν2(n)=2 then ν2((4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!)≥0 for k>1 and ν2((4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!)=−1 for k=1. Thus ν2(∑k=1⌊4n⌋(4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!)=−1. If ν2(n)>2 then ν2((4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!)≥0 for k>2 and ν2((4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!)=−1 for k≤2. Thus ν2(∑k=1⌊4n⌋(4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!)≥0. Summing up, if ν2(n)=2 then (∑k=1⌊4n⌋(4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!) is an integer and then n∣H4(n)−1. If ν2(n)=2 then 2(∑k=1⌊4n⌋(4k−1n−1)⋅k!4k(4k−1)!) is an integer and then 2n∣H4(n)−1 while n∤H4(n)−1. The proof for the case of d=4 is finished.
Let us consider the case of prime d. If n<d then Hd(n)−1=0 and obviously n∣Hd(n)−1. If n≥d then d∣Hd(n) and thus d∤Hd(n)−1. Let us write
[TABLE]
Since d∤dνd(n)n, we thus have νd(dνd(n)∑k=1⌊dn⌋(dk−1n−1)⋅dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1))=νd(Hd(n)−1)=0.
If p is a prime number not equal to d then
[TABLE]
and νp(dνd(n)∑k=1⌊dn⌋(dk−1n−1)⋅dk(dk−1)((d−1)k−1))≥0. Finally,
[TABLE]
which means that dνd(n)n∣Hd(n)−1 and dνd(n)n=GCD(Hd(n)−1,n).
∎
7.3. Nontrivial common divisors of numbers Ha(n) and Hb(n)
Let us fix two distinct integers a,b≥2. It is natural to ask about existence of indices n for which the numbers Ha(n) and Hb(n) have a common divisor greater than 1. The above question can be answered immediately. Let d∈N≥2, n∈N≥d and p be a prime divisor of Hd(n). Then p∣GCD(Hd(n+p),Hp(n+p)). Indeed, it is a simple consequence of periodicity of the sequence (Hd(n)(modp))n∈N and divisibility properties of the sequence (Hp(n))n∈N for prime number p. Moreover, we give the following.
Theorem 7.5**.**
Let d∈N≥3. Then 2d+1∣Hd(3d+2) if and only if 2d+1∣d!−1.
If additionally d is odd then
•
2d+1∣H2d+1(3d+2)* if and only if 2d+1∣(d!)2−1.*
•
2d+1∣Hd(4d)* if and only if 2d+1∣d!+1;*
•
2d+1∣H2d+1(4d)* if and only if 2d+1∣(d!)2−1.*
Proof.
Since the proofs of the remaining equivalences are very similar, we only show the second equivalence.
By the exact formula for H2d+1(3d+2) we have H2d+1(3d+2)=1+2d+1(3d+2)(2d+1). We compute
[TABLE]
and we see that the divisibility of H2d+1(3d+2) by 2d+1 is equivalent to the divisibility of (d!)2−1 by 2d+1.
∎
In the above theorem we needed assumption that d is odd. The next proposition shows that primality of 2d+1 is necessary and sufiicient for validity of the condition 2d+1∣(d!)2−1.
Proposition 7.6**.**
Let d be an odd positive integer. Then 2d+1∣(d!)2−1 if and only if 2d+1 is a prime number.
Proof.
If 2d+1 is prime then 2d+1∣H2d+1(3d+2) as 3d+2≥2d+1. Thus, by Theorem 7.5 there holds 2d+1∣(d!)2−1.
If 2d+1 is a composite number then by Corollary 3.8 we have H2d+1(3d+2)≡H2d+1(d+1)=1(mod2d+1) as d+1<2d+1. Hence by Theorem 7.5 the condition 2d+1∣(d!)2−1 is not satisfied.
∎
Now we are ready to give a formula for the one-parametr infinite family of quadruples (a,b,n,c) such that c>1 divides both Ha(n) and Hb(n).
Corollary 7.7**.**
If n≥3 is an odd integer such that 2n+1 is a prime number then 2n+1 is a common divisor of numbers Hn(3n+2) and H2n+1(3n+2) or Hn(4n) and H2n+1(4n). More precisely,
•
2n+1∣GCD(Hn(3n+2),H2n+1(3n+2))* if and only if 2n+1∣n!−1;*
•
2n+1∣GCD(Hn(4n),H2n+1(4n))* if and only if 2n+1∣n!+1.*
In other words, if (a,b,n,c)=(d,2d+1,[2d+1∣d!−1]⋅(3d+2)+[2d+1∣d!+1]⋅(4d),2d+1), where d is an odd positive integer such that 2d+1 is a prime number and we use the Iverson bracket
[TABLE]
then c∣GCD(Ha(n),Hb(n)).
Let us observe that all the examples of quadruples (a,b,n,c) with the property that c>1 divides both Ha(n) and Hb(n) are such that c=b is a prime number and n≥b. This is a motivation to formulate the following.
Question 7.8**.**
Are there infinitely many triples (a,b,c)∈N3, a,b,c≥2, such that c>1 is coprime to ab and c∣GCD(Ha(n),Hb(n)) for some n∈N?
Moreover, it is quite natural to ask the following.
Question 7.9**.**
Are there infinitely many pairs (a,b)∈N2, a,b≥2, such that GCD(Ha(n),Hb(n))=1 for each n∈N?
8. Some polynomials related to numbers Hd(n) and their combinatorial interpretation
Let us define polynomials Hd(n,x)∈Z[x] recursively: Hd(n,x)=xn for n∈{0,...,d−1} and
[TABLE]
Then Hd(n,1)=Hd(n) and we have exact formula
[TABLE]
Proposition 8.1**.**
The exponential generating function of the sequence (Hd(n,x))n∈N takes the form
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let us write ext+dtd=∑n=0+∞n!ad(n,x)tn By comparing the coefficients near tn−1 in the identity
[TABLE]
and multiplying by (n−1)! we get the recurrence
[TABLE]
The above recurrence combined with the fact that
[TABLE]
for n∈{0,...,d−1} implies ad(n,x)=Hd(n,x) for each n∈N.
∎
Theorem 8.2**.**
Let Fixn(σ) and Sd,n denote the set of fixed points of the permutation σ∈Sn and the set of permutations being product of pairwise disjoint d-cycles, respectively. Then, we have the following equality
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let us write the right hand side of the above equality as gd,n(x). We will show that the sequence (gd,n(x))n∈N satisfies the same recurrence as the sequence (Hd(n,x))n∈N. This fact combined with obvious equality gd,n(x)=xn for n∈{0,...,d−1} will give us the statement of our theorem.
Let us fix σ∈Sd,n. If σ(n)=n then σ=σ1 for some σ1∈Sd,n−1. The number of fixed points of σ is equal to the number of fixed points of σ1 increased by 1, since n is an extra fixed point of σ. Hence the summand x#Fixn(σ) in gd,n(x) reduces with the summand x#Fixn(σ1)+1 in xgd,n−1(x). If σ(n)=n then σ=σ1∘π, where π is a d-cycle containing n and σ1 is a product of pairwise disjoint d-cycles on a set {1,...,n}\\mboxsupp(π). Then σ1 can be treated as a member of the set Sd,n−d and #Fixn−d(σ1)=#Fixn(σ). Moreover, π can be chosen in (n−1)(d−1) ways. Thus the summand x#Fixn(σ) in gd,n(x) reduces with the summand x#Fixn(σ1) in (n−1)(d−1)gd,n−d(x). Summing over all σ∈Sd,n we obtain gd,n(x)=xgd,n−1(x)+(n−1)(d−1)gd,n−d(x), which completes the proof.
∎
For given d∈N≥2, the sequence of polynomials (Hd(n,x))n∈N contains more precise information concerning the number of permutations in Sn which are product of disjoint d-cycles. However, because our primary object of study is the sequence (Hd(n))n∈N,
we offer only few results concerning this natural polynomial generalization. First we prove the following:
Theorem 8.3**.**
Let d∈N≥2. Then the following congruence holds for any n∈N:
•
Hd(n,x)≡xn(modd)* if d is a composite number greater than 4;*
•
Hd(n,x)≡xn+2⌊4n⌋xn−4=xn−4⋅(⌊4n⌋(mod2))(x4+2)⌊4n⌋(mod2)(modd)* if d=4;*
•
Hd(n,x)≡xn(modd)(x−1)d⌊dn⌋(modd)* if d is a prime number.*
Proof.
We will proceed by induction on n∈N. The statement of the theorem is true for n∈{0,...,d−1}. Let us suppose that d>4 is a composite number and n≥d. Then the product of consecutive d−1 integers is divisible by d, thus by the recurrence formula and inductive hypothesis for n−1 we have
[TABLE]
Suppose now that d=4 and n≥4. If 4∣n then, by the recurrence defining polynomials H4(n,x), inductive hypothesis for n−1 and n−4 and the fact that (n−1)(3)≡3!≡2(mod4), we obtain the following:
[TABLE]
If 4∤n then, by the recurrence defining polynomials H4(n,x), inductive hypothesis for n−1 and the fact that among the numbers n−3, n−2, n−1 there is a one divisible by 4, we obtain the following:
[TABLE]
Since the polynomial x4+2 is irreducible over the ring Z/4Z, thus H4(n,x)≡xn+2⌊4n⌋xn−4=xn−4⋅(⌊4n⌋(mod2))(x4+2)⌊4n⌋(mod2)(mod4) is a factorization of the polynomial H4(n,x) modulo 4.
Assume now that d is a prime number and n≥d and the statement is true for any non-negative integer less than n. If d∣n then
[TABLE]
If d∤n then, by the recurrence defining polynomials Hd(n,x), inductive hypothesis for n−1 and the fact that among the numbers (n−d+1), …, (n−1) there is a one divisible by d, we obtain the following:
[TABLE]
∎
Now, we concentrate on the case d=2 and prove the following
Theorem 8.4**.**
Let U(n,x)=H2(n−1,x)H2(n+1,x)−H2(n,x)2 for n∈N+.
(1)
We have U(n,x)=V(n,x2), where V(n,x)∈Z[x] is of degree n−1.
2. (2)
We have V(1,x)=1,V(2,x)=x−1,V(3,x)=x2+3 and for n≥4 the following recurrence relation is true:
[TABLE]
3. (3)
We have the following identity
[TABLE]
4. (4)
Let us write V(n,x)=∑i=0n−1a(i,n)xi. Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof.
From the expression for H2(n,x) we see that it is an odd polynomial if n≡1(mod2) and an even polynomial in case of n≡0(mod2). We thus get that the polynomial U(n,x)=H2(n−1,x)H2(n+1,x)−H2(n,x)2 is an even polynomial and for each n∈N+ we can write U(n,x)=V(n,x2) for some polynomial V(n,x). The expressions for V(n,x) for n∈{1,2,3} are clear from the shape of H2(n,x) for n∈{1,2,3,4}.
Let us observe that the sequence (H2(n,x))n∈N is a holonomic sequence of polynomials. Indeed, this is consequence of the fact that the generating function Hd(x,t) (as a function in variable t) is D-finite for each d, i. e. is a solution of some linear differential equation with polynomial coefficients. We recall that a sequence is holonomic if satisfies the recurrence relation with coefficients being polynomials in n. It is well known that if (fn)n∈N,(gn)n∈N are holonomic sequences then the sequences (fn±gn)n∈N,(fngn)n∈N are holonomic too. It is straightforward (but a bit tedious) exercise to check that the sequence (U(n,x))n∈N+ satisfies the relation given in the statement of our theorem (with x replaced by x2) and hence the sequence (V(n,x))n∈N+ satisfies exactly the relation presented above.
If we define V(x,t)=∑n=0∞n!V(n+1,x)tn, then it is an easy task to produce the differential equation satisfied by the function V(x,t). Indeed, applying standard methods and the relation (15) we check that
[TABLE]
The initial condition V(x,0)=1 allow us to compute the unique solution of the above differential equation in the form
[TABLE]
which is exactly the expression presented in the statement of our theorem. Now, it is an easy task to compute the coefficient a(i,n) for i=0,1. We have a(0,1)=1,a(0,2)=−1,a(1,2)=1,a(0,3)=3,a(1,3)=0 and our formulas are true in case of n=1,2,3. We see that the sequence (a(0,n))n∈N satisfies the recurrence relation of degree 3 given by
[TABLE]
The above relation comes from the relation (15) by taking x=0. However, a closer look reveals that our sequence satisfies simpler recurrence relation
[TABLE]
and a direct check shows that the expressions for a(0,2n),a(0,2n+1) presented in the statement satisfy the above recurrence relation. Similarly, by differentiating the recurrence relation (15) with respect to x and taking the limit x→0 we get that the sequence (a(1,n))n∈N≥2 satisfies the recurrence relation
[TABLE]
A direct check confirms that the expressions for a(1,2n),a(1,2n+1) given in the statement are correct. We omit simple details.
Having proved the expressions for a(0,n),a(1,n) we are ready to prove positivity of a(i,n) for i∈{2,…,n−1}. First, we get rid of the [math]-th coefficient in V(n+1,x) by differentiating this polynomial with respect to x. Thus, by differentiating the generating function V(x,t) with respect to x, we arrive to the identity
[TABLE]
Dividing the last equality by t, comparing expansions on both sides of the above identity, we see that the polynomial V′(n+2,x)/(n+1) is just the binomial convolution of the integer sequence (hn)n∈N and the sequence of polynomials (Rn(x))n∈N, where
[TABLE]
More precisely,
[TABLE]
The power series expansion of F1(t) is well known and we get that
[TABLE]
In consequence, we see that the coefficients of the power series expansion of F1(t2) are non-negative. Next, from the definition of F2(t) we see that R0(x)=1. Moreover, we have that
[TABLE]
The above equality, together with the power series expansion 1/(1−t)2=∑n=0∞(n+1)tn allow us to get the recurrence relation satisfied by the sequence (Rn(x))n∈N. Indeed, by comparing the coefficients near tn we easily get
[TABLE]
Let us observe that Rn(0)=0 for n≥1 and x=0 is a simple root. Indeed, the simplicity of the root x=0 is clear from the relation
[TABLE]
Thus, Rn′(0)=1 for n≥1. Moreover, from the recurrence relation satisfied by the sequence (Rn(x))n∈N, it is clear that degRn=n and by writing Rn(x)=∑i=0nb(i,n)xi we get b(i,n)>0 for i∈{1,…,n}.
Finally, by comparing the coefficients near xi,i∈{1,…,n−1}, on both sides of the formula (17) we get the identity
[TABLE]
In consequence a(i,n)>0 for each i∈{1,...,n−1}.
∎
Remark 8.5**.**
Let us note that the sequence of polynomials (Rn(x))n∈N coming from the power series expansion
[TABLE]
is also an interesting object. Indeed, if we write Rn(x)=∑i=0nb(i,n)xi, then the double array of coefficients (b(i,n)), where n∈N and i∈{0,…,n}, can be easily found in OEIS database as the sequence A271703 [11]. The sequence is called the unsigned Lah numbers and has closed form b(i,n)=(i−1n−1)n!/i! for n∈N+ and i∈{1,…,n−1}. It has many combinatorial interpretations. More precisely, the number b(i,n) counts: (1) partially ordered sets on n elements that consist entirely of k chains; (2) number of ways to split the set {1,…,n} into an ordered collection of n+1−i non-crossing nonempty sets; and (3) Dyck n-paths with n+1−i peaks labeled 1,2,…,n+1−i in some order, see [8]. It would be nice to have combinatorial explanation of the identity (18).
**
Remark 8.6**.**
The positivity of coefficients of the polynomial V(n,x) is a bit unexpected property and the question arises whether similar phenomena hold for the case of d=2. It seems that the direct generalization does not work. However, based on some numerical experiments we are able to formulate the following general
Conjecture 8.7**.**
Let d∈N≥2 and define Ud(n,x)=Hd(n−d,x)Hd(n+d,x)−Hd(n)2. Then, for n≥d there is a polynomial Vd(n,x)∈Z[x] of degree degVd(n,x)=2⌊dn⌋−1 such that
[TABLE]
and all coefficients of Vd(n,x) are positive. In particular, for each d∈N≥2 and n≥d we have
[TABLE]
It is possible to prove the above conjecture in the case d=2 by using the same approach as in the proof of Theorem 8.4. More precisely, one can prove the identity
[TABLE]
and careful analysis of the convolution form of the polynomial U2(n,x) allows to prove that if n≡1(mod2), then all coefficients but [math]th are positive; in case of n≡0(mod2) all coefficients are positive. However, it seems that this approach can not be used in order to get the positivity of the coefficients of the polynomial Vd(n,x) (or equivalently, the non-negativity of coefficients of the polynomial Ud(n,x)).
It is clear that our discussion is connected with the concept of concavity of sequences. More precisely, let us recall that the sequence a=(an)n∈N is called logarithmically concave sequence, or a log-concave sequence for short, if an2≥an−1an+1 holds for all n≥k for some k. If the opposite inequality is satisfied for n≥k, then the sequence is called logarithmically convex (log-convex for short). Let us observe that if the sequence a is positive, then the log-concavity of a implies the log-convexity of the sequence a−1=(an−1)n∈N (and vice-versa of course). As an immediate consequence of Theorem 8.4, we get the following
Proposition 8.8**.**
If x≥1, then the sequence (H2(n,x))n∈N is log-convex. In particular, we have
[TABLE]
and the sequence (H2(n))n∈N is log-convex.
Let us note that from the work of Bender and Canfield [2] we know that for each d∈N≥2 and any given x>0, there is an integer Nd(x) such that the sequence (Hd(n,x))n≥Nd(x) is log-convex. However, the question concerning the non-negativity of coefficients of the polynomial Ud(n,x) is of different nature. In fact, it is not even clear whether for given positive x, the inequality Ud(n,x)≥0 is true.**
One can also note that the non-zero coefficients of the polynomial U2(n,x) are not too small. Indeed, this is a consequence of the following
Proposition 8.9**.**
Let d∈N≥2 be fixed. Then, for n≥d, the following congruence is true
[TABLE]
Proof.
The proof of the above congruence can be performed with the help of the basic recurrence relation satisfied by the sequence (Hd(n,x))n∈N and the induction. We left the details for the reader.
∎
In fact, the following stronger result is true.
Theorem 8.10**.**
Let d∈N≥2. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
If d is a prime number then by Theorem 8.3 we have
[TABLE]
which combined with the congruence Hd(n−d,x)Hd(n+d,x)≡Hd(n,x)2(mod(d−1)!) and the fact that d and (d−1)! are coprime, gives the congruence Hd(n−d,x)Hd(n+d,x)≡Hd(n,x)2(modd!) for each integer n≥d.
If d is a composite number then at first we show the equivalence of the condition
[TABLE]
with the condition
[TABLE]
For n=d we have the following chain of equivalences:
[TABLE]
Since (2d−1)(d−1)≡(d−1)!(modd) for any positive integer d, thus the last congruence is equivalent to 2(d−12d−1)≡2(modd). Now, let us assume that n≥d>4 and Hd(n−d,x)Hd(n+d,x)≡Hd(n,x)2(modd!). Then we have the following chain of equivalences:
[TABLE]
where we used Theorem 8.3 and the fact that a composite number d≥6 divides a product of any consecutive d−1 integers.
Assume that d=p2 for some odd prime number p. Then
[TABLE]
In order to prove the congruence (p2−1n−p2)+(p2−1n+p2)≡2(p2−1n)(modp2) for n≥p2 we will compute (p2−1n) modulo p2. If p2∣n+1 then, similarly as above, we prove that (p2−1n)≡1(modp2). If νp(n+1)=1 then we write n+1=kp2+lp for some k,l∈N+ with l<p and compute
[TABLE]
If p∤n+1 then we write n+1=kp2+lp+m for some k,m∈N+ and l∈N with l,m<p and compute
[TABLE]
Thus, independently on the p-adic valuation of n+1, there holds (p2−1n−p2)+(p2−1n+p2)≡2(p2−1n)(modp2). The only non-trivial case is νp(n+1)=1. Then, writing n+1=kp2+lp for some k,l∈N+ with l<p, we obtain the following:
[TABLE]
We have just proven the validity of congruences (19) for d being a square of an odd prime number.
In the sequel, we assume that d is a composite number not being a square of any prime number and satisfying congruences Hd(n−d,x)Hd(n+d,x)≡Hd(n,x)2(modd!), n≥d. Let us note that if congruences (d−1n−d)+(d−1n+d)≡2(d−1n)(modd) hold for each integer n≥d then, by the identity (c+1n+1)−(c+1n)=(cn), the congruences (cn−d)+(cn+d)≡2(cn)(modd) are satisfied for each integers n≥d and c∈{0,...,d−1}. We have the following chain of congruences:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Assume now that d is a composite number not of the form 2p, 2p2 for some odd prime number p or 2k for some integer k≥2. Then there is an odd prime number p such that d=tps, where s∈N+ and t≥3 is an integer with p-adic valuation less than s. Taking c=2ps and n=pd−1 in the expression c!2∑k=1⌊2c⌋d2k∑0≤j1<...<jc−2k≤c−1(n−j1)⋅...⋅(n−jc−2k), we obtain
[TABLE]
Since d>s, we have νp(pd−1−i)=νp(1+i) for any i∈{0,...,2ps−1}. Hence, the summand with the least p-adic valuation is
[TABLE]
obtained for k=1, ji=i−1, i∈{1,...,ps}, and ji=i, i∈{ps+1,...,2ps−2}. By the equality νp(pd−1−i)=νp(1+i) for any i∈{0,...,2ps−1} this summand has p-adic valuation equal to 2νp(t)<s+νp(t)=νp(d). Any other summand has strictly greater p-adic valuation because some from the factors pd−1,...,pd−ps+1,pd−ps−1,...,pd−2ps+1, having p-adic valuations less than s, are replaced by pd−ps, pd−2ps or d=tps with p-adic valuations at least equal to s. Thus, the whole sum (2ps−1)(ps−1)(ps−1)!1∑k=1pst2kp2s(k−1)∑0≤j1<...<jc−2k≤c−1(pd−1−j1)⋅...⋅(pd−1−jc−2k) has p-adic valuation less than νp(d), which implies that it cannot be divisible by d - a contradiction.
We are checking now the numbers d of the form 2p, 2p2 for some odd prime number p. We compute the value (d−12d−1)(modp). For shortening the proof we will perform the computation for numbers d=2p2 as for the remaining case the computations are simpler.
[TABLE]
Then 2(2p2−14p2−1)≡6(modp) but, on the other hand, there should be 2(2p2−14p2−1)≡2(modp). This implies the congruence 6≡2(modp) and, as a result, p∣4 - a contradiction, as p is an odd prime number.
Let d=2k for an integer k≥3. We compute the value (d−12d−1)(modp):
[TABLE]
Then 2(2k−12k+1−1)≡6(mod8) but, on the other hand, there should be 2(2k−12k+1−1)≡2(mod8). This implies the congruence 6≡2(mod8) and, as a result, 8∣4 - a contradiction.
We are left with the case d=4. By (20), the condition H4(0,x)H4(8,x)≡H4(4,x)2(mod4!) is equivalent to the condition 2(37)≡2(mod4), which holds. It is easy to compute that
[TABLE]
Assuming that H4(n−4,x)H4(n+4,x)≡H4(n,x)2(mod4!), we prove similarly as in (21) that the congruence H4(n−3,x)H4(n+5,x)≡H4(n+1,x)2(mod4!) is equivalent to
[TABLE]
Further, the above condition is equivalent to the following equivalent congruences:
[TABLE]
The last congruence is true, because 2(⌊4n−7⌋+⌊4n+4⌋)≡2(⌊4n−4⌋+⌊4n+1⌋)≡2(⌊4n−3⌋+⌊4n⌋)(mod4), (⌊4n−7⌋+⌊4n+1⌋)≡0(mod2) and by (22) we have (3n−4)+(3n+4)≡2(3n)(mod4) and (3n−4)(n+4)(3)≡(3n)(n)(3)(mod4). Hence, H4(n−4,x)H4(n+4,x)≡H4(n,x)2(mod4!) for each integer n≥4.
∎
Two further identities involving elements of the sequence (Hd(n,x))n∈N can be proved. More precisely, we have the following:
Theorem 8.11**.**
Let d∈N≥2 be given. For each n∈N the following identities hold
[TABLE]
9. Some related observations, questions and conjectures
In this section we collect observations concerning some related sequences connected with the family of sequences (Hd(n))n∈N and formulate several questions and conjectures appeared during our investigations.
In [1] the authors introduced the summatory sequence for the sequence of involutions (H2(n))n∈N. Thus, it is natural to consider the sequence (Gd(n))n∈N for d∈N≥2 with
[TABLE]
From the definition, the number Gd(n) can be seen as a number of all permutations in ∐i=1nSi which are products of cycles of length d.
The sequence (Gd(n))n∈N satisfies the following recurrence relation: Gd(i)=i+1 for i=−1,…,d−1, and for n≥d we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
In order to get the exponential generating function for the sequence (Gd(n))n∈N we apply Lemma 9.1 with A(x)=Hd(x) and get the result.
The recurrence relation for the sequence (Gd(n))n∈N can be easily proved by noting the identity Hd(n)=Gd(n)−Gd(n−1). Indeed, from the relation (1) we get
[TABLE]
and hence the result.
∎
We can apply the previous result and get the following general fact (with special case for d=2 obtained by Amdeberhan and Moll).
Corollary 9.3**.**
We have the following identity:
[TABLE]
Proof.
We have Hd(x)=ex+dxd and using the first part of Theorem 9.2 we get
[TABLE]
Comparing the coefficients on both sides of the first and the last expression we get the result.
∎
In the paper [1] the authors were able to compute exact expression for the 2-adic valuation of G2(n). One can ask whether it is possible to compute νp(Gp(n)) for p∈P and n∈N+. A numerical computations suggest the following:
Conjecture 9.4**.**
(1)
We have the following expression
[TABLE]
2. (2)
We have the following expression
[TABLE]
It is very likely that the method employed by Amdeberhan and Moll can be extended in order to confirm the above conjecture. However, it would be nice to have general method which works for all p∈P.
Let d∈N≥2 be fixed and for n∈N+ define the matrix
[TABLE]
Based on numerical calculations we formulate the following
Conjecture 9.5**.**
Let d∈N≥2.
(1)
For n∈N+ we have detMd(n,x)∈Z and
[TABLE]
2. (2)
For n∈N+ we have the identity
[TABLE]
3. (3)
If d≥3, then we have the following property
[TABLE]
Let a,b∈N≥2 with a<b. It seems to be interesting to find out if there are some integers n≥a and m≥b such that
[TABLE]
We only know that if a is a prime number then the equation (24) has no solutions, as a divides the left hand side and does not divide the right hand side.
Question 9.6**.**
Is there any quadruple (a,b,n,m)∈N4 such that 2≤a<b, n≥a, m≥b and Ha(n)=Hb(m)? If yes, are there infinitely many such quadruples?
Bibliography11
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] T. Amdeberhan, V. Moll, Involutions and their progenies , J. Comb. 6 (2015), no. 4, 483-508.
2[2] E. A. Bender, R. R. Canfield, Log-concavity and related properties of the cycle index polynomials , J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 74 (1) (1996), no. 1, 57-70.
3[3] S. Chowla, I. N. Herstein, W. K. Moore, On recursions connected with symmetric groups I , Canad. J. Math. 3 (1951), 328-334.
4[4] R. Donaghey, Binomial self-inverse sequences and tangent coefficients , J. Combin. Theory, Ser. A 21 (1976), 155-163.
5[5] M. Grady, M. Newman, Residue periodicity in subgroup counting functions , in: Contemp. Math., vol. 166, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1994, pp. 265-273.
6[6] H. Ishihara, H. Ochiai, Y. Takegahara, T. Yoshida, p 𝑝 p -Divisibility of the Number of Solutions of x p = 1 superscript 𝑥 𝑝 1 x^{p}=1 in a Symmetric Group , Ann. Comb. 5 (2001), 197-210.
7[7] D. Kim, J. S. Kim, A combinatorial approach to the power of 2 2 2 in the number of involutions , J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 117 (2010), 1082-1094.