A note on the distribution of major index for Schr\"oder paths
Xiaomei Chen

TL;DR
This paper corrects an error in previous formulas regarding the distribution of the major index for Schr"oder paths and provides a complete proof for all cases, enhancing the mathematical understanding of these combinatorial objects.
Contribution
It rectifies a mistake in earlier work and extends the proof to cover all cases of the distribution of the major index for Schr"oder paths.
Findings
Corrected the proof of the distribution formulas for Schr"oder paths
Extended the proof to all cases beyond E<D<N
Ensured the formulas are valid universally
Abstract
Bonin, Shapiro and Simion (1993) gave two formulas on the distribution of major index for Schr\"oder paths, and proved their result for the case . In this short note, we correct an error in their proof, and give a complete proof for all cases.
Peer Reviews
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Combinatorial Mathematics · Random Matrices and Applications · Mathematical Dynamics and Fractals
A note on the distribution of major index for Schröder paths
Xiaomei Chen
Abstract
Bonin, Shapiro and Simion (1993) gave two formulas on the distribution of major index for Schröder paths, and proved their result for the case . In this short note, we correct an error in their proof, and give a complete proof for all cases.
1 Introduction
For the notation and terminology below on lattice paths, see [1]. Let denote the set of Delannoy paths from to with steps, where a Delannoy path is a lattice path using only the three steps (1,0), (1,1) and (0,1). A Schröder path is a Delannoy path from to which never goes above the diagonal line , and we use to denote the collection of all Schröder paths with steps.
In the following, we use , and to denote the three steps (1,0), (1,1) and (0,1) respectively, and represent a Delannoy path of length by a word over the alphabet set . Given a linear ordering of , is called a descent of if . We use to denote the set of all descents of , and define the major index of by .
Bonin et al. studied the major index for Schröder paths and gave the following result.
Theorem 1.1**.**
[1*]**
For given , and linear ordering of , the distribution of the statistic maj over is*
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Bonin et al. gave a detailed proof of the above result for the case , and omitted proof of other cases. In their proof, a path is called a ’bad’ one if it runs above the line , and a correspondence from the set consisting of all bad paths in to the set is defined as follows.
For a ’bad’ path , let be the first step of running above the line , and let be the last element of the sequence of consecutive beginning at . Then is defined to be the path obtained from by replacing with . The correctness of the proof given in [1] relies on the statement that is a bijection, which however is not true. See the following example for instance.
Example 1.2**.**
Let and be two bad paths in . Then .
2 Proof of Theorem 1.1
Let denote the set of all ’bad’ paths in . Given a linear ordering of , we define
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
to be the distributions of the maj statistic over and respectively.
For a path , the depth of is defined to be the difference between the number of and the number of in the subpath . By extending the technique applied to Catalan paths in [2], we obtain the following result.
Lemma 2.1**.**
For given and linear ordering of , we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof.
We prove Lemma 2.1 by constructing a bijection
[TABLE]
as follows. Given a path , let be its first deepest step. We denote by
[TABLE]
the subpath of such that , , and for and . Then is defined as follows.
- (1)
If , or , is obtained from by replacing with . 2. (2)
If , or , is obtained from according to the following two cases:
- •
when , replacing with the path ;
- •
when , replacing with the path .
By the definition of and , we must have , , and if . Then it is not difficult to verify that
[TABLE]
For instance, if and , then , which implies that .
Thus to complete the proof of Lemma 2.1, it is enough to show that is a bijection. Given a path , let be the last of its deepest step, where the depth of is defined to be 0. Then we must have . We denote by
[TABLE]
the subpath of such that , , and for and . Then the path is constructed as follows.
- (1)
If , or , is obtained from by replacing with . 2. (2)
If , or , is obtained from according to the following two cases:
- •
when , replacing with the path ;
- •
when , replacing with the path .
It is obvious that the above construction gives the inverse of , thus we completes the proof. ∎
We are now ready to give the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Proof.
By a result of MacMahon([3]) on the distribution of maj over all permutations of a multiset, we have
[TABLE]
It is obvious that
[TABLE]
Therefore by Lemma 2.1, for the case when , we have
[TABLE]
and for the case when , we have
[TABLE]
∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Bonin J, Shapiro L, Simion R. Some q-analogues of the Schröder numbers arising from combinatorial statistics on lattice paths[J]. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 1993, 34(1): 35-55.
- 2[2] Fürlinger J, Hofbauer J. q-Catalan numbers[J]. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 1985, 40(2): 248-264.
- 3[3] Mac Mahon P A. Combinatory analysis(Vol. 2)[M]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1918. Reprinted by Chelsea, New York, 1960.
