
TL;DR
This paper proves new ${}_5 ext{psi}_5$ identities of Bailey using a ${}_5 ext{phi}_4$ identity, and derives related ${}_3 ext{psi}_3$ formulas through limiting cases, employing techniques from Ismail and Askey.
Contribution
It introduces novel proofs of Bailey's ${}_5 ext{psi}_5$ identities and connects them to ${}_3 ext{psi}_3$ formulas using established summation techniques.
Findings
Proved two ${}_5 ext{psi}_5$ summation formulas of Bailey.
Derived two ${}_3 ext{psi}_3$ summation formulas as limits.
Applied techniques from Ismail and Askey to establish identities.
Abstract
In this paper, we provide proofs of two summation formulas of Bailey using a identity of Carlitz. We show that in the limiting case, the two identities give rise to two summation formulas of Bailey. Finally, we prove the two identities using a technique initially used by Ismail to prove Ramanujan's summation formula and later by Ismail and Askey to prove Bailey's very-well-poised sum.
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 Mathematical Identities · Analytic Number Theory Research · Mathematical Inequalities and Applications
On identities of Bailey
Aritram Dhar
Department of Mathematics, University of Florida, Gainesville FL 32611, USA
(Date: August 31, 2023)
Abstract.
In this paper, we provide proofs of two summation formulas of Bailey using a identity of Carlitz. We show that in the limiting case, the two identities give rise to two summation formulas of Bailey. Finally, we prove the two identities using a technique initially used by Ismail to prove Ramanujan’s summation formula and later by Ismail and Askey to prove Bailey’s very-well-poised sum.
Key words and phrases:
basic hypergeometric series, summation formula, Ismail’s method, Bailey’s sum, Bailey’s sum
2020 Mathematics Subject Classification:
33D15, 33D65
1. Introduction
Let and be variables and define the conventional -Pochammer symbol
[TABLE]
for any positive integer and . For , we define
[TABLE]
We define for all real numbers by
[TABLE]
For variables , we define the shorthand notations
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Next, we require the following formulas from Gasper and Rahman [5, Appendix I]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
We invite the reader to examine Gasper and Rahman’s text [5] for an introduction to basic hypergeometric series, whose notations we follow. For instance, the unilateral and bilateral basic hypergeometric series with base and argument are defined, respectively, by
[TABLE]
Throughout the remainder of this paper, we assume that . We now present the statements of the main identities which we prove in this paper.
Theorem 1.1**.**
(Bailey [2, eq. ]) For any non-negative integer ,
[TABLE]
where .
Theorem 1.2**.**
(Bailey [2, eq. ]) For any non-negative integer ,
[TABLE]
where .
Theorem 1.3**.**
(Bailey [2, eq. ])
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.4**.**
(Bailey [2, eq. ])
[TABLE]
Bailey [2] proved Theorems 1.3 and 1.4 by letting and setting in the summation formula [5, II.] respectively and mentioned that (1.5) and (1.6) follow from Jackson’s -analogue of Dougall’s theorem [5, II.].
Our work is motivated by Ismail’s initial proof [6] of Ramanujan’s summation formula which can be stated as
[TABLE]
where and by Askey and Ismail’s proof [1] of Bailey’s very-well-poised identity which is
[TABLE]
provided .
To prove (1.9) and (1.10), Ismail [6] and Askey and Ismail [1] show that the two sides of (1.9) and (1.10) are analytic functions that agree infinitely often near a point that is an interior point of the domain of analyticity and hence they are identically equal.
To this end, we employ the following -hypergeometric series identities
Theorem 1.5**.**
(Carlitz [3, eq. ]) For any non-negative integer ,
[TABLE]
where and .
We note that for even, Theorem 1.5 is Chu’s [4, p. ] Corollary where and for odd, Theorem 1.5 is Chu’s [4, p. ] Corollary where .
Theorem 1.6**.**
(Jackson’s terminating q-analogue of Dixon’s sum [5, II.]) For any non-negative integer ,
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.7**.**
(Carlitz [3, eq. ]) For any non-negative integer ,
[TABLE]
where .
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we give the proofs of the two identities (1.5) and (1.6) respectively. In Section 3, we show that the two identities (1.5) and (1.6) become the two identities (1.7) and (1.8) respectively when . Finally, we provide proofs of the two identities (1.7) and (1.8) in Section 4.
2. Proofs of the two identities
2.1. Proof of Theorem 1.1
Proof.
Replacing by , by , by , by and by in (1.11), we get
[TABLE]
where . Now, we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where the last equality above follows from (2.1) (after replacing by ). Then simplifying the last expression above using (1.1), (1.2) and (1.3) with appropriate substitutions, we get
[TABLE]
where for . This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1. ∎
2.2. Proof of Theorem 1.2
Proof.
Replacing by , by , by , by and by in (1.11), we get
[TABLE]
where . Now, we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where the last equality above follows from (2.2) (after replacing by ). Then simplifying the last expression above using (1.1), (1.2) and (1.3) with appropriate substitutions, we get
[TABLE]
where for . This completes the proof of Theorem 1.2. ∎
3. Two limiting cases
Letting in (1.5) and simplifying using (1.3) with appropriate substitutions, we get
[TABLE]
which is exactly (1.7).
Similarly, letting in (1.6) and simplifying using (1.3) with appropriate substitutions, we get
[TABLE]
which is exactly (1.8).
4. Ismail type proofs of the two identities
In this Section, we derive the the two identities (1.7) and (1.8) using Ismail’s method [6].
4.1. Proof of Theorem 1.3
Proof.
Replacing by and by in (1.12), we get
[TABLE]
We now have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where (4.2) follows using (1.4) with appropriate substitutions and (4.3) follows from (4.1).
Firstly, we note that the series on the left-hand side of (1.7) is an analytic function of provided . If we set for any positive integer in (1.7), we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where the last equality above follows from (4.3). Then simplifying the last expression above using (1.1), (1.2) and (1.3) with appropriate substitutions, we get
[TABLE]
Thus, the two sides of (1.7) constitute analytic functions of provided where we note that the first of these inequalities always holds simply because and the second inequality can be rearranged to give which is a disk of radius centred about [math]. Thus, both the sides of (1.7) agree on an infinite sequence of points which converges to the limit [math] inside the disk . Hence, (1.7) is valid in general. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.3. ∎
4.2. Proof of Theorem 1.4
Proof.
Replacing by , by , by and by in (1.13), we get
[TABLE]
We now have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where (4.5) follows using (1.4) with appropriate substitutions and (4.6) follows from (4.4).
Firstly, we note that series on the left-hand side of (1.8) is an analytic function of provided . If we set for any positive integer in (1.8), we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where the last equality above follows from (4.6). Then simplifying the last expression above using (1.1), (1.2) and (1.3) with appropriate substitutions, we get
[TABLE]
Thus, the two sides of (1.8) constitute analytic functions of provided where we note that the first of these inequalities always holds simply because and the second inequality can be rearranged to give which is a disk of radius centred about [math]. Thus, both the sides of (1.8) agree on an infinite sequence of points which converges to the limit [math] inside the disk . Hence, (1.8) is valid in general. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.4. ∎
5. Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Alexander Berkovich for encouraging him to prove Theorems 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and for his very helpful comments and suggestions. The author would also like to thank George E. Andrews and Jonathan Bradley-Thrush for previewing a preliminary draft of this paper and for their helpful comments. The author would also like to thank the anonymous referee and the editor for their helpful comments.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] R. Askey and M. E. H. Ismail, The very well poised ψ 6 6 subscript subscript 𝜓 6 6 {}_{6}\psi_{6} , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 77 (1979), no. 2, 218–222.
- 2[2] W. N. Bailey, On the analogue of Dixon’s theorem for bilateral basic hypergeometric series , Quart. J. Math (Oxford) 2(1) (1950) 194–198.
- 3[3] L. Carlitz, Some formulas of F. H. Jackson , Monatshefte für Math. 73 (1969), 193–198.
- 4[4] W. Chu, Abel’s method on summation by parts and bilateral well-poised ψ 5 5 subscript subscript 𝜓 5 5 {}_{5}\psi_{5} -series identities , Port. Math. 66 (3) (2009), 275–302.
- 5[5] G. Gasper and M. Rahman, Basic Hypergeometric Series , vol. 96, Cambridge University Press, 2004.
- 6[6] M. Ismail, A simple proof of Ramanujan’s ψ 1 1 subscript subscript 𝜓 1 1 {}_{1}\psi_{1} sum , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 63 (1977), no. 1, 185–186.
