That helps.

(Sadly, though, J's current d. and D. implementations are not up to
the task of extracting coefficients from these generating functions.
But I guess I can't use J for everything.)

Thanks,

-- 
Raul


On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 2:15 PM, 'Robert Raschke' via Chat
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I reckon that the G.f and E.g.f have very special interpretations. Maybe
> the Formulas section in https://oeis.org/eishelp2.html might help?
>
> Cheers,
> Robby
>
> On 21 Feb 2017 19:29, "Raul Miller" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I was looking at https://oeis.org/A000248 (because of its relevance to
>> idempotence), and I ran into some problems understanding the formula.
>>
>> One of them makes sense to me:
>>
>> a(n) = Sum_{k=0..n} C(n,k)*(n-k)^k. [Paul D. Hanna, Jun 26 2009]
>>
>> corresponds to:
>>
>>    k=:i.@>:
>>    +/@((!~k)*(-k)^k)"0 i.10
>> 1 1 3 10 41 196 1057 6322 41393 293608
>>
>> But the two preceding that give me problems.
>>
>> For example, I look at E.g.f.: exp(x*exp(x)) and that seems to me to
>> represent:
>>
>>    ^(* ^) i.10
>> 1 15.1543 2.6185e6 1.47609e26 7.02589e94 _ _ _ _ _
>>
>> I do not see how that can ever be relevant. But, ok, maybe I need an
>> integer base for the exponent. The only integer which gets me "closer"
>> to the desired sequence would be 2, so:
>>
>>    2&^(* 2&^) i.10
>> 1 4 256 1.67772e7 1.84467e19 1.4615e48 3.9402e115 5.28295e269 _ _
>>
>> ... that still does not make sense to me. I don't even know why that
>> formula is there. Maybe I need to be using some different value for x?
>> But I doubt it, because the growth rate looks wrong for both of those
>> sequences.
>>
>> And, the next one:
>>
>> G.f.: Sum_{k>=0} x^k/(1-k*x)^(k+1). - Vladeta Jovovic, Oct 25 2003
>>
>> This one also seems like garbage - there's two variables here, and
>> there's no constraint that tells me about whether it's x or k that is
>> supposed to correspond to the index position in the sequence, and
>> likewise there's nothing that tells me what the other value should be.
>> Or, ok, maybe that's supposed to be an infinite sequence in k which
>> converges (and x is the index position)? Let's try that:
>>
>>    k=:i.10
>>    3 :'+/y^k%(1-k*y)^k+1'"0 ] i.10
>> 1 10 10.9531 10.2994 10.1588 10.1015 10.0717 10.0538 10.0421 10.034
>>    k=:i.100
>>    3 :'+/y^k%(1-k*y)^k+1'"0 ] i.10
>> 1 100 100.953 100.299 100.159 100.102 100.072 100.054 100.042 100.034
>>    k=:i.1000
>>    3 :'+/y^k%(1-k*y)^k+1'"0 ] i.10
>> 1 1000 1000.95 1000.3 1000.16 1000.1 1000.07 1000.05 1000.04 1000.03
>>
>> Unless I have made a major mistake, it looks like that is not a useful
>> interpretation of that formula.
>>
>> Then again, maybe I am overlooking some quirk of notation? I only was
>> able to make sense of the Paul D. Hanna formula because I recognized
>> the C(n,k) as what we would express in J as k!n
>>
>> So... since I know some other people here have stronger backgrounds in
>> this kind of thing than I - am I overlooking something important here?
>>
>> I'd really prefer to be able to understand what I read.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Raul
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to