On the enumeration of series-parallel matroids

Nicholas Proudfoot111Supported by NSF grants DMS-1954050, DMS-2053243, and DMS-2344861., Yuan Xu222Supported by Simons Foundation Collaboration Grant #849676., and Benjamin Young
Department of Mathematics, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403

Abstract. By the work of Ferroni and Larson, Kazhdan–Lusztig polynomials and Z𝑍Zitalic_Z-polynomials of complete graphs have combinatorial interpretations in terms of quasi series-parallel matroids. We provide explicit formulas for the number of series-parallel matroids and the number of simple series-parallel matroids of a given rank and cardinality, extending results of Ferroni–Larson and Gao–Proudfoot–Yang–Zhang.

1 Introduction

Given a graph, a series extension is a graph obtained by subdividing an edge, and a parallel extension is a graph obtained by adding a new edge parallel to an existing one. A graph is called series-parallel if it can be constructed from a 2-cycle by a sequence of series and parallel extensions. By convention, a single edge and a single loop are also considered series-parallel graphs. A matroid associated with a series-parallel graph is called a series-parallel matroid. A series-parallel matroid is simple if and only if it comes from a graph with no loops or parallel edges.

A (possibly empty) direct sum of series-parallel matroids is called quasi series-parallel; this is the same as taking matroids associated with disjoint unions of series-parallel graphs. A quasi series-parallel matroid is simple if and only if each of its components is simple. Quasi series-parallel matroids are characterized by the property of having no minors equal to the uniform matroid of rank 2 on 4 elements or the matroid associated with the complete graph K4subscript𝐾4K_{4}italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [FL24, Proposition 2.1]. The rank of a quasi series-parallel matroid is equal to the number of vertices minus the number of connected components of the corresponding graph.

Consider the following quantities:

Cn,ksubscriptπΆπ‘›π‘˜\displaystyle C_{n,k}italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =the number of series-parallel matroids onΒ [n]Β of rankΒ kabsentthe number of series-parallel matroids onΒ [n]Β of rankΒ k\displaystyle=\text{the number of series-parallel matroids on $[n]$ of rank $k% $ }= the number of series-parallel matroids on [ italic_n ] of rank italic_k [OEIS, A140945]
En,ksubscriptπΈπ‘›π‘˜\displaystyle E_{n,k}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =the number of simple series-parallel matroids onΒ [n]Β of rankΒ kabsentthe number of simple series-parallel matroids onΒ [n]Β of rankΒ k\displaystyle=\text{the number of simple series-parallel matroids on $[n]$ of % rank $k$}= the number of simple series-parallel matroids on [ italic_n ] of rank italic_k [OEIS, A361355]
An,ksubscriptπ΄π‘›π‘˜\displaystyle A_{n,k}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =the number of quasi series-parallel matroids onΒ [n]Β of rankΒ kabsentthe number of quasi series-parallel matroids onΒ [n]Β of rankΒ k\displaystyle=\text{the number of quasi series-parallel matroids on $[n]$ of % rank $k$}= the number of quasi series-parallel matroids on [ italic_n ] of rank italic_k [OEIS, A359985]
Sn,ksubscriptπ‘†π‘›π‘˜\displaystyle S_{n,k}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =the number of simple quasi series-parallel matroids onΒ [n]Β of rankΒ kabsentthe number of simple quasi series-parallel matroids onΒ [n]Β of rankΒ k\displaystyle=\text{the number of simple quasi series-parallel matroids on $[n% ]$ of rank $k$}= the number of simple quasi series-parallel matroids on [ italic_n ] of rank italic_k [OEIS, A361353]
Remark 1.1.

The letter A𝐴Aitalic_A stands for All quasi series-parallel matroids, S𝑆Sitalic_S stands for Simple quasi series-parallel matroids, and C𝐢Citalic_C stands for Connected quasi series-parallel matroids, which are the same as series-parallel matroids (with the convention that the empty matroid is not connected). The letter E𝐸Eitalic_E does not stand for anything, but it means simple and connected. In [FL24], the quantity E2⁒k,k+1subscript𝐸2π‘˜π‘˜1E_{2k,k+1}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k , italic_k + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is denoted EksubscriptπΈπ‘˜E_{k}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Remark 1.2.

The original motivation for studying these quantities is that An,ksubscriptπ΄π‘›π‘˜A_{n,k}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (respectively Sn,ksubscriptπ‘†π‘›π‘˜S_{n,k}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) is equal to the coefficient of tnβˆ’ksuperscriptπ‘‘π‘›π‘˜t^{n-k}italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the Z𝑍Zitalic_Z-polynomial (respectively Kazhdan–Lusztig polynomial) of the matroid associated with the complete graph Kn+1subscript𝐾𝑛1K_{n+1}italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [FL24, Theorem 1.1]. This is the only known combinatorial description of these coefficients.

Remark 1.3.

Note that the number of series-parallel matroids on [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] is not the same as the number of series-parallel graphs with edge set [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ], because different graphs can induce the same matroid. For example, there are three different ways (up to isomorphism) to label the edges of the 4-cycle with the labels {1,2,3,4}1234\{1,2,3,4\}{ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 }, but they all induce the uniform matroid of rank 3.

Consider the following generating functions:

E⁒(x,y)𝐸π‘₯𝑦\displaystyle E(x,y)italic_E ( italic_x , italic_y ) :=assign\displaystyle:=:= βˆ‘n=1βˆžβˆ‘k=0nEn,k⁒yk⁒xnn!,S⁒(x,y):=βˆ‘n=0βˆžβˆ‘k=0nSn,k⁒yk⁒xnn!assignsuperscriptsubscript𝑛1superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0𝑛subscriptπΈπ‘›π‘˜superscriptπ‘¦π‘˜superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛𝑆π‘₯𝑦superscriptsubscript𝑛0superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0𝑛subscriptπ‘†π‘›π‘˜superscriptπ‘¦π‘˜superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛\displaystyle\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{n}E_{n,k}\,y^{k}\frac{x^{n}}{n!},% \qquad S(x,y):=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{n}S_{n,k}\,y^{k}\frac{x^{n}}{n!}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG , italic_S ( italic_x , italic_y ) := βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG
C⁒(x,y)𝐢π‘₯𝑦\displaystyle C(x,y)italic_C ( italic_x , italic_y ) :=assign\displaystyle:=:= βˆ‘n=1βˆžβˆ‘k=0nCn,k⁒yk⁒xnn!,A⁒(x,y):=βˆ‘n=0βˆžβˆ‘k=0nAn,k⁒yk⁒xnn!.assignsuperscriptsubscript𝑛1superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0𝑛subscriptπΆπ‘›π‘˜superscriptπ‘¦π‘˜superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛𝐴π‘₯𝑦superscriptsubscript𝑛0superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0𝑛subscriptπ΄π‘›π‘˜superscriptπ‘¦π‘˜superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛\displaystyle\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{n}C_{n,k}\,y^{k}\frac{x^{n}}{n!},% \qquad A(x,y):=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{n}A_{n,k}\,y^{k}\frac{x^{n}}{n!}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG , italic_A ( italic_x , italic_y ) := βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG .

Note that the two generating functions on the left begin with n=1𝑛1n=1italic_n = 1, while the two on the right begin with n=0𝑛0n=0italic_n = 0; this is because the empty matroid is quasi series-parallel but not series-parallel. The combinatorial relationships between these numbers can be expressed in terms of their generating functions.

Proposition 1.4.

We have the following identities:

S⁒(x,y)𝑆π‘₯𝑦\displaystyle S(x,y)italic_S ( italic_x , italic_y ) =\displaystyle== eE⁒(x,y)superscript𝑒𝐸π‘₯𝑦\displaystyle e^{E(x,y)}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_E ( italic_x , italic_y ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
A⁒(x,y)𝐴π‘₯𝑦\displaystyle A(x,y)italic_A ( italic_x , italic_y ) =\displaystyle== eC⁒(x,y)superscript𝑒𝐢π‘₯𝑦\displaystyle e^{C(x,y)}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_C ( italic_x , italic_y ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
C⁒(x,y)𝐢π‘₯𝑦\displaystyle C(x,y)italic_C ( italic_x , italic_y ) =\displaystyle== E⁒(exβˆ’1,y)+x𝐸superscript𝑒π‘₯1𝑦π‘₯\displaystyle E(e^{x}-1,y)+xitalic_E ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 , italic_y ) + italic_x
A⁒(x,y)𝐴π‘₯𝑦\displaystyle A(x,y)italic_A ( italic_x , italic_y ) =\displaystyle== S⁒(exβˆ’1,y)β‹…ex⋅𝑆superscript𝑒π‘₯1𝑦superscript𝑒π‘₯\displaystyle S(e^{x}-1,y)\cdot e^{x}italic_S ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 , italic_y ) β‹… italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
A𝐴Aitalic_AC𝐢Citalic_CS𝑆Sitalic_SE𝐸Eitalic_EexponentiateexponentiateprecomposewithΒ exβˆ’1and multiplybyΒ exprecomposewithΒ exβˆ’1and multiplybyΒ ex\begin{subarray}{c}\text{{\em precompose}}\\ \text{{\em with} $e^{x}-1$}\\ \text{{\em and multiply}}\\ \text{{\em by} $e^{x}$}\end{subarray}start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL precompose end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL normal_with italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL and multiply end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL normal_by italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARGprecomposewithΒ exβˆ’1and addΒ xprecomposewithΒ exβˆ’1and addΒ x\begin{subarray}{c}\text{{\em precompose}}\\ \text{{\em with} $e^{x}-1$}\\ \text{{\em and add} $x$}\end{subarray}start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL precompose end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL normal_with italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL normal_and normal_add italic_x end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG
Proof.

A quasi series-parallel matroid on [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] is given by a partition of [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] along with a series-parallel matroid on each part, and it is simple if and only if each component is simple. This fact, combined with [Sta24, Corollary 5.1.6], implies the first two identities. When nβ‰₯2𝑛2n\geq 2italic_n β‰₯ 2, a series-parallel matroid on [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] is given by a partition of [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] into parallel classes and a simple series-parallel matroid on the set of parallel classes. This observation, combined with [Sta24, Theorem 5.1.4], implies the third identity. (The addition of xπ‘₯xitalic_x comes from the matroid of rank 0 on the set [1]delimited-[]1[1][ 1 ], which is series-parallel but not simple.) Finally, a quasi series-parallel matroid on [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] is given by a set of loops, a partition of the nonloops into parallel classes, and a simple series-parallel matroid on the set of parallel classes. This statement implies the fourth identity by [Sta24, Proposition 5.1.1 and Theorem 5.1.4], with the factor of exsuperscript𝑒π‘₯e^{x}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT corresponding to the choice of the set of loops. ∎

We focus here on the numbers En,ksubscriptπΈπ‘›π‘˜E_{n,k}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, from which all of the others can be computed. We know that we have En,k=0subscriptπΈπ‘›π‘˜0E_{n,k}=0italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 when nβ‰₯2⁒k>0𝑛2π‘˜0n\geq 2k>0italic_n β‰₯ 2 italic_k > 0 [FL24, Proposition 2.10]. Theorem 1.5 provides formulas for E2⁒kβˆ’1,ksubscript𝐸2π‘˜1π‘˜E_{2k-1,k}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - 1 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [FL24, Corollary 2.12] and E2⁒kβˆ’2,ksubscript𝐸2π‘˜2π‘˜E_{2k-2,k}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - 2 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [GPYZ, Corollary 1.6].

Theorem 1.5.

[FL24, GPYZ] We have

E2⁒kβˆ’1,k(2⁒kβˆ’1)!!=(2⁒kβˆ’1)kβˆ’3andE2⁒kβˆ’2,k(2⁒kβˆ’3)!!=(2⁒kβˆ’1)kβˆ’2βˆ’(2⁒kβˆ’2)kβˆ’2+23⁒(kβˆ’2)⁒(2⁒kβˆ’2)kβˆ’3.formulae-sequencesubscript𝐸2π‘˜1π‘˜double-factorial2π‘˜1superscript2π‘˜1π‘˜3andsubscript𝐸2π‘˜2π‘˜double-factorial2π‘˜3superscript2π‘˜1π‘˜2superscript2π‘˜2π‘˜223π‘˜2superscript2π‘˜2π‘˜3\frac{E_{2k-1,k}}{(2k-1)!!}=(2k-1)^{k-3}\qquad\text{and}\qquad\frac{E_{2k-2,k}% }{(2k-3)!!}=(2k-1)^{k-2}-(2k-2)^{k-2}+\frac{2}{3}(k-2)(2k-2)^{k-3}.divide start_ARG italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - 1 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( 2 italic_k - 1 ) !! end_ARG = ( 2 italic_k - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and divide start_ARG italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - 2 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( 2 italic_k - 3 ) !! end_ARG = ( 2 italic_k - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( 2 italic_k - 2 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG ( italic_k - 2 ) ( 2 italic_k - 2 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

Our goal in this note is to provide a formula for E2⁒kβˆ’r,ksubscript𝐸2π‘˜π‘Ÿπ‘˜E_{2k-r,k}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - italic_r , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for arbitrary kπ‘˜kitalic_k and rπ‘Ÿritalic_r. Our formula becomes more complicated as rπ‘Ÿritalic_r grows. It can be used to recover Theorem 1.5, and we also use it to provide an explicit closed formula for the next case E2⁒kβˆ’3,ksubscript𝐸2π‘˜3π‘˜E_{2k-3,k}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - 3 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (Example 1.7).

Consider the unsigned associated Stirling number of the first kind

[[nk]]=(nβˆ’1)⁒[[nβˆ’2kβˆ’1]]+(nβˆ’1)⁒[[nβˆ’1k]],delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixπ‘›π‘˜π‘›1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrix𝑛2π‘˜1𝑛1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrix𝑛1π‘˜{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}n\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}=(n-1){\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}n-2\\ k-1\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}+(n-1){\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}n-1\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]},[ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_n end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] = ( italic_n - 1 ) [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_n - 2 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k - 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] + ( italic_n - 1 ) [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_n - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] , (1)

which counts the number of derangements of [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] with kπ‘˜kitalic_k cycles [Com74, page 256]. This quantity vanishes when n<2⁒k𝑛2π‘˜n<2kitalic_n < 2 italic_k, and Equation (1) implies the following formulas when n𝑛nitalic_n is close to 2⁒k2π‘˜2k2 italic_k:

[[2⁒kk]]=(2⁒kβˆ’1)!!,[[2⁒k+1k]]=23⁒k⁒(2⁒k+1)!!,and[[2⁒k+2k]]=19⁒(4⁒k+5)⁒(k+1)⁒k⁒(2⁒k+1)!!.formulae-sequencedelimited-[]delimited-[]matrix2π‘˜π‘˜double-factorial2π‘˜1formulae-sequencedelimited-[]delimited-[]matrix2π‘˜1π‘˜23π‘˜double-factorial2π‘˜1anddelimited-[]delimited-[]matrix2π‘˜2π‘˜194π‘˜5π‘˜1π‘˜double-factorial2π‘˜1{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}2k\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}=(2k-1)!!,\quad{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}2k+1% \\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}=\frac{2}{3}k\,(2k+1)!!,\quad\text{and}\quad{% \left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}2k+2\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}=\frac{1}{9}(4k+5)(k+1)k\,(2k+1)!!.[ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL 2 italic_k end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] = ( 2 italic_k - 1 ) !! , [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL 2 italic_k + 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] = divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG italic_k ( 2 italic_k + 1 ) !! , and [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL 2 italic_k + 2 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 9 end_ARG ( 4 italic_k + 5 ) ( italic_k + 1 ) italic_k ( 2 italic_k + 1 ) !! .
Theorem 1.6.

For all 0≀r≀k0π‘Ÿπ‘˜0\leq r\leq k0 ≀ italic_r ≀ italic_k, we have

E2⁒kβˆ’r,k=βˆ‘p=1r[[2⁒kβˆ’pβˆ’1kβˆ’p]]β’βˆ‘i=0rβˆ’p(βˆ’1)i+p+1⁒(2⁒kβˆ’pβˆ’i)kβˆ’pβˆ’1i!⁒(rβˆ’pβˆ’i)!.subscript𝐸2π‘˜π‘Ÿπ‘˜superscriptsubscript𝑝1π‘Ÿdelimited-[]delimited-[]matrix2π‘˜π‘1π‘˜π‘superscriptsubscript𝑖0π‘Ÿπ‘superscript1𝑖𝑝1superscript2π‘˜π‘π‘–π‘˜π‘1π‘–π‘Ÿπ‘π‘–E_{2k-r,k}=\sum_{p=1}^{r}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}2k-p-1\\ k-p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\sum_{i=0}^{r-p}\frac{(-1)^{i+p+1}(2k-p-i)^{k-% p-1}}{i!(r-p-i)!}.italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - italic_r , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL 2 italic_k - italic_p - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k - italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i + italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 italic_k - italic_p - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_i ! ( italic_r - italic_p - italic_i ) ! end_ARG .
Example 1.7.

When r=1π‘Ÿ1r=1italic_r = 1 and r=2π‘Ÿ2r=2italic_r = 2, Theorem 1.6 reproduces Theorem 1.5. When r=3π‘Ÿ3r=3italic_r = 3, Theorem 1.6 tells us that

E2⁒kβˆ’3,k(2⁒kβˆ’3)!!subscript𝐸2π‘˜3π‘˜double-factorial2π‘˜3\displaystyle\frac{E_{2k-3,k}}{(2k-3)!!}divide start_ARG italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - 3 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( 2 italic_k - 3 ) !! end_ARG =\displaystyle== 12⁒(2⁒kβˆ’1)kβˆ’2βˆ’(2⁒kβˆ’2)kβˆ’2+12⁒(2⁒kβˆ’3)kβˆ’212superscript2π‘˜1π‘˜2superscript2π‘˜2π‘˜212superscript2π‘˜3π‘˜2\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}(2k-1)^{k-2}-(2k-2)^{k-2}+\frac{1}{2}(2k-3)^{k-2}divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( 2 italic_k - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( 2 italic_k - 2 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( 2 italic_k - 3 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
+23⁒(kβˆ’2)⁒((2⁒kβˆ’3)kβˆ’3βˆ’(2⁒kβˆ’2)kβˆ’3)23π‘˜2superscript2π‘˜3π‘˜3superscript2π‘˜2π‘˜3\displaystyle+\frac{2}{3}(k-2)\left((2k-3)^{k-3}-(2k-2)^{k-3}\right)+ divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG ( italic_k - 2 ) ( ( 2 italic_k - 3 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( 2 italic_k - 2 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
+19⁒(4⁒kβˆ’7)⁒(kβˆ’2)⁒(kβˆ’3)⁒(2⁒kβˆ’3)kβˆ’5.194π‘˜7π‘˜2π‘˜3superscript2π‘˜3π‘˜5\displaystyle+\frac{1}{9}(4k-7)(k-2)(k-3)(2k-3)^{k-5}.+ divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 9 end_ARG ( 4 italic_k - 7 ) ( italic_k - 2 ) ( italic_k - 3 ) ( 2 italic_k - 3 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .
Remark 1.8.

Let M𝑀Mitalic_M be a simple quasi series-parallel matroid of rank kπ‘˜kitalic_k on the set [2⁒kβˆ’r]delimited-[]2π‘˜π‘Ÿ[2k-r][ 2 italic_k - italic_r ], and let {Mi}subscript𝑀𝑖\{M_{i}\}{ italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } be its connected components. Then Misubscript𝑀𝑖M_{i}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a simple series-parallel matroid of rank kisubscriptπ‘˜π‘–k_{i}italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on a set of cardinality 2⁒kiβˆ’ri2subscriptπ‘˜π‘–subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘–2k_{i}-r_{i}2 italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and we have βˆ‘iki=ksubscript𝑖subscriptπ‘˜π‘–π‘˜\sum_{i}k_{i}=kβˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_k and βˆ‘iri=rsubscript𝑖subscriptπ‘Ÿπ‘–π‘Ÿ\sum_{i}r_{i}=rβˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_r. Thus S2⁒kβˆ’r,ksubscript𝑆2π‘˜π‘Ÿπ‘˜S_{2k-r,k}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - italic_r , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT may be computed in terms of E2⁒jβˆ’s,jsubscript𝐸2𝑗𝑠𝑗E_{2j-s,j}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_j - italic_s , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for j≀kπ‘—π‘˜j\leq kitalic_j ≀ italic_k and s≀rπ‘ π‘Ÿs\leq ritalic_s ≀ italic_r. The precise formula can be derived from the first equation in Proposition 1.4.

We prove Theorem 1.6 using the generating functions. Ferroni and Larson provide an expression for the generating function C⁒(x,y)𝐢π‘₯𝑦C(x,y)italic_C ( italic_x , italic_y ) in terms of the compositional inverse of the function

1y⁒log⁑(1+x⁒y)+log⁑(1+x)βˆ’x,1𝑦1π‘₯𝑦1π‘₯π‘₯\frac{1}{y}\log(1+xy)+\log(1+x)-x,divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_y end_ARG roman_log ( 1 + italic_x italic_y ) + roman_log ( 1 + italic_x ) - italic_x ,

where y𝑦yitalic_y is regarded as a parameter (Section 4). We explicitly compute the coefficients of this compositional inverse, which gives us a formula for the numbers Cn,ksubscriptπΆπ‘›π‘˜C_{n,k}italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (Corollary 4.4). We then combine this with the third identity in Proposition 1.4 to prove Theorem 1.6.

Acknowledgments: The authors are grateful to Luis Ferroni and Matt Larson, whose work made this paper possible.

2 Two Stirling lemmas

We begin with two lemmas about Stirling numbers that we will need later in the paper. Let {nk}FRACOPπ‘›π‘˜\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{k}{ FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG } be the Stirling number of the second kind, which counts partitions of [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] into kπ‘˜kitalic_k nonempty parts.

Lemma 2.1.

We have

βˆ‘p=0β„“(βˆ’1)β„“+p⁒(m+pβ„“+p)⁒[[β„“+pp]]={m+1mβˆ’β„“+1}.superscriptsubscript𝑝0β„“superscript1ℓ𝑝binomialπ‘šπ‘β„“π‘delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝𝑝FRACOPπ‘š1π‘šβ„“1\sum_{p=0}^{\ell}(-1)^{\ell+p}\binom{m+p}{\ell+p}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}% \ell+p\\ p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}=\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{m+1}{m-\ell+1}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ + italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + italic_p end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p end_ARG ) [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] = { FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_m - roman_β„“ + 1 end_ARG } .
Proof.

Let us denote the left-hand side of the equation by Tm,β„“subscriptπ‘‡π‘šβ„“T_{m,\ell}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. We have

{m+1mβˆ’β„“+1}βˆ’{mmβˆ’β„“}=(mβˆ’β„“+1)⁒{mmβˆ’β„“+1},FRACOPπ‘š1π‘šβ„“1FRACOPπ‘šπ‘šβ„“π‘šβ„“1FRACOPπ‘šπ‘šβ„“1\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{m+1}{m-\ell+1}-\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{m}{m-\ell}=% (m-\ell+1)\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{m}{m-\ell+1},{ FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_m - roman_β„“ + 1 end_ARG } - { FRACOP start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG italic_m - roman_β„“ end_ARG } = ( italic_m - roman_β„“ + 1 ) { FRACOP start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG italic_m - roman_β„“ + 1 end_ARG } ,

and we will show that Tm,β„“subscriptπ‘‡π‘šβ„“T_{m,\ell}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT satisfies the same recursion. Indeed, we have

Tm,β„“βˆ’Tmβˆ’1,β„“subscriptπ‘‡π‘šβ„“subscriptπ‘‡π‘š1β„“\displaystyle T_{m,\ell}-T_{m-1,\ell}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m - 1 , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== βˆ‘p=1β„“(βˆ’1)p+ℓ⁒((m+pβ„“+p)βˆ’(mβˆ’1+pβ„“+p))⁒[[β„“+pp]]superscriptsubscript𝑝1β„“superscript1𝑝ℓbinomialπ‘šπ‘β„“π‘binomialπ‘š1𝑝ℓ𝑝delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝𝑝\displaystyle\sum_{p=1}^{\ell}(-1)^{p+\ell}\left(\binom{m+p}{\ell+p}-\binom{m-% 1+p}{\ell+p}\right){\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+p\\ p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p + roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + italic_p end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p end_ARG ) - ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m - 1 + italic_p end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p end_ARG ) ) [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ]
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘p=0β„“(βˆ’1)p+ℓ⁒(m+pβˆ’1β„“+pβˆ’1)⁒[[β„“+pp]]superscriptsubscript𝑝0β„“superscript1𝑝ℓbinomialπ‘šπ‘1ℓ𝑝1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝𝑝\displaystyle\sum_{p=0}^{\ell}(-1)^{p+\ell}\binom{m+p-1}{\ell+p-1}{\left[\!% \left[\begin{matrix}\ell+p\\ p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p + roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + italic_p - 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p - 1 end_ARG ) [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ]
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘p=0β„“(βˆ’1)p+ℓ⁒(m+pβˆ’1β„“+pβˆ’1)⁒(β„“+pβˆ’1)⁒([[β„“+pβˆ’2pβˆ’1]]+[[β„“+pβˆ’1p]])superscriptsubscript𝑝0β„“superscript1𝑝ℓbinomialπ‘šπ‘1ℓ𝑝1ℓ𝑝1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝2𝑝1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝1𝑝\displaystyle\sum_{p=0}^{\ell}(-1)^{p+\ell}\binom{m+p-1}{\ell+p-1}(\ell+p-1)% \left({\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+p-2\\ p-1\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}+{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+p-1\\ p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\right)βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p + roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + italic_p - 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p - 1 end_ARG ) ( roman_β„“ + italic_p - 1 ) ( [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p - 2 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p - 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] + [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] )
=\displaystyle== (mβˆ’β„“+1)β’βˆ‘p=0β„“(βˆ’1)p+ℓ⁒(m+pβˆ’1β„“+pβˆ’2)⁒([[β„“+pβˆ’2pβˆ’1]]+[[β„“+pβˆ’1p]])π‘šβ„“1superscriptsubscript𝑝0β„“superscript1𝑝ℓbinomialπ‘šπ‘1ℓ𝑝2delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝2𝑝1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝1𝑝\displaystyle(m-\ell+1)\sum_{p=0}^{\ell}(-1)^{p+\ell}\binom{m+p-1}{\ell+p-2}% \left({\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+p-2\\ p-1\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}+{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+p-1\\ p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\right)( italic_m - roman_β„“ + 1 ) βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p + roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + italic_p - 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p - 2 end_ARG ) ( [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p - 2 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p - 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] + [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] )
=\displaystyle== (mβˆ’β„“+1)β’βˆ‘q=0β„“βˆ’1(βˆ’1)q+ℓ⁒((m+qβˆ’1β„“+qβˆ’2)βˆ’(m+qβ„“+qβˆ’1))⁒[[β„“+qβˆ’1q]]π‘šβ„“1superscriptsubscriptπ‘ž0β„“1superscript1π‘žβ„“binomialπ‘šπ‘ž1β„“π‘ž2binomialπ‘šπ‘žβ„“π‘ž1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixβ„“π‘ž1π‘ž\displaystyle(m-\ell+1)\sum_{q=0}^{\ell-1}(-1)^{q+\ell}\left(\binom{m+q-1}{% \ell+q-2}-\binom{m+q}{\ell+q-1}\right){\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+q-1\\ q\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}( italic_m - roman_β„“ + 1 ) βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_q + roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + italic_q - 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_q - 2 end_ARG ) - ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + italic_q end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_q - 1 end_ARG ) ) [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_q - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_q end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ]
=\displaystyle== (mβˆ’β„“+1)β’βˆ‘q=0β„“βˆ’1(βˆ’1)q+β„“βˆ’1⁒(m+qβˆ’1β„“+qβˆ’1)⁒[[β„“+qβˆ’1q]]π‘šβ„“1superscriptsubscriptπ‘ž0β„“1superscript1π‘žβ„“1binomialπ‘šπ‘ž1β„“π‘ž1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixβ„“π‘ž1π‘ž\displaystyle(m-\ell+1)\sum_{q=0}^{\ell-1}(-1)^{q+\ell-1}\binom{m+q-1}{\ell+q-% 1}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+q-1\\ q\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}( italic_m - roman_β„“ + 1 ) βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_q + roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m + italic_q - 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_q - 1 end_ARG ) [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_q - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_q end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ]
=\displaystyle== (mβˆ’β„“+1)⁒Tmβˆ’1,β„“βˆ’1.π‘šβ„“1subscriptπ‘‡π‘š1β„“1\displaystyle(m-\ell+1)T_{m-1,\ell-1}.( italic_m - roman_β„“ + 1 ) italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m - 1 , roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

This completes the proof. ∎

Lemma 2.2.

We have

{n+km}=βˆ‘j=0kβˆ’1{n+1mβˆ’j}β’βˆ‘i=0j(βˆ’1)i⁒(mβˆ’i)kβˆ’1i!⁒(jβˆ’i)!.FRACOPπ‘›π‘˜π‘šsuperscriptsubscript𝑗0π‘˜1FRACOP𝑛1π‘šπ‘—superscriptsubscript𝑖0𝑗superscript1𝑖superscriptπ‘šπ‘–π‘˜1𝑖𝑗𝑖\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n+k}{m}=\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n+% 1}{m-j}\sum_{i=0}^{j}\frac{(-1)^{i}(m-i)^{k-1}}{i!(j-i)!}.{ FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + italic_k end_ARG start_ARG italic_m end_ARG } = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_m - italic_j end_ARG } βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_m - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_i ! ( italic_j - italic_i ) ! end_ARG .
Proof.

We have

m!⁒{n+km}π‘šFRACOPπ‘›π‘˜π‘š\displaystyle m!\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n+k}{m}italic_m ! { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + italic_k end_ARG start_ARG italic_m end_ARG } =\displaystyle== |{f:[n+k]β† [m]}|conditional-set𝑓↠delimited-[]π‘›π‘˜delimited-[]π‘š\displaystyle\big{|}\{f:[n+k]\twoheadrightarrow[m]\}\big{|}| { italic_f : [ italic_n + italic_k ] β†  [ italic_m ] } |
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘j=1kβˆ’1(mj)|{f:[n+1]β† [mβˆ’j]}|β‹…|{f:[kβˆ’1]β†’[m]∣[j]βŠ‚im(f)}|\displaystyle\sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\binom{m}{j}\big{|}\{f:[n+1]\twoheadrightarrow[m-% j]\}\big{|}\cdot\big{|}\{f:[k-1]\to[m]\mid[j]\subset\operatorname{im}(f)\}\big% {|}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG italic_j end_ARG ) | { italic_f : [ italic_n + 1 ] β†  [ italic_m - italic_j ] } | β‹… | { italic_f : [ italic_k - 1 ] β†’ [ italic_m ] ∣ [ italic_j ] βŠ‚ roman_im ( italic_f ) } |
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘j=1kβˆ’1(mj)(mβˆ’j)!{n+1mβˆ’j}β‹…|{f:[kβˆ’1]β†’[m]∣[j]βŠ‚im(f)}|,\displaystyle\sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\binom{m}{j}(m-j)!\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n+1}{% m-j}\cdot\big{|}\{f:[k-1]\to[m]\mid[j]\subset\operatorname{im}(f)\}\big{|},βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG italic_j end_ARG ) ( italic_m - italic_j ) ! { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_m - italic_j end_ARG } β‹… | { italic_f : [ italic_k - 1 ] β†’ [ italic_m ] ∣ [ italic_j ] βŠ‚ roman_im ( italic_f ) } | ,

and therefore

{n+km}=βˆ‘j=1kβˆ’11j!{n+1mβˆ’j}β‹…|{f:[kβˆ’1]β†’[m]∣[j]βŠ‚im(f)}|.\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n+k}{m}=\sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\frac{1}{j!}\genfrac{\{}{\}}% {0.0pt}{}{n+1}{m-j}\cdot\big{|}\{f:[k-1]\to[m]\mid[j]\subset\operatorname{im}(% f)\}\big{|}.{ FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + italic_k end_ARG start_ARG italic_m end_ARG } = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_j ! end_ARG { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_m - italic_j end_ARG } β‹… | { italic_f : [ italic_k - 1 ] β†’ [ italic_m ] ∣ [ italic_j ] βŠ‚ roman_im ( italic_f ) } | .

By the inclusion-exclusion principle,

|{f:[kβˆ’1]β†’[m]∣[j]βŠ‚im(f)}|\displaystyle\big{|}\{f:[k-1]\to[m]\mid[j]\subset\operatorname{im}(f)\}\big{|}| { italic_f : [ italic_k - 1 ] β†’ [ italic_m ] ∣ [ italic_j ] βŠ‚ roman_im ( italic_f ) } | =\displaystyle== βˆ‘i=0kβˆ’1(βˆ’1)i(ji)|{f:[kβˆ’1]β†’[m]∣[i]βŠ„im(f)}|\displaystyle\sum_{i=0}^{k-1}(-1)^{i}\binom{j}{i}\big{|}\{f:[k-1]\to[m]\mid[i]% \not\subset\operatorname{im}(f)\}\big{|}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_ARG italic_i end_ARG ) | { italic_f : [ italic_k - 1 ] β†’ [ italic_m ] ∣ [ italic_i ] βŠ„ roman_im ( italic_f ) } |
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘i=0kβˆ’1(βˆ’1)i⁒(ji)⁒|{f:[kβˆ’1]β†’[mβˆ’i]}|superscriptsubscript𝑖0π‘˜1superscript1𝑖binomial𝑗𝑖conditional-set𝑓→delimited-[]π‘˜1delimited-[]π‘šπ‘–\displaystyle\sum_{i=0}^{k-1}(-1)^{i}\binom{j}{i}\big{|}\{f:[k-1]\to[m-i]\}% \big{|}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_ARG italic_i end_ARG ) | { italic_f : [ italic_k - 1 ] β†’ [ italic_m - italic_i ] } |
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘i=0kβˆ’1(βˆ’1)i⁒(ji)⁒(mβˆ’i)kβˆ’1.superscriptsubscript𝑖0π‘˜1superscript1𝑖binomial𝑗𝑖superscriptπ‘šπ‘–π‘˜1\displaystyle\sum_{i=0}^{k-1}(-1)^{i}\binom{j}{i}(m-i)^{k-1}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_ARG italic_i end_ARG ) ( italic_m - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

This completes the proof. ∎

3 Sums of products of reciprocals

Consider the numbers

Hm,k:=βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=mj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯11(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jk+1).assignsubscriptπ»π‘šπ‘˜subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘šformulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1H_{m,k}:=\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=m\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{1}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k}+% 1)}.italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_m end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG .
Lemma 3.1.

We have the recursion

n⁒Hnβˆ’k,k=k⁒Hnβˆ’kβˆ’1,kβˆ’1+(nβˆ’1)⁒Hnβˆ’kβˆ’1,k.𝑛subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜π‘˜π‘˜subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜1π‘˜1𝑛1subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜1π‘˜nH_{n-k,k}=kH_{n-k-1,k-1}+(n-1)H_{n-k-1,k}.italic_n italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_k italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k - 1 , italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ( italic_n - 1 ) italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k - 1 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Proof.

We have

n⁒Hnβˆ’k,k𝑛subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜π‘˜\displaystyle nH_{n-k,k}italic_n italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== n!k!β’βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=nβˆ’kj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯11(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jk+1)π‘›π‘˜subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘›π‘˜formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1\displaystyle\frac{n!}{k!}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=n-k\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{1}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k}+% 1)}divide start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG start_ARG italic_k ! end_ARG βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - italic_k end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=nβˆ’kj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1(j1+1)+β‹―+(jk+1)(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jk+1).subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘›π‘˜formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=n-k\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{(j_{1}+1)+\cdots+(j_{k}+1% )}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k}+1)}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - italic_k end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) + β‹― + ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG .

By symmetry, we may replace the numerator in the fraction above by k⁒(jk+1)π‘˜subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1k(j_{k}+1)italic_k ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ), and we obtain the equation

n⁒Hnβˆ’k,k𝑛subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜π‘˜\displaystyle nH_{n-k,k}italic_n italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=nβˆ’kj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1k⁒(jk+1)(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jk+1)subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘›π‘˜formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1π‘˜subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=n-k\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{k(j_{k}+1)}{(j_{1}+1)% \cdots(j_{k}+1)}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - italic_k end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_k ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=nβˆ’kj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1k(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jkβˆ’1+1)subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘›π‘˜formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1π‘˜subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=n-k\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{k}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k-1% }+1)}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - italic_k end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_k end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘jkβ‰₯1βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jkβˆ’1=nβˆ’kβˆ’jkj1β‰₯1,…,jkβˆ’1β‰₯1k(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jkβˆ’1+1).subscriptsubscriptπ‘—π‘˜1subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1π‘›π‘˜subscriptπ‘—π‘˜formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11π‘˜subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11\displaystyle\sum_{j_{k}\geq 1}\;\;\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k-% 1}=n-k-j_{k}\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k-1}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{k}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k% -1}+1)}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - italic_k - italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_k end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG .

Similarly, we have

(nβˆ’1)⁒Hnβˆ’kβˆ’1,k=βˆ‘jkβ‰₯1βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jkβˆ’1=nβˆ’kβˆ’jkβˆ’1j1β‰₯1,…,jkβˆ’1β‰₯1k(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jkβˆ’1+1).𝑛1subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜1π‘˜subscriptsubscriptπ‘—π‘˜1subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1π‘›π‘˜subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11π‘˜subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11(n-1)H_{n-k-1,k}=\sum_{j_{k}\geq 1}\;\;\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j% _{k-1}=n-k-j_{k}-1\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k-1}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{k}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k% -1}+1)}.( italic_n - 1 ) italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k - 1 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - italic_k - italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_k end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG .

Taking the difference, we find that

n⁒Hnβˆ’k,kβˆ’(nβˆ’1)⁒Hnβˆ’kβˆ’1,k𝑛subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜π‘˜π‘›1subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜1π‘˜\displaystyle nH_{n-k,k}-(n-1)H_{n-k-1,k}italic_n italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - ( italic_n - 1 ) italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k - 1 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jkβˆ’1=nβˆ’kβˆ’1j1β‰₯1,…,jkβˆ’1β‰₯1k(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jkβˆ’1+1)subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1π‘›π‘˜1formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11π‘˜subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k-1}=n-k-1\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k-1}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{k}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k% -1}+1)}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - italic_k - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_k end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG
=\displaystyle== k⁒Hnβˆ’kβˆ’1,k.π‘˜subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜1π‘˜\displaystyle kH_{n-k-1,k}.italic_k italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k - 1 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

This completes the proof. ∎

Lemma 3.2.

We have

Hnβˆ’k,k=k!n!⁒[[nk]].subscriptπ»π‘›π‘˜π‘˜π‘˜π‘›delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixπ‘›π‘˜H_{n-k,k}=\frac{k!}{n!}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}n\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}.italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_k ! end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_n end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] .
Proof.

The recursion in Equation (1) matches the one in Lemma 3.1. ∎

Lemma 3.3.

We have

βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=mj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1∏i=1k1+yjiji+1=βˆ‘β„“=0myβ„“β’βˆ‘p=0k(kp)⁒Hβ„“,p⁒Hmβˆ’β„“,kβˆ’p.subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘šformulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1superscriptsubscriptproduct𝑖1π‘˜1superscript𝑦subscript𝑗𝑖subscript𝑗𝑖1superscriptsubscriptβ„“0π‘šsuperscript𝑦ℓsuperscriptsubscript𝑝0π‘˜binomialπ‘˜π‘subscript𝐻ℓ𝑝subscriptπ»π‘šβ„“π‘˜π‘\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=m\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\prod_{i=1}^{k}\frac{1+y^{j_{i}% }}{j_{i}+1}=\sum_{\ell=0}^{m}y^{\ell}\sum_{p=0}^{k}\binom{k}{p}H_{\ell,p}H_{m-% \ell,k-p}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_m end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 + italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 end_ARG = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_k end_ARG start_ARG italic_p end_ARG ) italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ , italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m - roman_β„“ , italic_k - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Proof.

We have

βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=mj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1∏i=1k1+yjiji+1subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘šformulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1superscriptsubscriptproduct𝑖1π‘˜1superscript𝑦subscript𝑗𝑖subscript𝑗𝑖1\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=m\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\prod_{i=1}^{k}\frac{1+y^{j_{i}% }}{j_{i}+1}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_m end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 + italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 end_ARG =\displaystyle== βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=mj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1βˆ‘p=0k(kp)⁒yj1+β‹―+jp(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jk+1)subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘šformulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1superscriptsubscript𝑝0π‘˜binomialπ‘˜π‘superscript𝑦subscript𝑗1β‹―subscript𝑗𝑝subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=m\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\sum_{p=0}^{k}\binom{k}{p}\frac% {y^{j_{1}+\cdots+j_{p}}}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k}+1)}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_m end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_k end_ARG start_ARG italic_p end_ARG ) divide start_ARG italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘p=0k(kp)β’βˆ‘β„“=pmβˆ’k+pyβ„“β’βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=mj1+β‹―+jp=β„“j1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯11(j1+1)⁒⋯⁒(jk+1)superscriptsubscript𝑝0π‘˜binomialπ‘˜π‘superscriptsubscriptβ„“π‘π‘šπ‘˜π‘superscript𝑦ℓsubscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘šsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscript𝑗𝑝ℓformulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜11subscript𝑗11β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1\displaystyle\sum_{p=0}^{k}\binom{k}{p}\sum_{\ell=p}^{m-k+p}y^{\ell}\sum_{% \begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=m\\ j_{1}+\cdots+j_{p}=\ell\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\frac{1}{(j_{1}+1)\cdots(j_{k}+% 1)}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_k end_ARG start_ARG italic_p end_ARG ) βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ = italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - italic_k + italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_m end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_β„“ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) end_ARG
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘β„“=0myβ„“β’βˆ‘p=0k(kp)⁒Hβ„“,p⁒Hmβˆ’β„“,kβˆ’p.superscriptsubscriptβ„“0π‘šsuperscript𝑦ℓsuperscriptsubscript𝑝0π‘˜binomialπ‘˜π‘subscript𝐻ℓ𝑝subscriptπ»π‘šβ„“π‘˜π‘\displaystyle\sum_{\ell=0}^{m}y^{\ell}\sum_{p=0}^{k}\binom{k}{p}H_{\ell,p}H_{m% -\ell,k-p}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_k end_ARG start_ARG italic_p end_ARG ) italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ , italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m - roman_β„“ , italic_k - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

This completes the proof. ∎

Combining Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3 yields the following corollary, which we will use in Section 4.

Corollary 3.4.

We have

βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=mj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1∏i=1k1+yjiji+1=k!(mβˆ’k)!β’βˆ‘β„“=0myβ„“β’βˆ‘p=0k(mβˆ’kβ„“+p)⁒[[β„“+pp]]⁒[[mβˆ’β„“+kβˆ’pkβˆ’p]].subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘šformulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1superscriptsubscriptproduct𝑖1π‘˜1superscript𝑦subscript𝑗𝑖subscript𝑗𝑖1π‘˜π‘šπ‘˜superscriptsubscriptβ„“0π‘šsuperscript𝑦ℓsuperscriptsubscript𝑝0π‘˜binomialπ‘šπ‘˜β„“π‘delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝𝑝delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixπ‘šβ„“π‘˜π‘π‘˜π‘\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=m\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\,\prod_{i=1}^{k}\frac{1+y^{j_{i}% }}{j_{i}+1}=\frac{k!}{(m-k)!}\sum_{\ell=0}^{m}y^{\ell}\sum_{p=0}^{k}\binom{m-k% }{\ell+p}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+p\\ p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}m-\ell+k-p\\ k-p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_m end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 + italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_k ! end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_m - italic_k ) ! end_ARG βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_m - italic_k end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p end_ARG ) [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_m - roman_β„“ + italic_k - italic_p end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k - italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] .

4 Inverting a power series

The partial Bell polynomials Bn,k⁒(t1,…,tnβˆ’k+1)subscriptπ΅π‘›π‘˜subscript𝑑1…subscriptπ‘‘π‘›π‘˜1B_{n,k}(t_{1},\ldots,t_{n-k+1})italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) are characterized by the identity

exp⁑(yβ’βˆ‘j=1∞tj⁒xjj!)=βˆ‘0≀k≀nBn,k⁒(t1,…,tnβˆ’k+1)⁒yk⁒xnn!.𝑦superscriptsubscript𝑗1subscript𝑑𝑗superscriptπ‘₯𝑗𝑗subscript0π‘˜π‘›subscriptπ΅π‘›π‘˜subscript𝑑1…subscriptπ‘‘π‘›π‘˜1superscriptπ‘¦π‘˜superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛\exp\left(y\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}t_{j}\frac{x^{j}}{j!}\right)=\sum_{0\leq k\leq n% }B_{n,k}(t_{1},\ldots,t_{n-k+1})\,y^{k}\frac{x^{n}}{n!}.roman_exp ( italic_y βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j ! end_ARG ) = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 ≀ italic_k ≀ italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG . (2)

The following lemma gives an explicit expression for these polynomials.

Lemma 4.1.

We have

Bn,k⁒(t1,…,tnβˆ’k+1)=n!k!β’βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=nj1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1tj1j1!⁒⋯⁒tjkjk!.subscriptπ΅π‘›π‘˜subscript𝑑1…subscriptπ‘‘π‘›π‘˜1π‘›π‘˜subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘›formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1subscript𝑑subscript𝑗1subscript𝑗1β‹―subscript𝑑subscriptπ‘—π‘˜subscriptπ‘—π‘˜B_{n,k}(t_{1},\ldots,t_{n-k+1})=\frac{n!}{k!}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+% \cdots+j_{k}=n\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\frac{t_{j_{1}}}{j_{1}!}\cdots% \frac{t_{j_{k}}}{j_{k}!}.italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = divide start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG start_ARG italic_k ! end_ARG βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ! end_ARG β‹― divide start_ARG italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ! end_ARG .
Proof.

Equation (2) implies that Bn,k⁒(t1,…,tnβˆ’k+1)subscriptπ΅π‘›π‘˜subscript𝑑1…subscriptπ‘‘π‘›π‘˜1B_{n,k}(t_{1},\ldots,t_{n-k+1})italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is equal to the coefficient of xnsuperscriptπ‘₯𝑛x^{n}italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the power series

n!k!⁒(βˆ‘j=1∞tj⁒xjj!)k.π‘›π‘˜superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑗1subscript𝑑𝑗superscriptπ‘₯π‘—π‘—π‘˜\frac{n!}{k!}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}t_{j}\frac{x^{j}}{j!}\right)^{k}.divide start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG start_ARG italic_k ! end_ARG ( βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j ! end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

The lemma follows. ∎

Suppose that

F⁒(x)=βˆ‘n=1∞Fn⁒xnn!andG⁒(x)=βˆ‘n=1∞Gn⁒xnn!formulae-sequence𝐹π‘₯superscriptsubscript𝑛1subscript𝐹𝑛superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛and𝐺π‘₯superscriptsubscript𝑛1subscript𝐺𝑛superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛F(x)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}F_{n}\frac{x^{n}}{n!}\qquad\text{and}\qquad G(x)=\sum_% {n=1}^{\infty}G_{n}\frac{x^{n}}{n!}italic_F ( italic_x ) = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG and italic_G ( italic_x ) = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG

are power series with coefficients in some commutative β„šβ„š\mathbb{Q}blackboard_Q-algebra R𝑅Ritalic_R. Suppose further that F1β‰ 0subscript𝐹10F_{1}\neq 0italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰  0, and let Fn^=Fn+1(n+1)⁒F1^subscript𝐹𝑛subscript𝐹𝑛1𝑛1subscript𝐹1\hat{F_{n}}=\frac{F_{n+1}}{(n+1)F_{1}}over^ start_ARG italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_n + 1 ) italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG, so that

F^⁒(x):=βˆ‘n=1∞Fn^⁒xnn!=F⁒(x)βˆ’F1⁒xx.assign^𝐹π‘₯superscriptsubscript𝑛1^subscript𝐹𝑛superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛𝐹π‘₯subscript𝐹1π‘₯π‘₯\hat{F}(x):=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\hat{F_{n}}\frac{x^{n}}{n!}=\frac{F(x)-F_{1}x}{% x}.over^ start_ARG italic_F end_ARG ( italic_x ) := βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_F ( italic_x ) - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_ARG start_ARG italic_x end_ARG .

The following result is a corollary of the Lagrange inversion theorem [Cha02, Corollary 11.3].

Theorem 4.2.

We have G⁒(F⁒(x))=x𝐺𝐹π‘₯π‘₯G(F(x))=xitalic_G ( italic_F ( italic_x ) ) = italic_x if and only if G1=F1βˆ’1subscript𝐺1superscriptsubscript𝐹11G_{1}=F_{1}^{-1}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and, for all n>1𝑛1n>1italic_n > 1,

Gnsubscript𝐺𝑛\displaystyle G_{n}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== 1F1nβ’βˆ‘k=1nβˆ’1n⁒(n+1)⁒⋯⁒(n+kβˆ’1)⁒Bnβˆ’1,k⁒(F^1,…,F^nβˆ’k)1superscriptsubscript𝐹1𝑛superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜1𝑛1𝑛𝑛1β‹―π‘›π‘˜1subscript𝐡𝑛1π‘˜subscript^𝐹1…subscript^πΉπ‘›π‘˜\displaystyle\frac{1}{F_{1}^{n}}\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}n(n+1)\cdots(n+k-1)B_{n-1,k}% \left(\hat{F}_{1},\ldots,\hat{F}_{n-k}\right)divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n ( italic_n + 1 ) β‹― ( italic_n + italic_k - 1 ) italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( over^ start_ARG italic_F end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , over^ start_ARG italic_F end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
=\displaystyle== 1F1nβ’βˆ‘k=1nβˆ’1(βˆ’1)k⁒(n+kβˆ’1)!k!β’βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=nβˆ’1j1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1∏i=1kF^jiji!.1superscriptsubscript𝐹1𝑛superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜1𝑛1superscript1π‘˜π‘›π‘˜1π‘˜subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘›1formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1superscriptsubscriptproduct𝑖1π‘˜subscript^𝐹subscript𝑗𝑖subscript𝑗𝑖\displaystyle\frac{1}{F_{1}^{n}}\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}(-1)^{k}\frac{(n+k-1)!}{k!}% \sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=n-1\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\prod_{i=1}^{k}\frac{\hat{F}_{j_{% i}}}{j_{i}!}.divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( italic_n + italic_k - 1 ) ! end_ARG start_ARG italic_k ! end_ARG βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_F end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ! end_ARG .

We now apply Theorem 4.2 to a particular power series with coefficients in the commutative β„šβ„š\mathbb{Q}blackboard_Q-algebra β„šβ’[y]β„šdelimited-[]𝑦\mathbb{Q}[y]blackboard_Q [ italic_y ]. Let

F⁒(x,y)=βˆ‘n=1∞Fn⁒(y)⁒xnn!:=1y⁒log⁑(1+x⁒y)+log⁑(1+x)βˆ’x.𝐹π‘₯𝑦superscriptsubscript𝑛1subscript𝐹𝑛𝑦superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛assign1𝑦1π‘₯𝑦1π‘₯π‘₯F(x,y)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}F_{n}(y)\frac{x^{n}}{n!}:=\frac{1}{y}\log(1+xy)+\log% (1+x)-x.italic_F ( italic_x , italic_y ) = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG := divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_y end_ARG roman_log ( 1 + italic_x italic_y ) + roman_log ( 1 + italic_x ) - italic_x .

Explicitly, we have F1⁒(y)=1subscript𝐹1𝑦1F_{1}(y)=1italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) = 1 and Fn⁒(y)=(βˆ’1)nβˆ’1⁒(nβˆ’1)!⁒(1+ynβˆ’1)subscript𝐹𝑛𝑦superscript1𝑛1𝑛11superscript𝑦𝑛1F_{n}(y)=(-1)^{n-1}(n-1)!(1+y^{n-1})italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) = ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_n - 1 ) ! ( 1 + italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) for all n>1𝑛1n>1italic_n > 1. Let

G⁒(x,y)=βˆ‘n=1∞Gn⁒(y)⁒xnn!=βˆ‘n=1βˆžβˆ‘k=0∞Gn,k⁒yk⁒xnn!𝐺π‘₯𝑦superscriptsubscript𝑛1subscript𝐺𝑛𝑦superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛superscriptsubscript𝑛1superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0subscriptπΊπ‘›π‘˜superscriptπ‘¦π‘˜superscriptπ‘₯𝑛𝑛G(x,y)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}G_{n}(y)\frac{x^{n}}{n!}=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=% 0}^{\infty}G_{n,k}\,y^{k}\frac{x^{n}}{n!}italic_G ( italic_x , italic_y ) = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_n ! end_ARG

be the unique power series with the property that G⁒(F⁒(x,y),x)=x𝐺𝐹π‘₯𝑦π‘₯π‘₯G(F(x,y),x)=xitalic_G ( italic_F ( italic_x , italic_y ) , italic_x ) = italic_x.

Proposition 4.3.

We have

Gn,β„“=Gn,nβˆ’β„“βˆ’1=βˆ‘j=0β„“(βˆ’1)j+ℓ⁒[[j+β„“j]]⁒{n+jj+β„“+1}.subscript𝐺𝑛ℓsubscript𝐺𝑛𝑛ℓ1superscriptsubscript𝑗0β„“superscript1𝑗ℓdelimited-[]delimited-[]matrix𝑗ℓ𝑗FRACOP𝑛𝑗𝑗ℓ1G_{n,\ell}=G_{n,n-\ell-1}=\sum_{j=0}^{\ell}(-1)^{j+\ell}{\left[\!\left[\begin{% matrix}j+\ell\\ j\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n+j}{j+\ell+1}.italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n - roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j + roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j + roman_β„“ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + italic_j end_ARG start_ARG italic_j + roman_β„“ + 1 end_ARG } .
Proof.

Let

F^n⁒(y):=Fn+1⁒(y)(n+1)⁒F1⁒(y)=(βˆ’1)n⁒n!⁒(1+yn)n+1.assignsubscript^𝐹𝑛𝑦subscript𝐹𝑛1𝑦𝑛1subscript𝐹1𝑦superscript1𝑛𝑛1superscript𝑦𝑛𝑛1\hat{F}_{n}(y):=\frac{F_{n+1}(y)}{(n+1)F_{1}(y)}=\frac{(-1)^{n}n!(1+y^{n})}{n+% 1}.over^ start_ARG italic_F end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) := divide start_ARG italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_n + 1 ) italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) end_ARG = divide start_ARG ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n ! ( 1 + italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_n + 1 end_ARG .

By Theorem 4.2, we have

Gn⁒(y)subscript𝐺𝑛𝑦\displaystyle G_{n}(y)italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) =\displaystyle== βˆ‘k=1nβˆ’1(βˆ’1)k⁒(n+kβˆ’1)!k!β’βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=nβˆ’1j1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1∏i=1kF^ji⁒(y)ji!superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜1𝑛1superscript1π‘˜π‘›π‘˜1π‘˜subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘›1formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1superscriptsubscriptproduct𝑖1π‘˜subscript^𝐹subscript𝑗𝑖𝑦subscript𝑗𝑖\displaystyle\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}(-1)^{k}\frac{(n+k-1)!}{k!}\sum_{\begin{subarray}% {c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=n-1\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\prod_{i=1}^{k}\frac{\hat{F}_{j_{% i}}(y)}{j_{i}!}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( italic_n + italic_k - 1 ) ! end_ARG start_ARG italic_k ! end_ARG βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_F end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ! end_ARG
=\displaystyle== βˆ‘k=1nβˆ’1(βˆ’1)n+kβˆ’1⁒(n+kβˆ’1)!k!β’βˆ‘j1+β‹―+jk=nβˆ’1j1β‰₯1,…,jkβ‰₯1∏i=1k1+yjiji+1.superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜1𝑛1superscript1π‘›π‘˜1π‘›π‘˜1π‘˜subscriptsubscript𝑗1β‹―subscriptπ‘—π‘˜π‘›1formulae-sequencesubscript𝑗11…subscriptπ‘—π‘˜1superscriptsubscriptproduct𝑖1π‘˜1superscript𝑦subscript𝑗𝑖subscript𝑗𝑖1\displaystyle\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}(-1)^{n+k-1}\frac{(n+k-1)!}{k!}\sum_{\begin{% subarray}{c}j_{1}+\cdots+j_{k}=n-1\\ j_{1}\geq 1,\ldots,j_{k}\geq 1\end{subarray}}\prod_{i=1}^{k}\frac{1+y^{j_{i}}}% {j_{i}+1}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n + italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( italic_n + italic_k - 1 ) ! end_ARG start_ARG italic_k ! end_ARG βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_n - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 , … , italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰₯ 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 + italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 end_ARG .

Note that this polynomial is clearly palindromic of degree nβˆ’1𝑛1n-1italic_n - 1, which implies that Gn,β„“=Gn,nβˆ’β„“βˆ’1subscript𝐺𝑛ℓsubscript𝐺𝑛𝑛ℓ1G_{n,\ell}=G_{n,n-\ell-1}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n - roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. By Corollary 3.4, Gn⁒(y)subscript𝐺𝑛𝑦G_{n}(y)italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ) is equal to

βˆ‘β„“=0nβˆ’1yβ„“β’βˆ‘k=1nβˆ’1(βˆ’1)n+kβˆ’1β’βˆ‘p=0β„“[[β„“+pp]]⁒[[nβˆ’1βˆ’β„“+kβˆ’pkβˆ’p]]⁒(n+kβˆ’1β„“+p).superscriptsubscriptβ„“0𝑛1superscript𝑦ℓsuperscriptsubscriptπ‘˜1𝑛1superscript1π‘›π‘˜1superscriptsubscript𝑝0β„“delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝𝑝delimited-[]delimited-[]matrix𝑛1β„“π‘˜π‘π‘˜π‘binomialπ‘›π‘˜1ℓ𝑝\sum_{\ell=0}^{n-1}y^{\ell}\ \sum_{k=1}^{n-1}(-1)^{n+k-1}\sum_{p=0}^{\ell}{% \left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}\ell+p\\ p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}n-1-\ell+k-p\\ k-p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\binom{n+k-1}{\ell+p}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n + italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_n - 1 - roman_β„“ + italic_k - italic_p end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k - italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + italic_k - 1 end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p end_ARG ) .

Taking the coefficient of yβ„“superscript𝑦ℓy^{\ell}italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and reindexing with j=kβˆ’pπ‘—π‘˜π‘j=k-pitalic_j = italic_k - italic_p, we get

Gn,β„“=βˆ‘j=0nβˆ’β„“βˆ’1(βˆ’1)n+jβˆ’β„“βˆ’1⁒[[nβˆ’1βˆ’β„“+jj]]β’βˆ‘p=0β„“(βˆ’1)β„“+p⁒[[β„“+pp]]⁒(nβˆ’1+j+pβ„“+p).subscript𝐺𝑛ℓsuperscriptsubscript𝑗0𝑛ℓ1superscript1𝑛𝑗ℓ1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrix𝑛1ℓ𝑗𝑗superscriptsubscript𝑝0β„“superscript1ℓ𝑝delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixℓ𝑝𝑝binomial𝑛1𝑗𝑝ℓ𝑝G_{n,\ell}=\sum_{j=0}^{n-\ell-1}(-1)^{n+j-\ell-1}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}% n-1-\ell+j\\ j\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\sum_{p=0}^{\ell}(-1)^{\ell+p}{\left[\!\left[% \begin{matrix}\ell+p\\ p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\binom{n-1+j+p}{\ell+p}.italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n + italic_j - roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_n - 1 - roman_β„“ + italic_j end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ + italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ + italic_p end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] ( FRACOP start_ARG italic_n - 1 + italic_j + italic_p end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + italic_p end_ARG ) .

Note that the symmetry Gn,β„“=Gn,nβˆ’1βˆ’β„“subscript𝐺𝑛ℓsubscript𝐺𝑛𝑛1β„“G_{n,\ell}=G_{n,n-1-\ell}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n - 1 - roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be seen by exchanging j𝑗jitalic_j and p𝑝pitalic_p in the summation above. By Lemma 2.1 with m=nβˆ’1+jπ‘šπ‘›1𝑗m=n-1+jitalic_m = italic_n - 1 + italic_j, we have

Gn,β„“=βˆ‘j=0nβˆ’β„“βˆ’1(βˆ’1)n+jβˆ’β„“βˆ’1⁒[[nβˆ’1βˆ’β„“+jj]]⁒{n+jn+jβˆ’β„“}.subscript𝐺𝑛ℓsuperscriptsubscript𝑗0𝑛ℓ1superscript1𝑛𝑗ℓ1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrix𝑛1ℓ𝑗𝑗FRACOP𝑛𝑗𝑛𝑗ℓG_{n,\ell}=\sum_{j=0}^{n-\ell-1}(-1)^{n+j-\ell-1}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}% n-1-\ell+j\\ j\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n+j}{n+j-\ell}.italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n + italic_j - roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_n - 1 - roman_β„“ + italic_j end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + italic_j end_ARG start_ARG italic_n + italic_j - roman_β„“ end_ARG } .

Replacing β„“β„“\ellroman_β„“ with nβˆ’1βˆ’β„“π‘›1β„“n-1-\ellitalic_n - 1 - roman_β„“ allows us to rewrite our expression as

Gn,β„“=Gn,nβˆ’1βˆ’β„“=βˆ‘j=0β„“(βˆ’1)j+ℓ⁒[[j+β„“j]]⁒{n+jj+β„“+1}.subscript𝐺𝑛ℓsubscript𝐺𝑛𝑛1β„“superscriptsubscript𝑗0β„“superscript1𝑗ℓdelimited-[]delimited-[]matrix𝑗ℓ𝑗FRACOP𝑛𝑗𝑗ℓ1G_{n,\ell}=G_{n,n-1-\ell}=\sum_{j=0}^{\ell}(-1)^{j+\ell}{\left[\!\left[\begin{% matrix}j+\ell\\ j\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n+j}{j+\ell+1}.italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n - 1 - roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j + roman_β„“ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_j + roman_β„“ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_j end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n + italic_j end_ARG start_ARG italic_j + roman_β„“ + 1 end_ARG } .

This completes the proof. ∎

Proposition 4.3, along with a theorem of Ferroni and Larson, provides a formula for Cn,β„“subscript𝐢𝑛ℓC_{n,\ell}italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Corollary 4.4.

For all nβ‰₯2𝑛2n\geq 2italic_n β‰₯ 2, we have

Cn,β„“=βˆ‘k=0β„“βˆ’1(βˆ’1)k+β„“βˆ’1⁒[[k+β„“βˆ’1k]]⁒{nβˆ’1+kk+β„“}.subscript𝐢𝑛ℓsuperscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0β„“1superscript1π‘˜β„“1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixπ‘˜β„“1π‘˜FRACOP𝑛1π‘˜π‘˜β„“C_{n,\ell}=\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1}(-1)^{k+\ell-1}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}k+% \ell-1\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n-1+k}{k+\ell}.italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k + roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_k + roman_β„“ - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n - 1 + italic_k end_ARG start_ARG italic_k + roman_β„“ end_ARG } .
Proof.

Using the work of Drake [Dra08, Example 1.5.1], Ferroni and Larson [FL24, Proposition 2.3] show that

C⁒(x,y)=(1+y)⁒x+y⁒∫G⁒(x,y)⁒𝑑x,𝐢π‘₯𝑦1𝑦π‘₯𝑦𝐺π‘₯𝑦differential-dπ‘₯C(x,y)=(1+y)x+y\int G(x,y)\,dx,italic_C ( italic_x , italic_y ) = ( 1 + italic_y ) italic_x + italic_y ∫ italic_G ( italic_x , italic_y ) italic_d italic_x ,

where the improper integral is taken to have no constant term. This means that, for all nβ‰₯2𝑛2n\geq 2italic_n β‰₯ 2, Cn,β„“=Gnβˆ’1,β„“βˆ’1subscript𝐢𝑛ℓsubscript𝐺𝑛1β„“1C_{n,\ell}=G_{n-1,\ell-1}italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The Corollary then follows from Proposition 4.3. ∎

Remark 4.5.

In Proposition 4.3, we gave an algebraic proof of the identity Gn,β„“=Gn,nβˆ’1βˆ’β„“subscript𝐺𝑛ℓsubscript𝐺𝑛𝑛1β„“G_{n,\ell}=G_{n,n-1-\ell}italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_G start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n - 1 - roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. We can reinterpret this identity as saying that Cn+1,β„“+1=Cn+1,nβˆ’β„“subscript𝐢𝑛1β„“1subscript𝐢𝑛1𝑛ℓC_{n+1,\ell+1}=C_{n+1,n-\ell}italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , roman_β„“ + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n - roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, which follows from the fact that matroid duality is a bijection from the set of series-parallel matroids on [n+1]delimited-[]𝑛1[n+1][ italic_n + 1 ] of rank β„“+1β„“1\ell+1roman_β„“ + 1 to the set of series-parallel matroids on [n+1]delimited-[]𝑛1[n+1][ italic_n + 1 ] of rank nβˆ’β„“π‘›β„“n-\ellitalic_n - roman_β„“.

5 Proof of Theorem 1.6

This section is devoted to using Corollary 4.4 to prove Theorem 1.6.

Lemma 5.1.

For all nβ‰₯2𝑛2n\geq 2italic_n β‰₯ 2, we have

Cn,β„“=βˆ‘m=β„“n{nm}⁒Em,β„“.subscript𝐢𝑛ℓsuperscriptsubscriptπ‘šβ„“π‘›FRACOPπ‘›π‘šsubscriptπΈπ‘šβ„“C_{n,\ell}=\sum_{m=\ell}^{n}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{m}E_{m,\ell}.italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m = roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_m end_ARG } italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Proof.

This can be derived from the third identity in Proposition 1.4, or one can prove it directly using the same combinatorial reasoning employed in the proof of Proposition 1.4. That is, a series-parallel matroid on [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] is given by a partition of [n]delimited-[]𝑛[n][ italic_n ] into mπ‘šmitalic_m parallel classes for some mπ‘šmitalic_m, along with a simple series-parallel matroid on the set of parallel classes. The lemma follows. ∎

Let

E~n,β„“:=βˆ‘p=12β’β„“βˆ’n[[2β’β„“βˆ’pβˆ’1β„“βˆ’p]]β’βˆ‘i=02β’β„“βˆ’nβˆ’p(βˆ’1)i+p+1⁒(2β’β„“βˆ’pβˆ’i)β„“βˆ’pβˆ’1i!⁒(2β’β„“βˆ’nβˆ’pβˆ’i)!,assignsubscript~𝐸𝑛ℓsuperscriptsubscript𝑝12ℓ𝑛delimited-[]delimited-[]matrix2ℓ𝑝1ℓ𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑖02ℓ𝑛𝑝superscript1𝑖𝑝1superscript2ℓ𝑝𝑖ℓ𝑝1𝑖2ℓ𝑛𝑝𝑖\tilde{E}_{n,\ell}:=\sum_{p=1}^{2\ell-n}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}2\ell-p-1% \\ \ell-p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\sum_{i=0}^{2\ell-n-p}\frac{(-1)^{i+p+1}(2% \ell-p-i)^{\ell-p-1}}{i!(2\ell-n-p-i)!},over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 roman_β„“ - italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL 2 roman_β„“ - italic_p - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ - italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 roman_β„“ - italic_n - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i + italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 roman_β„“ - italic_p - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ - italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_i ! ( 2 roman_β„“ - italic_n - italic_p - italic_i ) ! end_ARG ,

so that

E~2⁒kβˆ’r,k=βˆ‘p=1r[[2⁒kβˆ’pβˆ’1kβˆ’p]]β’βˆ‘i=0rβˆ’p(βˆ’1)i+p+1⁒(2⁒kβˆ’pβˆ’i)kβˆ’pβˆ’1i!⁒(rβˆ’pβˆ’i)!subscript~𝐸2π‘˜π‘Ÿπ‘˜superscriptsubscript𝑝1π‘Ÿdelimited-[]delimited-[]matrix2π‘˜π‘1π‘˜π‘superscriptsubscript𝑖0π‘Ÿπ‘superscript1𝑖𝑝1superscript2π‘˜π‘π‘–π‘˜π‘1π‘–π‘Ÿπ‘π‘–\tilde{E}_{2k-r,k}=\sum_{p=1}^{r}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}2k-p-1\\ k-p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\sum_{i=0}^{r-p}\frac{(-1)^{i+p+1}(2k-p-i)^{k-% p-1}}{i!(r-p-i)!}over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_k - italic_r , italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL 2 italic_k - italic_p - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k - italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i + italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 italic_k - italic_p - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_i ! ( italic_r - italic_p - italic_i ) ! end_ARG

is the expression appearing on the right-hand side of the equation in the statement of the theorem. We next prove the analogue of Lemma 5.1 for E~~𝐸\tilde{E}over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG.

Lemma 5.2.

For all nβ‰₯2𝑛2n\geq 2italic_n β‰₯ 2, we have

Cn,β„“=βˆ‘m=β„“n{nm}⁒E~m,β„“.subscript𝐢𝑛ℓsuperscriptsubscriptπ‘šβ„“π‘›FRACOPπ‘›π‘šsubscript~πΈπ‘šβ„“C_{n,\ell}=\sum_{m=\ell}^{n}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{m}\tilde{E}_{m,\ell}.italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m = roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_m end_ARG } over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Proof.

By Corollary 4.4 and using Lemma 2.2, we have

Cn,β„“=βˆ‘k=0β„“βˆ’1(βˆ’1)k+β„“βˆ’1⁒[[k+β„“βˆ’1k]]β’βˆ‘j=0kβˆ’1{nk+β„“βˆ’j}β’βˆ‘i=0j(βˆ’1)i⁒(k+β„“βˆ’i)kβˆ’1i!⁒(jβˆ’i)!,subscript𝐢𝑛ℓsuperscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0β„“1superscript1π‘˜β„“1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixπ‘˜β„“1π‘˜superscriptsubscript𝑗0π‘˜1FRACOPπ‘›π‘˜β„“π‘—superscriptsubscript𝑖0𝑗superscript1𝑖superscriptπ‘˜β„“π‘–π‘˜1𝑖𝑗𝑖C_{n,\ell}=\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1}(-1)^{k+\ell-1}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}k+% \ell-1\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{k+% \ell-j}\sum_{i=0}^{j}\frac{(-1)^{i}(k+\ell-i)^{k-1}}{i!(j-i)!},italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k + roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_k + roman_β„“ - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_j end_ARG } βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_i ! ( italic_j - italic_i ) ! end_ARG ,

Setting m=k+β„“βˆ’jπ‘šπ‘˜β„“π‘—m=k+\ell-jitalic_m = italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_j, we get

Cn,β„“=βˆ‘m=1n{nm}β’βˆ‘k=0β„“βˆ’1(βˆ’1)k+β„“βˆ’1⁒[[k+β„“βˆ’1k]]β’βˆ‘i=0k+β„“βˆ’m(βˆ’1)i⁒(k+β„“βˆ’i)kβˆ’1i!⁒(k+β„“βˆ’mβˆ’i)!,subscript𝐢𝑛ℓsuperscriptsubscriptπ‘š1𝑛FRACOPπ‘›π‘šsuperscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0β„“1superscript1π‘˜β„“1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixπ‘˜β„“1π‘˜superscriptsubscript𝑖0π‘˜β„“π‘šsuperscript1𝑖superscriptπ‘˜β„“π‘–π‘˜1π‘–π‘˜β„“π‘šπ‘–C_{n,\ell}=\sum_{m=1}^{n}\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{m}\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1}(-1% )^{k+\ell-1}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}k+\ell-1\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\sum_{i=0}^{k+\ell-m}(-1)^{i}\frac{(k+\ell-i)^{k% -1}}{i!(k+\ell-m-i)!},italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_m end_ARG } βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k + roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_k + roman_β„“ - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_i ! ( italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_m - italic_i ) ! end_ARG ,

thus it will suffice to show that

βˆ‘k=0β„“βˆ’1(βˆ’1)k+β„“βˆ’1⁒[[k+β„“βˆ’1k]]β’βˆ‘i=0k+β„“βˆ’m(βˆ’1)i⁒(k+β„“βˆ’i)kβˆ’1i!⁒(k+β„“βˆ’mβˆ’i)!superscriptsubscriptπ‘˜0β„“1superscript1π‘˜β„“1delimited-[]delimited-[]matrixπ‘˜β„“1π‘˜superscriptsubscript𝑖0π‘˜β„“π‘šsuperscript1𝑖superscriptπ‘˜β„“π‘–π‘˜1π‘–π‘˜β„“π‘šπ‘–\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-1}(-1)^{k+\ell-1}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}k+\ell-1\\ k\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\sum_{i=0}^{k+\ell-m}\frac{(-1)^{i}(k+\ell-i)^{k% -1}}{i!(k+\ell-m-i)!}βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k + roman_β„“ - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_k + roman_β„“ - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_k end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_i ! ( italic_k + roman_β„“ - italic_m - italic_i ) ! end_ARG

is equal to

βˆ‘p=12β’β„“βˆ’m[[2β’β„“βˆ’pβˆ’1β„“βˆ’p]]β’βˆ‘i=02β’β„“βˆ’mβˆ’p(βˆ’1)i+p+1⁒(2β’β„“βˆ’pβˆ’i)β„“βˆ’pβˆ’1i!⁒(2β’β„“βˆ’mβˆ’pβˆ’i)!.superscriptsubscript𝑝12β„“π‘šdelimited-[]delimited-[]matrix2ℓ𝑝1ℓ𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑖02β„“π‘šπ‘superscript1𝑖𝑝1superscript2ℓ𝑝𝑖ℓ𝑝1𝑖2β„“π‘šπ‘π‘–\sum_{p=1}^{2\ell-m}{\left[\!\left[\begin{matrix}2\ell-p-1\\ \ell-p\end{matrix}\right]\!\right]}\sum_{i=0}^{2\ell-m-p}\frac{(-1)^{i+p+1}(2% \ell-p-i)^{\ell-p-1}}{i!(2\ell-m-p-i)!}.βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 roman_β„“ - italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ [ start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL 2 roman_β„“ - italic_p - 1 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_β„“ - italic_p end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ] ] βˆ‘ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 roman_β„“ - italic_m - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ( - 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i + italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 2 roman_β„“ - italic_p - italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_β„“ - italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_i ! ( 2 roman_β„“ - italic_m - italic_p - italic_i ) ! end_ARG .

This is readily seen by setting k=β„“βˆ’pπ‘˜β„“π‘k=\ell-pitalic_k = roman_β„“ - italic_p. ∎

Proof of Theorem 1.6.

We need to prove that En,β„“=E~n,β„“subscript𝐸𝑛ℓsubscript~𝐸𝑛ℓE_{n,\ell}=\tilde{E}_{n,\ell}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for all nβ‰₯β„“β‰₯1𝑛ℓ1n\geq\ell\geq 1italic_n β‰₯ roman_β„“ β‰₯ 1. We fix β„“β‰₯1β„“1\ell\geq 1roman_β„“ β‰₯ 1 and proceed by induction on n𝑛nitalic_n. If n=β„“=1𝑛ℓ1n=\ell=1italic_n = roman_β„“ = 1, we can verify the equality directly. Otherwise we have nβ‰₯2𝑛2n\geq 2italic_n β‰₯ 2, so Equation (5.1) and Lemma 5.2 tell us that

{nβ„“}⁒Eβ„“,β„“+{nβ„“+1}⁒Eβ„“+1,β„“+β‹―+{nn}⁒En,β„“=Cn,β„“={nβ„“}⁒E~β„“,β„“+{nβ„“+1}⁒E~β„“+1,β„“+β‹―+{nn}⁒E~n,β„“.FRACOP𝑛ℓsubscript𝐸ℓℓFRACOP𝑛ℓ1subscript𝐸ℓ1β„“β‹―FRACOP𝑛𝑛subscript𝐸𝑛ℓsubscript𝐢𝑛ℓFRACOP𝑛ℓsubscript~𝐸ℓℓFRACOP𝑛ℓ1subscript~𝐸ℓ1β„“β‹―FRACOP𝑛𝑛subscript~𝐸𝑛ℓ\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{\ell}E_{\ell,\ell}+\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{% \ell+1}E_{\ell+1,\ell}+\cdots+\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{n}E_{n,\ell}=C_{n,% \ell}=\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n}{\ell}\tilde{E}_{\ell,\ell}+\genfrac{\{}{\}}% {0.0pt}{}{n}{\ell+1}\tilde{E}_{\ell+1,\ell}+\cdots+\genfrac{\{}{\}}{0.0pt}{}{n% }{n}\tilde{E}_{n,\ell}.{ FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG } italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + 1 end_ARG } italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ + 1 , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_n end_ARG } italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ end_ARG } over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG roman_β„“ + 1 end_ARG } over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_β„“ + 1 , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + β‹― + { FRACOP start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_ARG italic_n end_ARG } over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

By our inductive hypothesis, we can conclude that En,β„“=E~n,β„“subscript𝐸𝑛ℓsubscript~𝐸𝑛ℓE_{n,\ell}=\tilde{E}_{n,\ell}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = over~ start_ARG italic_E end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_β„“ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. ∎

References

  • [Cha02] CharalambosΒ A. Charalambides, Enumerative combinatorics, CRC Press Series on Discrete Mathematics and its Applications, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2002.
  • [Com74] Louis Comtet, Advanced combinatorics, enlarged ed., D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, 1974, The art of finite and infinite expansions.
  • [Dra08] Brian Drake, An inversion theorem for labeled trees and some limits of areas under lattice paths, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2008, Thesis (Ph.D.)–Brandeis University.
  • [FL24] Luis Ferroni and Matt Larson, Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials of braid matroids, Comm. Amer. Math. Soc. 4 (2024), 64–79.
  • [GPYZ] AliceΒ L.L. Gao, Nicholas Proudfoot, ArthurΒ L.B. Yang, and Zhong-Xue Zhang, The combinatorics behind the leading Kazhdan-Lusztig coefficients of braid matroids, arXiv:2311.06929.
  • [OEIS] OEIS Foundation, Inc., The On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences, 2024, http://oeis.org.
  • [Sta24] RichardΒ P. Stanley, Enumerative combinatorics. Vol. 2, second ed., Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 208, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, [2024] Β©2024, With an appendix by Sergey Fomin.