counting the number of non-negative integer pairs of $a+2b+3c+4d=100$
$begingroup$
I thought partition number $P(n,4)$ is equal with
the number of non-negative integer pairs $a+2b+3c+4d=n-4$
so....
how do I count the number of integer pairs satisfying $a+2b+3c+4d=100$ over $a,b,c,d geq 0$ ??
I really wonder this problem!
thank you for sharing your knowledge.
please don't use a computer
combinatorics
$endgroup$
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I thought partition number $P(n,4)$ is equal with
the number of non-negative integer pairs $a+2b+3c+4d=n-4$
so....
how do I count the number of integer pairs satisfying $a+2b+3c+4d=100$ over $a,b,c,d geq 0$ ??
I really wonder this problem!
thank you for sharing your knowledge.
please don't use a computer
combinatorics
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I won't call $(a,b,c,d)$ a pair, anyway you just need a coefficient in the Maclaurin series of $$frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n x^n,$$ and due to the pole of order $4$ at $x=1$, $$a_napprox frac{1}{24}binom{n+3}{3}.$$
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:11
$begingroup$
Since $x=-1$ is a double pole, there is a significative (linear) perturbation due to the parity of $n$. The other poles contribute with a bounded arithmetic perturbation.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:14
$begingroup$
The estimate by @JackD'Aurizio comes out to $approx7369$ for $n=100.$ Counting with a python script gives $8037.$ So, about a $10%$ error.
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
Dec 21 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
If you expand Jack D'Aurizio's generating function by partial fractions you could get an expression something like $a_n = c_1 + c_2 n + c_3 n^2 + c_4 n^3 + c_5 (-1)^n + c_6 n (-1)^n + c_7 cos(2 pi n/3) + c_8 sin(2 pi n/3) + c_9 cos(pi n/2) + c_{10} sin(pi n/2)$. Quite a bit of work to do by hand, though.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schepler
Dec 21 '18 at 18:04
$begingroup$
@DanielSchepler: not so much, just done.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 18:14
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I thought partition number $P(n,4)$ is equal with
the number of non-negative integer pairs $a+2b+3c+4d=n-4$
so....
how do I count the number of integer pairs satisfying $a+2b+3c+4d=100$ over $a,b,c,d geq 0$ ??
I really wonder this problem!
thank you for sharing your knowledge.
please don't use a computer
combinatorics
$endgroup$
I thought partition number $P(n,4)$ is equal with
the number of non-negative integer pairs $a+2b+3c+4d=n-4$
so....
how do I count the number of integer pairs satisfying $a+2b+3c+4d=100$ over $a,b,c,d geq 0$ ??
I really wonder this problem!
thank you for sharing your knowledge.
please don't use a computer
combinatorics
combinatorics
edited Dec 21 '18 at 17:11
postmortes
2,29531422
2,29531422
asked Dec 21 '18 at 16:56
뭘꼬나바뭘꼬나바
82
82
1
$begingroup$
I won't call $(a,b,c,d)$ a pair, anyway you just need a coefficient in the Maclaurin series of $$frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n x^n,$$ and due to the pole of order $4$ at $x=1$, $$a_napprox frac{1}{24}binom{n+3}{3}.$$
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:11
$begingroup$
Since $x=-1$ is a double pole, there is a significative (linear) perturbation due to the parity of $n$. The other poles contribute with a bounded arithmetic perturbation.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:14
$begingroup$
The estimate by @JackD'Aurizio comes out to $approx7369$ for $n=100.$ Counting with a python script gives $8037.$ So, about a $10%$ error.
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
Dec 21 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
If you expand Jack D'Aurizio's generating function by partial fractions you could get an expression something like $a_n = c_1 + c_2 n + c_3 n^2 + c_4 n^3 + c_5 (-1)^n + c_6 n (-1)^n + c_7 cos(2 pi n/3) + c_8 sin(2 pi n/3) + c_9 cos(pi n/2) + c_{10} sin(pi n/2)$. Quite a bit of work to do by hand, though.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schepler
Dec 21 '18 at 18:04
$begingroup$
@DanielSchepler: not so much, just done.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 18:14
|
show 2 more comments
1
$begingroup$
I won't call $(a,b,c,d)$ a pair, anyway you just need a coefficient in the Maclaurin series of $$frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n x^n,$$ and due to the pole of order $4$ at $x=1$, $$a_napprox frac{1}{24}binom{n+3}{3}.$$
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:11
$begingroup$
Since $x=-1$ is a double pole, there is a significative (linear) perturbation due to the parity of $n$. The other poles contribute with a bounded arithmetic perturbation.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:14
$begingroup$
The estimate by @JackD'Aurizio comes out to $approx7369$ for $n=100.$ Counting with a python script gives $8037.$ So, about a $10%$ error.
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
Dec 21 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
If you expand Jack D'Aurizio's generating function by partial fractions you could get an expression something like $a_n = c_1 + c_2 n + c_3 n^2 + c_4 n^3 + c_5 (-1)^n + c_6 n (-1)^n + c_7 cos(2 pi n/3) + c_8 sin(2 pi n/3) + c_9 cos(pi n/2) + c_{10} sin(pi n/2)$. Quite a bit of work to do by hand, though.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schepler
Dec 21 '18 at 18:04
$begingroup$
@DanielSchepler: not so much, just done.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 18:14
1
1
$begingroup$
I won't call $(a,b,c,d)$ a pair, anyway you just need a coefficient in the Maclaurin series of $$frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n x^n,$$ and due to the pole of order $4$ at $x=1$, $$a_napprox frac{1}{24}binom{n+3}{3}.$$
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:11
$begingroup$
I won't call $(a,b,c,d)$ a pair, anyway you just need a coefficient in the Maclaurin series of $$frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n x^n,$$ and due to the pole of order $4$ at $x=1$, $$a_napprox frac{1}{24}binom{n+3}{3}.$$
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:11
$begingroup$
Since $x=-1$ is a double pole, there is a significative (linear) perturbation due to the parity of $n$. The other poles contribute with a bounded arithmetic perturbation.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:14
$begingroup$
Since $x=-1$ is a double pole, there is a significative (linear) perturbation due to the parity of $n$. The other poles contribute with a bounded arithmetic perturbation.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:14
$begingroup$
The estimate by @JackD'Aurizio comes out to $approx7369$ for $n=100.$ Counting with a python script gives $8037.$ So, about a $10%$ error.
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
Dec 21 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
The estimate by @JackD'Aurizio comes out to $approx7369$ for $n=100.$ Counting with a python script gives $8037.$ So, about a $10%$ error.
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
Dec 21 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
If you expand Jack D'Aurizio's generating function by partial fractions you could get an expression something like $a_n = c_1 + c_2 n + c_3 n^2 + c_4 n^3 + c_5 (-1)^n + c_6 n (-1)^n + c_7 cos(2 pi n/3) + c_8 sin(2 pi n/3) + c_9 cos(pi n/2) + c_{10} sin(pi n/2)$. Quite a bit of work to do by hand, though.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schepler
Dec 21 '18 at 18:04
$begingroup$
If you expand Jack D'Aurizio's generating function by partial fractions you could get an expression something like $a_n = c_1 + c_2 n + c_3 n^2 + c_4 n^3 + c_5 (-1)^n + c_6 n (-1)^n + c_7 cos(2 pi n/3) + c_8 sin(2 pi n/3) + c_9 cos(pi n/2) + c_{10} sin(pi n/2)$. Quite a bit of work to do by hand, though.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schepler
Dec 21 '18 at 18:04
$begingroup$
@DanielSchepler: not so much, just done.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 18:14
$begingroup$
@DanielSchepler: not so much, just done.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 18:14
|
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Expanding my comment: if we consider the partial fraction decomposition of $f(z)=frac{1}{(1-z)(1-z^2)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n z^n$ we have that the pole at $z=1$ contributes with
$$ frac{1}{24(1-z)^4}+frac{1}{8(1-z)^3}+frac{59}{288(1-z)^2}+frac{17}{72(1-z)} $$
to $f(z)$, hence it contributes with
$$ frac{2n^3+30n^2+135n+175}{288}$$
to $a_n$. The pole at $z=-1$ contributes with
$$ (-1)^n frac{n+5}{32} $$
and the other poles provide bounded contributions, since they are simple. It follows that for even values of $n$
$$ a_n approx frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144} $$
and for $n=100$ the ceiling of the RHS is exactly $a_{100}$, i.e. $8037$. The error of this approximation is bounded by twice the sum of the absolute values of the real parts of the residues at the simple poles, i.e. $frac{2}{9}<frac{1}{2}$. In particular
If $n$ is even $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144}.$
If $n$ is odd $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+13)}{144}.$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I claim that the number of such tuples is equal to the number of partitions of 100 into 4 nonnegative integers.
Indeed, let $S={(a,b,c,d): a+2b+3c+4d=100}$, and let $S'={(A,B,C,D): A+B+C+D=100, Age Bge Cge D}$.
I claim that $S$ and $S'$ are in bijection. To see this, we will define two inverse maps between the two sets.
Given $(a,b,c,d)in S$, we obtain $(A,B,C,D)in S'$ by taking
$A=a+b+c+d$,$B=b+c+d$, $C=c+d$ and $D=d$. Conversely, given $(A,B,C,D)in S'$, we have $(a,b,c,d)in S$ where $d=D, c=D-C, b=B-C, a=A-B$, and it is readily verified that these are inverse assignments.
In particular, the number of tuples you wish to count is equal to the cardinatlity of $S'$.
Note that $S'$ is in bijection with the set of partitions of $100$ into 4 nonnegative integers. The cardinality can be expressed in terms of the partition function $p(n,k)=$ number of partitions of n into k positive integers. Indeed, the tuple (A,B,C,D) may have 0,1,2, or 3 terms equal to 0, so we have $|S'|=p(100,4)+p(100,3)+p(100,2)+p(100,1)$. The function $p(n,k)$ satisfies various recurrence relations that can be found on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_(number_theory).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3048692%2fcounting-the-number-of-non-negative-integer-pairs-of-a2b3c4d-100%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Expanding my comment: if we consider the partial fraction decomposition of $f(z)=frac{1}{(1-z)(1-z^2)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n z^n$ we have that the pole at $z=1$ contributes with
$$ frac{1}{24(1-z)^4}+frac{1}{8(1-z)^3}+frac{59}{288(1-z)^2}+frac{17}{72(1-z)} $$
to $f(z)$, hence it contributes with
$$ frac{2n^3+30n^2+135n+175}{288}$$
to $a_n$. The pole at $z=-1$ contributes with
$$ (-1)^n frac{n+5}{32} $$
and the other poles provide bounded contributions, since they are simple. It follows that for even values of $n$
$$ a_n approx frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144} $$
and for $n=100$ the ceiling of the RHS is exactly $a_{100}$, i.e. $8037$. The error of this approximation is bounded by twice the sum of the absolute values of the real parts of the residues at the simple poles, i.e. $frac{2}{9}<frac{1}{2}$. In particular
If $n$ is even $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144}.$
If $n$ is odd $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+13)}{144}.$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Expanding my comment: if we consider the partial fraction decomposition of $f(z)=frac{1}{(1-z)(1-z^2)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n z^n$ we have that the pole at $z=1$ contributes with
$$ frac{1}{24(1-z)^4}+frac{1}{8(1-z)^3}+frac{59}{288(1-z)^2}+frac{17}{72(1-z)} $$
to $f(z)$, hence it contributes with
$$ frac{2n^3+30n^2+135n+175}{288}$$
to $a_n$. The pole at $z=-1$ contributes with
$$ (-1)^n frac{n+5}{32} $$
and the other poles provide bounded contributions, since they are simple. It follows that for even values of $n$
$$ a_n approx frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144} $$
and for $n=100$ the ceiling of the RHS is exactly $a_{100}$, i.e. $8037$. The error of this approximation is bounded by twice the sum of the absolute values of the real parts of the residues at the simple poles, i.e. $frac{2}{9}<frac{1}{2}$. In particular
If $n$ is even $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144}.$
If $n$ is odd $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+13)}{144}.$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Expanding my comment: if we consider the partial fraction decomposition of $f(z)=frac{1}{(1-z)(1-z^2)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n z^n$ we have that the pole at $z=1$ contributes with
$$ frac{1}{24(1-z)^4}+frac{1}{8(1-z)^3}+frac{59}{288(1-z)^2}+frac{17}{72(1-z)} $$
to $f(z)$, hence it contributes with
$$ frac{2n^3+30n^2+135n+175}{288}$$
to $a_n$. The pole at $z=-1$ contributes with
$$ (-1)^n frac{n+5}{32} $$
and the other poles provide bounded contributions, since they are simple. It follows that for even values of $n$
$$ a_n approx frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144} $$
and for $n=100$ the ceiling of the RHS is exactly $a_{100}$, i.e. $8037$. The error of this approximation is bounded by twice the sum of the absolute values of the real parts of the residues at the simple poles, i.e. $frac{2}{9}<frac{1}{2}$. In particular
If $n$ is even $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144}.$
If $n$ is odd $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+13)}{144}.$
$endgroup$
Expanding my comment: if we consider the partial fraction decomposition of $f(z)=frac{1}{(1-z)(1-z^2)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n z^n$ we have that the pole at $z=1$ contributes with
$$ frac{1}{24(1-z)^4}+frac{1}{8(1-z)^3}+frac{59}{288(1-z)^2}+frac{17}{72(1-z)} $$
to $f(z)$, hence it contributes with
$$ frac{2n^3+30n^2+135n+175}{288}$$
to $a_n$. The pole at $z=-1$ contributes with
$$ (-1)^n frac{n+5}{32} $$
and the other poles provide bounded contributions, since they are simple. It follows that for even values of $n$
$$ a_n approx frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144} $$
and for $n=100$ the ceiling of the RHS is exactly $a_{100}$, i.e. $8037$. The error of this approximation is bounded by twice the sum of the absolute values of the real parts of the residues at the simple poles, i.e. $frac{2}{9}<frac{1}{2}$. In particular
If $n$ is even $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+22)}{144}.$
If $n$ is odd $a_n=[x^n]frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}$ is the closest integer to $frac{(n+5)(n^2+10n+13)}{144}.$
edited Dec 21 '18 at 18:21
answered Dec 21 '18 at 18:13
Jack D'AurizioJack D'Aurizio
292k33284673
292k33284673
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I claim that the number of such tuples is equal to the number of partitions of 100 into 4 nonnegative integers.
Indeed, let $S={(a,b,c,d): a+2b+3c+4d=100}$, and let $S'={(A,B,C,D): A+B+C+D=100, Age Bge Cge D}$.
I claim that $S$ and $S'$ are in bijection. To see this, we will define two inverse maps between the two sets.
Given $(a,b,c,d)in S$, we obtain $(A,B,C,D)in S'$ by taking
$A=a+b+c+d$,$B=b+c+d$, $C=c+d$ and $D=d$. Conversely, given $(A,B,C,D)in S'$, we have $(a,b,c,d)in S$ where $d=D, c=D-C, b=B-C, a=A-B$, and it is readily verified that these are inverse assignments.
In particular, the number of tuples you wish to count is equal to the cardinatlity of $S'$.
Note that $S'$ is in bijection with the set of partitions of $100$ into 4 nonnegative integers. The cardinality can be expressed in terms of the partition function $p(n,k)=$ number of partitions of n into k positive integers. Indeed, the tuple (A,B,C,D) may have 0,1,2, or 3 terms equal to 0, so we have $|S'|=p(100,4)+p(100,3)+p(100,2)+p(100,1)$. The function $p(n,k)$ satisfies various recurrence relations that can be found on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_(number_theory).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I claim that the number of such tuples is equal to the number of partitions of 100 into 4 nonnegative integers.
Indeed, let $S={(a,b,c,d): a+2b+3c+4d=100}$, and let $S'={(A,B,C,D): A+B+C+D=100, Age Bge Cge D}$.
I claim that $S$ and $S'$ are in bijection. To see this, we will define two inverse maps between the two sets.
Given $(a,b,c,d)in S$, we obtain $(A,B,C,D)in S'$ by taking
$A=a+b+c+d$,$B=b+c+d$, $C=c+d$ and $D=d$. Conversely, given $(A,B,C,D)in S'$, we have $(a,b,c,d)in S$ where $d=D, c=D-C, b=B-C, a=A-B$, and it is readily verified that these are inverse assignments.
In particular, the number of tuples you wish to count is equal to the cardinatlity of $S'$.
Note that $S'$ is in bijection with the set of partitions of $100$ into 4 nonnegative integers. The cardinality can be expressed in terms of the partition function $p(n,k)=$ number of partitions of n into k positive integers. Indeed, the tuple (A,B,C,D) may have 0,1,2, or 3 terms equal to 0, so we have $|S'|=p(100,4)+p(100,3)+p(100,2)+p(100,1)$. The function $p(n,k)$ satisfies various recurrence relations that can be found on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_(number_theory).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I claim that the number of such tuples is equal to the number of partitions of 100 into 4 nonnegative integers.
Indeed, let $S={(a,b,c,d): a+2b+3c+4d=100}$, and let $S'={(A,B,C,D): A+B+C+D=100, Age Bge Cge D}$.
I claim that $S$ and $S'$ are in bijection. To see this, we will define two inverse maps between the two sets.
Given $(a,b,c,d)in S$, we obtain $(A,B,C,D)in S'$ by taking
$A=a+b+c+d$,$B=b+c+d$, $C=c+d$ and $D=d$. Conversely, given $(A,B,C,D)in S'$, we have $(a,b,c,d)in S$ where $d=D, c=D-C, b=B-C, a=A-B$, and it is readily verified that these are inverse assignments.
In particular, the number of tuples you wish to count is equal to the cardinatlity of $S'$.
Note that $S'$ is in bijection with the set of partitions of $100$ into 4 nonnegative integers. The cardinality can be expressed in terms of the partition function $p(n,k)=$ number of partitions of n into k positive integers. Indeed, the tuple (A,B,C,D) may have 0,1,2, or 3 terms equal to 0, so we have $|S'|=p(100,4)+p(100,3)+p(100,2)+p(100,1)$. The function $p(n,k)$ satisfies various recurrence relations that can be found on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_(number_theory).
$endgroup$
I claim that the number of such tuples is equal to the number of partitions of 100 into 4 nonnegative integers.
Indeed, let $S={(a,b,c,d): a+2b+3c+4d=100}$, and let $S'={(A,B,C,D): A+B+C+D=100, Age Bge Cge D}$.
I claim that $S$ and $S'$ are in bijection. To see this, we will define two inverse maps between the two sets.
Given $(a,b,c,d)in S$, we obtain $(A,B,C,D)in S'$ by taking
$A=a+b+c+d$,$B=b+c+d$, $C=c+d$ and $D=d$. Conversely, given $(A,B,C,D)in S'$, we have $(a,b,c,d)in S$ where $d=D, c=D-C, b=B-C, a=A-B$, and it is readily verified that these are inverse assignments.
In particular, the number of tuples you wish to count is equal to the cardinatlity of $S'$.
Note that $S'$ is in bijection with the set of partitions of $100$ into 4 nonnegative integers. The cardinality can be expressed in terms of the partition function $p(n,k)=$ number of partitions of n into k positive integers. Indeed, the tuple (A,B,C,D) may have 0,1,2, or 3 terms equal to 0, so we have $|S'|=p(100,4)+p(100,3)+p(100,2)+p(100,1)$. The function $p(n,k)$ satisfies various recurrence relations that can be found on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_(number_theory).
answered Dec 21 '18 at 17:47
Mike HawkMike Hawk
1,593110
1,593110
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3048692%2fcounting-the-number-of-non-negative-integer-pairs-of-a2b3c4d-100%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
I won't call $(a,b,c,d)$ a pair, anyway you just need a coefficient in the Maclaurin series of $$frac{1}{(1-x)(1-x^2)(1-x^3)(1-x^4)}=sum_{ngeq 0}a_n x^n,$$ and due to the pole of order $4$ at $x=1$, $$a_napprox frac{1}{24}binom{n+3}{3}.$$
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:11
$begingroup$
Since $x=-1$ is a double pole, there is a significative (linear) perturbation due to the parity of $n$. The other poles contribute with a bounded arithmetic perturbation.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 17:14
$begingroup$
The estimate by @JackD'Aurizio comes out to $approx7369$ for $n=100.$ Counting with a python script gives $8037.$ So, about a $10%$ error.
$endgroup$
– saulspatz
Dec 21 '18 at 17:47
$begingroup$
If you expand Jack D'Aurizio's generating function by partial fractions you could get an expression something like $a_n = c_1 + c_2 n + c_3 n^2 + c_4 n^3 + c_5 (-1)^n + c_6 n (-1)^n + c_7 cos(2 pi n/3) + c_8 sin(2 pi n/3) + c_9 cos(pi n/2) + c_{10} sin(pi n/2)$. Quite a bit of work to do by hand, though.
$endgroup$
– Daniel Schepler
Dec 21 '18 at 18:04
$begingroup$
@DanielSchepler: not so much, just done.
$endgroup$
– Jack D'Aurizio
Dec 21 '18 at 18:14