By way of enrichment here is a proof using generating functions.
Suppose we seek to evaluate
$$\sum_{m=k}^n (k+1)^{n-m} {m\brace k}
= (k+1)^n \sum_{m=k}^n (k+1)^{-m} {m\brace k}.$$
This is
$$(k+1)^n \sum_{m=0}^{n-k} (k+1)^{-m-k} {m+k\brace k}$$
or
$$(k+1)^{n-k} \sum_{m=0}^{n-k} (k+1)^{-m} {m+k\brace k}.$$
What we have here is
$$(k+1)^{n-k} [z^{n-k}] \frac{1}{1-z}
\sum_{m\ge 0} {m+k\brace k} \frac{z^m}{(k+1)^m}.$$
Now recall the OGF of Stirling numbers with fixed $k$
which was evaluated e.g. at this
MSE link:
$$P(z) = \sum_{m\ge 0}{m\brace k} z^m
= \prod_{p=1}^k \frac{z}{1-pz}.$$
This is
$$\sum_{m\ge k}{m\brace k} z^m
= \sum_{m\ge 0}{m+k\brace k} z^{m+k}.$$
It follows that
$$\sum_{m\ge 0}{m+k\brace k} z^{m}
= \prod_{p=1}^k \frac{1}{1-pz}.$$
Substituting this into the sum yields
$$(k+1)^{n-k} [z^{n-k}] \frac{1}{1-z}
\prod_{p=1}^k \frac{1}{1-pz/(k+1)}
\\ = (k+1)^{n-k} [z^{n-k}]
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{1}{1-pz/(k+1)}
\\ = (k+1)^{n-k} [z^{n-k}]
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{k+1}{k+1-pz}
\\ = (k+1)^{n+1} [z^{n-k}]
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{1}{k+1-pz}.$$
This is
$$\frac{(k+1)^{n+1}}{2\pi i}
\int_{|z|=\epsilon} \frac{1}{z^{n-k+1}}
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{1}{k+1-pz} \; dz.$$
Put $z=(k+1) w$ so that $dz = (k+1)\; dw$ to get
$$\frac{(k+1)^{n+1}}{2\pi i}
\int_{|w|=\epsilon} \frac{k+1}{w^{n-k+1}(k+1)^{n-k+1}}
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{1}{k+1-p(k+1)w} \; dw$$
which is
$$\frac{1}{2\pi i}
\int_{|w|=\epsilon} \frac{k+1}{w^{n-k+1}(k+1)^{-k}}
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{1}{k+1-p(k+1)w} \; dw
\\ = \frac{1}{2\pi i}
\int_{|w|=\epsilon} \frac{1}{w^{n-k+1}(k+1)^{-(k+1)}}
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{1}{k+1-p(k+1)w} \; dw
\\ = \frac{1}{2\pi i}
\int_{|w|=\epsilon} \frac{1}{w^{n-k+1}}
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{1}{1-pw} \; dw
\\ = \frac{1}{2\pi i}
\int_{|w|=\epsilon} \frac{w^{k+1}}{w^{n+2}}
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{1}{1-pw} \; dw
\\ = \frac{1}{2\pi i}
\int_{|w|=\epsilon} \frac{1}{w^{n+2}}
\prod_{p=1}^{k+1} \frac{w}{1-pw} \; dw.$$
This last integral evaluates to
$${n+1\brace k+1}$$
by inspection.
What I don't get is why don't we choose all combinations of this selection of k from n ? Why a seemingly arbitrary selection of k objects ? Shouldn't it be something like $$\binom{n}{k} * {m \brace k}$$ ?
– Guest 123 Mar 09 '15 at 12:10