5

The problem is to prove the following statement for all natural numbers. $$f(n)=\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k}{k}\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^k=2^n$$

I already proved this using mathematical induction. But, my instinct is telling me that there is some kind of combinatorial/algebraic method that can be used to solve this easily. (Unless my instinct is wrong.) Can anyone give me hint on how to do this?

  • 1
    Well, one thing you should always do when seeking combinatorial proofs, is first to remove fractions, so multiply both sides by $2^n$ so you get that you want: $$\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k}{k}2^{n-k}=2^{2n}.$$ – Thomas Andrews Sep 15 '16 at 14:48
  • I tried it, but it doesn't look like it can be simplified any further. Are you saying that this can be used to set up a situation that connects to the above equation? – Junghyun Lee Sep 15 '16 at 14:52
  • No, I'm really just saying that this is always the first step when trying to find a combinatorial proof of an identity - combinatorics is about counting, so involves whole numbers, so it can't deal with fractions. – Thomas Andrews Sep 15 '16 at 14:58
  • Oh, ok. I'll keep that in mind. (Please bear with me; I'm kind of a beginner) – Junghyun Lee Sep 15 '16 at 14:59

3 Answers3

5

I don’t know that there’s a really easy combinatorial argument, but certainly combinatorial arguments can be made. The one that I offer below is essentially the same as Phicar’s (which I’ve upvoted, and which you should definitely examine), but I’ve phrased it in slightly more elementary terms and gone into more detail, given your comment about being kind of a beginner.

As Thomas Andrews suggested in the comments, it’s a good idea to multiply both sides by $2^n$ to get rid of the fractions. I will also use the fact that $\binom{n+k}k=\binom{n+k}n$, since having a constant lower number is likely to make life a little easier. This turns the desired identity into the equivalent identity

$$\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k}n2^{n-k}=2^{2n}\tag{1}$$

The most straightforward interpretation of $2^{2n}$ is that it is the number of subsets of the set $[2n]=\{1,2,\ldots,2n\}$. In that context the general term

$$\binom{n+k}n2^{n-k}$$

looks like the number of ways to choose $n$ members of the set $[n+k]$ together with any subset of $[2n]\setminus[n+k]=\{n+k+1,\ldots,2n\}$; every subset of $[2n]$ that has exactly $n$ elements in $[n+k]$ is counted here. There are two problems with this idea. First, even after we sum over $k$ we are counting only subsets of $[2n]$ that have at least $n$ elements, while the $2^{2n}$ on the righthand side counts all subsets of $[2n]$. Secondly, when we sum over $k$ we end up counting some subsets more than once. For instance, the subset $[n]$ is counted once for each $k$ from $0$ through $n$, because it has exactly $n$ members in $[n+k]$ for each $k$. Somehow we have to make $k$ tell us a bit more about the subset.

For starters, since we seem to be counting only subsets of $[2n]$ with at least $n$ elements, let’s do it right. For each $k\in\{0,1,\ldots,n\}$ we’ll count the subsets of $[2n]$ that have at least $n$ elements and whose $n$-th element is exactly $n+k$. There are $\binom{n+k-1}{n-1}$ ways to choose $n-1$ members of $[2n]$ that are smaller than $n+k$; those $n-1$ elements together with $n+k$ itself give us a set of $n$ elements of $[2n]$ whose $n$-th element is $n+k$, and we can then pad that with any subset of $[2n]\setminus[n+k]$ and still have a subset of $[2n]$ whose $n$-th element is $n+k$. There are $n-k$ elements of $[2n]$ bigger than $n+k$, so there are $2^{n-k}$ ways to choose some set of these to throw in with our first $n$ elements, and there are therefore

$$\binom{n+k-1}{n-1}2^{n-k}$$

ways to choose at least $n$ elements of $[2n]$ so that the $n$-th is $n+k$. Summing over the possible values of $k$, we see that there are exactly

$$\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k-1}{n-1}2^{n-k}\tag{2}$$

subsets of $[2n]$ with at least $n$ elements.

To finish the job of counting subsets of $[2n]$, we need to count the subsets that have fewer than $n$ elements. We’d like to count these in a way that looks as much as possible like what we’ve already done, so that with luck we can combine our calculation with $(2)$ and simplify to get $(1)$. One way to do that is to count the complements of these sets instead, so that we’re counting the subsets of $[2n]$ that have strictly more than $n$ elements: after all, each set has a unique complement, so the total number will be the same.

Each subset of $[2n]$ with more than $n$ elements has at minimum $n+1$ elements, and we can mimic what we did before by counting them according to their $(n+1)$-st element. How many of these sets have $n+k$ as their $(n+1)$-st element? We must choose $n$ members of $[2n]$ that are smaller than $n+k$, which we can do in $\binom{n+k-1}n$ ways, and then we can throw in any subset of the $n-k$ members of $[2n]$ that are bigger than $n+k$, so there must be

$$\binom{n+k-1}n2^{n-k}$$

subsets of $[2n]$ with more than $n$ elements and whose $(n+1)$-st element is $n+k$. Summing over the possible values of $k$, we find that $[2n]$ has

$$\sum_{k=1}^n\binom{n+k-1}n2^{n-k}=\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k-1}n2^{n-k}$$

subsets with more than $n$ elements. (Clearly $k=0$ is impossible this time, but there’s no harm in including it, since $\binom{n-1}n=0$, and the $k=0$ term therefore doesn’t change the sum anyway.) The complements of these sets are the subsets of $[2n]$ with fewer than $n$ elements, so there are

$$\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k-1}n2^{n-k}$$

of those as well. It follows that $[2n]$ has

$$\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k-1}{n-1}2^{n-k}+\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k-1}n2^{n-k}$$

subsets.

Now just combine the two summations into one and apply Pascal’s identity, and you’re home free.

Brian M. Scott
  • 616,228
  • Thank you for this beautiful explanation!

    (This problem was intended to practice mathematical induction, but I also wanted to practice combinatorial proof.)

    – Junghyun Lee Sep 16 '16 at 05:04
  • @Nick: You’re welcome! (I really like combinatorial proofs myself, though I have to admit that sometimes they can be quite hard to discover.) – Brian M. Scott Sep 16 '16 at 05:45
  • So, if some kind of combinatorial identity involves $2^n$, then is it natural to interpret it as the number of subsets of a set with n elements?

    What if it involves $3^n$ or any other exponents?

    – Junghyun Lee Sep 16 '16 at 05:54
  • @Nick: One has to look at what else appears in the proposed identity, but certainly the first things that come to mind when I see $2^n$ are the number of subsets of an $n$-element set and the number of $n$-bit strings. The simplest interpretation of $3^n$ is as the number of $n$-character strings over the alphabet ${0,1,2}$, but I’d also bear in mind the possibility of rewriting it as $(2+1)^n=\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n}k2^n$. It really is more of an art than a science, and practice — seeing lots of combinatorial arguments — helps enormously. – Brian M. Scott Sep 16 '16 at 05:58
  • Well, thank you for taking your time to help me out! I really appreciate it. – Junghyun Lee Sep 16 '16 at 06:00
  • @Nick: You’re very welcome. – Brian M. Scott Sep 16 '16 at 06:01
  • I tried to refrain from asking another question, but this couldn't be helped. How would you prove the above statement algebraically without induction? I can't think of any helpful algebraic manipulation.(I edited the question to include this.) – Junghyun Lee Sep 16 '16 at 10:19
  • @Nick: I’ll give it a bit more thought, but I don’t at the moment see a purely algebraic approach. – Brian M. Scott Sep 16 '16 at 18:41
4

Keeping in mind what Andrews has told you, you know that $2^{2n}$ counts the binary strings (String as $x=x_1x_2\ldots x_{2n}$) of length $2n$ (i.e., Set $\{0,1\}^{2n}$).

Note that you have either two possibilities for a string $x$ in that set. Either, $|x|_1\geq |x|_0$ or $|x|_1<|x|_0$, where $|x|_a$ is defined to be the number of times $a$ appears in the string. So $\{0,1\}^{2n}=A\bigcup B$, where $A=\{x\in \{0,1\}^{2n}:|x|_1\geq |x|_0\}$ and $B=\{x\in \{0,1\}^{2n}:|x|_1< |x|_0\}$ (Note that $A\bigcap B=\emptyset$, so $2^{2n}=|\{0,1\}^{2n}|=|A|+|B|$). It is not difficult to see that if $x\in A$, then $|x|_1\geq n$ so let's define a family of strings $$A_i = \left\{x\in \{0,1\}^{2n}:\sum _{k=0}^{n+i}x_k=n \wedge \sum _{k=0}^{n+i-1}x_k=n-1 \right\}\;,$$ which partitions $A$ because if $x\in A$ there must be an index $m$ such that $x_1x_2\cdots x_m$ contains $n$ 1's. and there is no prefix of it that contains $n$ 1's.

Now, $|A_i|=\binom{n+i-1}{n-1}2^{n-i}$ because we know that before $n+i$ there are $n-1$ ones, and we do not know what is after $n+i$ (there are $2n-n-i$ positions to fill). So

$$\begin{align*}|A|&=\sum _{i=0}^n |A_i|\\ &=\sum _{i=0}^n \binom{n+i-1}{n-1}2^{n-i}\\ &=\sum _{i=0}^n\left( \binom{n+i}{n}-\binom{n+i-1}{n}\right)2^{n-i}\\ &=\sum _{i=0}^n \binom{n+i}{n}2^{n-i}-\sum _{i=0}^n\binom{n+i-1}{n}2^{n-i}\;, \end{align*}$$

where the last step is by Pascal's recursion.

Note that $2^{2n}=|A|+|B|$ and $|A|=\sum _{i=0}^n \binom{n+i}{n}2^{n-i}-\sum _{i=0}^n\binom{n+i-1}{n}2^{n-i}$, so if you prove $|B|=\sum _{i=0}^n\binom{n+i-1}{n}2^{n-i}$ you are done.

Hint: Do exactly the same analysis as in $A$ but you know that, in this case, $|x|_0\geq n+1$.

Brian M. Scott
  • 616,228
Phicar
  • 14,722
4

Here is a generating function proof that avoids (or hides) the induction. $$ \begin{align} f(x) &=\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k}x^n\tag{1}\\ &=\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^n\left[\binom{n+k-1}{k}+\binom{n+k-1}{k-1}\right]\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k}x^n\tag{2}\\ &=\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k-1}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k}x^n+\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\binom{n+k}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k+1}x^n\tag{3}\\ &=\frac12+\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\binom{n+k-1}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k}x^n+\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k+1}x^n\tag{4}\\ &=1+\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\binom{n+k-1}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k-1}x^n\tag{5}\\ &=1+\sum_{n=0}^\infty\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k}x^{n+1}\tag{6}\\[9pt] &=1+x\,f(x)\tag{7} \end{align} $$ Explanation:
$(2)$: Pascal's Triangle relation
$(3)$: substitute $k\mapsto k+1$ in the right-hand sum
$(4)$: use $\binom{2n-1}{n}\left(\frac12\right)^{2n}=\binom{2n}{n}\left(\frac12\right)^{2n+1}$ for $n\ge1$ to move $x^n$ term from the left to the right sum
$(5)$: twice $(4)$ minus $(1)$
$(6)$: substitute $n\mapsto n+1$
$(7)$: compare $(1)$ and $(6)$

Note that $(7)$ implies that $$ \begin{align} f(x) &=\frac1{1-x}\\ &=\sum_{n=0}^\infty x^n\tag{8} \end{align} $$ Comparing the coefficients of $(1)$ and $(8)$ yields $$ \bbox[5px,border:2px solid #C0A000]{\sum_{k=0}^n\binom{n+k}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k}=1}\tag{9} $$


Postscript

I think it is interesting to note that $$ \begin{align} \sum_{k=0}^\infty\binom{n+k}{k}x^{n+k} &=\sum_{k=0}^\infty(-1)^k\binom{-n-1}{k}x^{n+k}\\ &=\frac{x^n}{(1-x)^{n+1}}\tag{10} \end{align} $$ Setting $x=\frac12$ in $(10)$ yields $$ \sum_{k=0}^\infty\binom{n+k}{k}\left(\frac12\right)^{n+k}=2\tag{11} $$ Thus, exactly half of the sum resides in the first $n+1$ terms.

robjohn
  • 345,667