Two inequalities for the complete symmetric functions

1978 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. J. Baston
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Function ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
Positive Definite ◽  
Even Order ◽  
Image Position ◽  
Complete Symmetric Function ◽  
Special Case

In (l) Hunter proved that the complete symmetric functions of even order are positive definite by obtaining the inequalitywhere ht denotes the complete symmetric function of order t. In this note we show that the inequality can be strengthened, which, in turn, enables theorem 2 of (l) to be sharpened. We also obtain a special case of an inequality conjectured by McLeod(2).

Inequalities for Generalized Symmetric Functions

1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 615-623 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.V. Menon
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Function ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
Elementary Symmetric Function ◽  
Generating Series ◽  
Image Position ◽  
Complete Symmetric Function

The generating series for the elementary symmetric function Er, the complete symmetric function Hr, are defined byrespectively.

The positive-definiteness of the complete symmetric functions of even order

1977 ◽  
Vol 82 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. B. Hunter
Keyword(s):  
Generating Function ◽  
Classical Theory ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
Positive Definiteness ◽  
Positive Definite ◽  
Homogeneous Product ◽  
Even Order ◽  
Image Position

An important role in the classical theory of symmetric functions of a real n-tuple x = (x1, x2, …, xn) is played by the complete symmetric functions or homogeneous product sums hr defined by the generating function(see Littlewood (5), p. 82). In an earlier paper (4) I conjectured that h2r is positive definite. The main object of the present paper is to prove this conjecture in a rather sharper form.

scholarly journals An Inequality for Complete Symmetric Functions

1978 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 503-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel A. Ilori
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Function ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
Real Numbers ◽  
Positive Real ◽  
Image Position ◽  
Complete Symmetric Function

Consider the identitywhere aj, …, am are positive real numbers. Then for r = 1, 2, 3, … Tr =Tr(a1, …, am) is called the rth complete symmetric function in a1, …, am (T0=l).

Linear Transformations on Algebras of Matrices: The Invariance of the Elementary Symmetric Functions

1959 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 383-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marvin Marcus ◽  
Roger Purves
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Function ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
Similarity Transformation ◽  
Elementary Symmetric Function ◽  
Linear Transformations ◽  
Elementary Symmetric Functions ◽  
Image Position

In this paper we examine the structure of certain linear transformations T on the algebra of w-square matrices Mn into itself. In particular if A ∈ Mn let Er(A) be the rth elementary symmetric function of the eigenvalues of A. Our main result states that if 4 ≤ r ≤ n — 1 and Er(T(A)) = Er(A) for A ∈ Mn then T is essentially (modulo taking the transpose and multiplying by a constant) a similarity transformation:No such result as this is true for r = 1,2 and we shall exhibit certain classes of counterexamples. These counterexamples fail to work for r = 3 and the structure of those T such that E3(T(A)) = E3(A) for all ∈ Mn is unknown to us.

An Inequality for Elementary Symmetric Functions

1972 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. V. Menon
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Function ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
Geometric Mean ◽  
Binomial Coefficient ◽  
Elementary Symmetric Function ◽  
Elementary Symmetric Functions ◽  
Image Position

Let Er denote the rth elementary symmetric function on α1 α2,…,αm which is defined by1E0 = 1 and Er=0(r>m).We define the rth symmetric mean by2where denote the binomial coefficient. If α1 α2,…,αm are positive reals thenwe have two well-known inequalities3and4In this paper we consider a generalization of these inequalities. The inequality (4) is known as Newton's inequality which contains the arithmetic and geometric mean inequality.

scholarly journals On Determinants of Symmetric Functions

1927 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. C. Aitken
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Function ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
The Other ◽  
Elementary Symmetric Functions ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Image Position

The result of dividing the alternant |aαbβcγ…| by the simplest alternant |a0b1c2…| (the difference-product of a, b, c, …) is known to be a symmetric function expressible in two distinct ways, (1) as a determinant having for elements the elementary symmetric functions C, of a, b, c, …, (2) as a determinant having for elements the complete homogeneous symmetric functions Hr. For exampleThe formation of the (historically earlier) H-determinant is evident. The suffixes in the first row are the indices of the alternant; those of the other rows decrease by unit steps. This result is due to Jacobi.

4. On a Class of Permanent Symmetric Functions

1882 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 409-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Muir
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Function ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
General Sense ◽  
Image Position

By Cauchy the word “symmetric,” as applied to functions, was used in a more general sense than that in which we ordinarily use it now, or than that in which it was used before his time. He spoke of “fonctions symétriques permanentes” and “fonctions symétriques alternées:” we apply the word symmetric only to certain of the first of these; the second we call simply “alternating functions.” Thus the expressionwas called by him a permanent symmetric function, since if a1, a2, a3 are interchanged in order with b1, b2, b3, the function remains unaltered. It would be more definite to say that it is a permanent symmetric function with respect to a1, a2, a3 and b1, b2, b3.

XXVI.—The Monomial Expansion of Determinantal Symmetric Functions

1943 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 300-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. C. Aitken
Keyword(s):  
Symmetric Function ◽  
Symmetric Functions ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Image Position

The quotient of alternantsthe denominator being the difference-product of the arguments a, β, γ, …, is an important symmetric function, introduced into algebra by Jacobi in 1841.

Shelah's work on non-semi-proper iterations, II

2001 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 1865-1883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaz Schlindwein
Keyword(s):  
Closed Subset ◽  
Stationary Subset ◽  
Finite Support ◽  
Countable Support ◽  
Final Model ◽  
Axiom A ◽  
Mahlo Cardinal ◽  
The One ◽  
Image Position ◽  
Special Case

One of the main goals in the theory of forcing iteration is to formulate preservation theorems for not collapsing ω1 which are as general as possible. This line leads from c.c.c. forcings using finite support iterations to Axiom A forcings and proper forcings using countable support iterations to semi-proper forcings using revised countable support iterations, and more recently, in work of Shelah, to yet more general classes of posets. In this paper we concentrate on a special case of the very general iteration theorem of Shelah from [5, chapter XV]. The class of posets handled by this theorem includes all semi-proper posets and also includes, among others, Namba forcing.In [5, chapter XV] Shelah shows that, roughly, revised countable support forcing iterations in which the constituent posets are either semi-proper or Namba forcing or P[W] (the forcing for collapsing a stationary co-stationary subset ofwith countable conditions) do not collapse ℵ1. The iteration must contain sufficiently many cardinal collapses, for example, Levy collapses. The most easily quotable combinatorial application is the consistency (relative to a Mahlo cardinal) of ZFC + CH fails + whenever A ∪ B = ω2 then one of A or B contains an uncountable sequentially closed subset. The iteration Shelah uses to construct this model is built using P[W] to “attack” potential counterexamples, Levy collapses to ensure that the cardinals collapsed by the various P[W]'s are sufficiently well separated, and Cohen forcings to ensure the failure of CH in the final model.In this paper we give details of the iteration theorem, but we do not address the combinatorial applications such as the one quoted above.These theorems from [5, chapter XV] are closely related to earlier work of Shelah [5, chapter XI], which dealt with iterated Namba and P[W] without allowing arbitrary semi-proper forcings to be included in the iteration. By allowing the inclusion of semi-proper forcings, [5, chapter XV] generalizes the conjunction of [5, Theorem XI.3.6] with [5, Conclusion XI.6.7].

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document