#17159: Stirling numbers at negative integers
------------------------------------+------------------------
       Reporter:  pluschny          |        Owner:
           Type:  defect            |       Status:  new
       Priority:  minor             |    Milestone:  sage-6.4
      Component:  combinatorics     |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  Stirling numbers  |    Merged in:
        Authors:                    |    Reviewers:
Report Upstream:  N/A               |  Work issues:
         Branch:                    |       Commit:
   Dependencies:                    |     Stopgaps:
------------------------------------+------------------------
Description changed by rws:

Old description:

> Inconsistent behaviour of the Stirling numbers at negative integers
> and insufficient documentation of these cases.
>
> (1) stirling_number2(-3, -5) gives OverflowError.
>
> (2) stirling_number2(-3, -5,"maxima") gives TypeError.
>
> (3) stirling_number2(-3, -5, "gap") gives 35 which is correct but this
> behaviour is not documented (doc says: n and k are nonnegative integers).
>
> (4) stirling_number1(-3, -5) gives 25 which is correct but this
> behaviour is not documented (doc implies that n and k are nonnegative
> integers).
>
> Proposal: Make GAP’s Stirling2 the default (as is GAP’s Stirling1)
> and document the behaviour for negative integers. (Perhaps disregard
> 'maxima' and the native implementation altogether?)
>
> Remark: The behaviour of GAP's implementation is based on a simple and
> coherent extension of the Stirling numbers to negative integers n, k
> which was outlined by Graham/Knuth/Patashnik in 'Concrete Mathematics'
> Section 6.1 (see Table 253).

New description:

 Inconsistent behaviour of the Stirling numbers at negative integers
 and insufficient documentation of these cases.

 (1) stirling_number2(-3, -5) gives OverflowError.

 (2) stirling_number2(-3, -5,"maxima") gives TypeError.

 (3) stirling_number2(-3, -5, "gap") gives 35 which is correct but this
 behaviour is not documented (doc says: n and k are nonnegative integers).

 (4) stirling_number1(-3, -5) gives 25 which is correct but this
 behaviour is not documented (doc implies that n and k are nonnegative
 integers).

 Proposal: Make GAP’s Stirling2 the default (as is GAP’s Stirling1)
 and document the behaviour for negative integers. (Perhaps disregard
 'maxima' and the native implementation altogether?)

 Remark: The behaviour of GAP's implementation is based on a simple and
 coherent extension of the Stirling numbers to negative integers n, k
 which was outlined by Graham/Knuth/Patashnik in 'Concrete Mathematics'
 Section 6.1 (see Table 253).

 Also, use libGAP not GAP, as was done in #16719.

--

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17159#comment:1>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to