P

n
k

Algebraic solution:

 X   X
  X  
X n X n X
n
n
n
n
2
k
=
k
+ (nk)
=
k
+ (nk)
=
n
= n2n .
k
k
nk
k
k
k
k

So

X n
k
= n2n1 .
k
k

Combinatorial solution, and alternative algebraic solution: see below.

P k
n

k

This generalizes a few homework problems. The cases
r = 1, 2, 3 appear

on the homework. Additionally, since expressions kr form a basis
for
P
polynomials in k, this sum will enable us to evaluate sums k p(k) nk for
polynomials p.
Algebraic solution. We have
    

k
n
n nr
=
.
r
k
r
k
Summing over k, we get
 
n nr
2
.
r



Combinatorial solution. The sum of nk kr counts the number of ways to
choose a committee, and a subcommittee of r members, from n people.
The size of the committee, k, is variable. Equivalently,
we can first choose


the subcommittee, which can be done in nr ways, and then decide which
of the other n r people will be added to the committee.
P 2 n

kk k




Algebraic solution: Since k 2 = 2 k2 + k1 , by the previous result the sum
has value
n(n + 1)2n2 .
Combinatorial solution: The sum counts the number of ways to choose a
committee of arbitrary size k, a president and a vice-president who may
or may not be the same person, but who must be on the committee from
n people. If the president and VP are the same then there are n choices
of pres and VP and 2n1 choices of committee; if they are different, there
are n2 n choices of leaders and 2n2 choices of committee. The answer
follows.
The solution for x3 is similar.

n
k 2k

Algebraic solution:
 
X
k n
0 = (1 1) =
(1)
k
k

2k =

X n
k

Adding these two equations, the odd k terms on the right cancel out, while
the even terms are doubled. Dividing out the factor of 2, we get
X n 
k1
2
=
.
2k
k

Combinatorial solution: An n-element set has 2n subsets; I claim that

exactly half of these have an even number of elements. I will prove this by
establishing a bijection between the sets with an even number of elements
and the sets with an odd number of elements. Given an n-element set S,
choose a distinguished element e. The bijection is: to every subset A not
containing e, associate A e; to every A containing e, associate A {e}.
P n

k 4k

I know of no combinatorial solution. But the algebraic solution has an

important theme, and it is worth learning.
We have
2n =

X n 
4k

X n 


+

 
 

n
n
n
+
+
4k + 1
4k + 2
4k + 3

 
 

n
n
n
0=

4k
4k + 1
4k + 2
4k + 3
k

 



X n 
n
n
n
(1 + i)n =
+i

i
4k
4k + 1
4k + 2
4k + 3
k








X n
n
n
n
n
i

+i
.
(1 i) =
4k
4k + 1
4k + 2
4k + 3
k

Adding these four equations, we see that the desired sum is

2n + (1 + i)n + (1 i)n
.
4

n 2
k

This is a special case of the next problem. (Substitute r = m = n.)

2

n
k

m
rk

n+m
r

This is known as Vandermondes convolution, though it appears to have

been known to the Chinese in the days of Genghis Khan. The sum counts
the number of ways, given a set of n + m elements in order, to choose k
of the first n and r k of the remaining m. As k is variable, it is clearly
equivalent to choose r of the n + m.


p+q
1
The answer is p+q
p .
As usual we associate with any path a word of p+q letters, which are U and
R as the corresponding step in the path is an upward or rightward step. So
any word has p U s and q Rs. A word is good if the corresponding path lies
below the diagonal. Now given any word, consider its cyclic permutations.
(For instance, given RU U RR, the permutations are RU U RR, U U RRR,
U RRRU , RRRU U , RRU U R.) I claim that there are exactly p+q of these
permutations, and of these exactly one is a good word. Clearly these two
claims are enough to imply the result.
To show that there are p + q permuted words I just have to check that
cycling to the right by r letters, say, must give me a word different from
the word I started with. Assume the contrary: suppose I have a word that
is fixed by this cyclic rotation of r letters to the right. Let `i denote the
i-th letter, where indices are taken modulo p + q. Then we have `i = `i+r ,
and since indices are difined modulo p + q, `i = `i+(p+q) . Letting s be
the GCD of r and p + q, we see that `i = `i+s . Thus, we can partition
the p + q letters into s sets of p+q
s , where the letters in each set are the
same. But since there are exactly p U s, we see that p is a multiple of p+q
s .
p+q
Similarly, q is also a multiple of s . Since the GCD of p and q is 1, we
must have p+q
s = 1, so s = p + q, so r = p + q, so we cannot have started
with a nontrivial rotation.
To show that there is exactly one good word among these p + q: consider
the infinite path in the plane obtained by extending the word according
to `i = `i+(p+q) . In other words, to every point (a, b) the original path
passes through, the new path will pass through all points (a + np, b + nq).
The original path can be recovered from the infinite path by considering
the segment of length p + q starting from the origin. By starting from
a different starting point instead (with a translation of the coordinate
system), we obtain the p + q different paths corresponding to the rotated
words. Only the starting point with the largest value of py qx will give
a good path.
How can we study the number of k-combinations? Let f (k, r) denote the
number of k-combinations with r subsets. For any such k-combination,
removing k from the combination gives a k 1-combination with either
r 1 or r subsets. Conversely, a k 1-combination with r 1 subsets gives
rise to a k-combination with r subsets in r different ways, as the singleton
set {k} must be added in one of the r positions. A k 1-combination with
3

r subsets gives rise to a k-combination with r subsets in r + 1 different

ways, as the element k can be added to any one of the r subsets, or to
none at all. Thus we have the recurrence relation
f (k, r) = rf (k 1, r 1) + (r + 1)f (k 1, r),
subject to the initial conditions: f (k, r) = 0 if r < 0 or r > k, and
f (0, 0) = 1. Using this it is easy to calculate small values of f (k, r).
How can we evaluate the infinite sum? We have seen that sums of the
form
X n
2n
r
n
are easily evaluated; in fact we have


X
n1
n=1

2n = 1.

(This was on last weeks homework.) So to evaluate the infinite

sum given
it is enough to write nk as a linear combination of terms nr . Either by
intuition or by testing small examples, we are led to conjecture that


X
n1
nk =
f (k, r)
.
r
r
Certainly, if we could prove this identity, then it would follow that

nk =

f (k, r),

n=1

which would solve the problem. But the identity itself is easily proven by
induction.
(This is Putnam 2005 B4.)
Please peruse the three solutions at http://209.222.159.179/amc/a-activities/a7problems/putnam/-pdf/2005s.pdf, as well as the solution below.
We will produce a bijection between the set of n-tuples of integers whose
absolute values sum to at most m and the set of m-tuples whose absolute
values sum to at most n.
Suppose x1 , x2 , . . . , xn are integers whose absolute values sum to at most
m. We associate to this n-tuple of integers a collection of triples (pi , qi , i ),
defined as follows. Let xn1 , xn2 , . . . , xnr denote the nonzero integers xi ,
taken in order (so n1 < n2 < < nr ). For 1 i r, let pi = ni be the
Pi
index of the i-th nonzero integer, and let qi = k=1 |xn1 | be the sum of
the first i nonzero integers. Finally, choose i = 1 to have the same sign
as xni .
4

The r triples (pi , qi , i ) have the following properties, which we call properties Pm,n . The values pi and qi are positive integers, and i = 1.
Both pi and qi are increasing sequences; that is, p1 < p2 < < pr and
q1 < q2 < < qr . Also, we have the bounds pr n, qr m.
Given r triples with these properties, we can see that there is a unique
x1 , x2 , . . . , xn to which it is associated. Indeed, we require that xk = 0 for
all k not equal to any of the pi . For each pi , we take xpi = i (qi qi1 ),
with the convention that q0 = 0. This is possible because pi n and the
pi are all distinct. Since qi > qi1 all these integers are nonzero. And the
sum of their absolute values is exactly qr m. Thus we have produced a
bijection between the sequences of integers xi satisfying the bound in the
problem and the sequences of triples satisfying Pm,n .
It remains to show that the number of sequences of triples satisfying Pm,n
is the same as the number of sequences of triples satisfying Pn,m . But this
is clear, as interchanging the ps and the qs produces a bijection between
these two sets.