Jump to content

Talk:Composition (combinatorics)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Untitled

Why not add the "more refined argument shows that the number of compositions of n into exactly k parts is given by the binomial coefficient"

Basically the same array is used but choose (k-1) places to put commas and fill the rest with plusses. This can be placed 1-1 with compositions into k parts. There are (n-1) boxes, hence the result. This is not more refined but quite understandable (A1jrj (talk) 18:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]

This is also easily understandable from the fact that 2^k = (1+1)^k, and then just use the binomial coefficient. 77.127.178.95 (talk) 21:30, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lacks a definition

There is no definition of what "a k-composition of n" is in the last section before the references. Propose this to be "A k-composition of n is a composition of n with at most k elements".Bj norge (talk) 18:01, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate statement

The statement "This is a power of two, because every composition matches a binary number" is not quite correct. The "matches" have to exhaust (the binary representations of) the integers in the set {0, 1, ..., 2^(n-1) - 1} or some other set with cardinality 2^(n-1). Ed Jeffery (talk) 06:41, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I've removed the nonsense sentence.

"Composition (number theory" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Composition (number theory and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#Composition (number theory until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:59, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]