ProbXiv
sign in

Minor summation formula and a proof of Stanley's open problem

Combinatorics · math.CO · posed by Masao Ishikawa · open

1 attempt · 1 machine check

Statement

Conjecture 5.4. Let w(x;t)=∑λω(λ)Pλ(x;t),w(x;t)=\sum_{\lambda}\omega(\lambda)P_{\lambda}(x;t), where Pλ(x;t)P_{\lambda}(x;t) denote the Hall-Littlewood function corresponding to the partition λ\lambda , and the sum runs over all partitions λ\lambda . Then log⁡w(x;−1)+∑n≥1odd12nancnp2n+∑n≥2even12nan2cn2(an2cn2−2bn2dn2)p2n∈Q[[p1,p3,p5,...]]\begin{array}{r}{\log w(x;-1)+\sum_{n \geq 1 \text{odd}}\frac{1}{2n}a^{n}c^{n}p_{2n}+\sum_{n \geq 2 \text{even}}\frac{1}{2n}a^{\frac{n}{2}}c^{\frac{n}{2}}\left(a^{\frac{n}{2}}c^{\frac{n}{2}}-2b^{\frac{n}{2}}d^{\frac{n}{2}}\right)p_{2n}}\\{\in \mathbb{Q}[[p_{1},p_{3},p_{5},...]]}\end{array} would hold.

Context

Candidate 1 of the open problems stated in "Minor summation formula and a proof of Stanley's open problem", extracted for the Scalable Mathematical Discovery run.

People

begin a project on this problem →

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt →

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    ai explorationGPT-5.5 xhigh ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    — the result was found by a model.
    models
    GPT-5.5 xhigh

    NEW

    Problem: Let R=Q[a,b,c,d]R=\mathbb Q[a,b,c,d], and let Λ^R=R[[p1,p2,…]]\widehat\Lambda_R=R[[p_1,p_2,\ldots]] be the completed ring of symmetric functions. For a partition λ\lambda, define

    ω(λ)=a∑i⌈λ2i−1/2⌉b∑i⌊λ2i−1/2⌋c∑i⌈λ2i/2⌉d∑i⌊λ2i/2⌋.\omega(\lambda)=a^{\sum_i\lceil\lambda_{2i-1}/2\rceil} b^{\sum_i\lfloor\lambda_{2i-1}/2\rfloor} c^{\sum_i\lceil\lambda_{2i}/2\rceil} d^{\sum_i\lfloor\lambda_{2i}/2\rfloor}.

    With Pλ(x;t)P_\lambda(x;t) the Hall–Littlewood PP-function, set

    w(x;t)=∑λω(λ)Pλ(x;t).w(x;t)=\sum_\lambda \omega(\lambda)P_\lambda(x;t).

    The reconstructed conjecture is that

    log⁡w(x;−1)+∑n≥1n odd(ac)n2np2n+∑n≥2n even(ac)n/2((ac)n/2−2(bd)n/2)2np2n∈R[[p1,p3,p5,…]].\log w(x;-1)+\sum_{\substack{n\ge1\\ n\text{ odd}}}\frac{(ac)^n}{2n}p_{2n} +\sum_{\substack{n\ge2\\ n\text{ even}}} \frac{(ac)^{n/2}\big((ac)^{n/2}-2(bd)^{n/2}\big)}{2n}p_{2n} \in R[[p_1,p_3,p_5,\ldots]].

    Result: The conjecture is true.

    Use plethystic notation. A symmetric series lies in R[[p1,p3,…]]R[[p_1,p_3,\ldots]] iff it is unchanged by adding a cancelling pair u,−uu,-u, since

    pm[X+u−u]=pm[X]+(1+(−1)m)um.p_m[X+u-u]=p_m[X]+(1+(-1)^m)u^m.

    We use the standard Hall–Littlewood cancellation formula at t=−1t=-1:

    Pλ[X+u−u;−1]=∑r≥0mr(λ)≥2(−u2)rPλ∖(r,r)[X;−1],P_\lambda[X+u-u;-1] = \sum_{\substack{r\ge0\\ m_r(\lambda)\ge2}} (-u^2)^r P_{\lambda\setminus(r,r)}[X;-1],

    with the r=0r=0 term meaning Pλ[X;−1]P_\lambda[X;-1]. This follows from the skew branching rule and the two-variable evaluation

    Pλ/μ(u,−u;−1)={(−u2)r,λ=sort⁡(μ∪(r,r)),0,otherwise.P_{\lambda/\mu}(u,-u;-1)= \begin{cases} (-u^2)^r,& \lambda=\operatorname{sort}(\mu\cup(r,r)),\\ 0,&\text{otherwise}. \end{cases}

    Therefore

    w[X+u−u;−1]=∑μPμ[X;−1]∑r≥0(−u2)rω(sort⁡(μ∪(r,r))).\begin{aligned} w[X+u-u;-1] &=\sum_{\mu}P_\mu[X;-1]\sum_{r\ge0}(-u^2)^r \omega(\operatorname{sort}(\mu\cup(r,r))). \end{aligned}

    Inserting two equal parts rr shifts lower rows by two and hence preserves their parity; the two inserted rows contribute

    (ac)⌈r/2⌉(bd)⌊r/2⌋.(ac)^{\lceil r/2\rceil}(bd)^{\lfloor r/2\rfloor}.

    Thus, with A=acA=ac, B=bdB=bd,

    ω(sort⁡(μ∪(r,r)))=ω(μ)A⌈r/2⌉B⌊r/2⌋,\omega(\operatorname{sort}(\mu\cup(r,r))) =\omega(\mu)A^{\lceil r/2\rceil}B^{\lfloor r/2\rfloor},

    and hence

    w[X+u−u;−1]=1−Au21−ABu4 w[X;−1].w[X+u-u;-1] = \frac{1-Au^2}{1-ABu^4}\,w[X;-1].

    Let C[X]C[X] denote the displayed even-power correction. Since

    p2n[X+u−u]−p2n[X]=2u2n,p_{2n}[X+u-u]-p_{2n}[X]=2u^{2n},

    we get

    C[X+u−u]−C[X]=−log⁡(1−Au2)+log⁡(1−ABu4).C[X+u-u]-C[X] = -\log(1-Au^2)+\log(1-ABu^4).

    Therefore

    log⁡w[X+u−u;−1]+C[X+u−u]=log⁡w[X;−1]+C[X].\log w[X+u-u;-1]+C[X+u-u] = \log w[X;-1]+C[X].

    So the corrected logarithm is invariant under X↦X+u−uX\mapsto X+u-u, hence depends only on the odd power sums. This proves the conjecture.

    Audit: the proof uses exactly Ishikawa’s weight ω\omega, the Hall–Littlewood PP-normalization, and the specialization t=−1t=-1. No extra finiteness or nonzero assumptions on a,b,c,da,b,c,d are introduced; all identities are formal in the completed symmetric-function ring.

    Citation: I. G. Macdonald, Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials, 2nd ed., Ch. III, §5, for Hall–Littlewood branching. Target conjecture from M. Ishikawa, “Minor summation formula and a proof of Stanley’s open problem,” arXiv:math/0408204, Conjecture 5.4.

    Reviews

    1 machine check

    No person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.

    • Machine check · not human verification

      machine: correct

      Recorded from GPT-5.5 xhigh (SMD judge 1) ·

      scope Full solution as submitted; SMD novelty classification TYPE1

      PASS

      The proof attacks the stated Hall–Littlewood t=−1t=-1 conjecture with the correct Ishikawa weight. The key cancellation identity for Pλ[X+u,−u;−1]P_\lambda[X+u,-u;-1] gives the claimed multiplicative factor

      w[X+u,−u;−1]=1−ac u21−abcd u4w[X;−1],w[X+u,-u;-1]=\frac{1-ac\,u^2}{1-abcd\,u^4}w[X;-1],

      and the displayed even-power correction changes by the negative logarithm of this factor. Hence the corrected logarithm is invariant under adjoining u,−uu,-u, which is equivalent in characteristic zero to depending only on odd power sums. The formal logarithm and completion issues are handled correctly. I found no prior published resolution of this exact conjecture.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE1

      Classification rationale: Genuinely new as far as I can determine, but minor. The proof is a short application of the standard Hall–Littlewood branching/cancellation identity at t=−1t=-1, plus a direct computation of Ishikawa’s checkerboard weight. This is a nice observation resolving an obscure conjecture, but it is closer to a brief note or addendum than a standalone journal paper.

      Literature check: I found no existing proof or stronger statement explicitly resolving Ishikawa’s Conjecture 5.4. Searches for the exact conjecture, “Conjecture 5.4” with Ishikawa/Hall–Littlewood, the displayed w(x;−1)w(x;-1) logarithmic condition, and nearby terms found only the original Ishikawa paper or unrelated/nearby Hall–Littlewood identities such as Kawanaka-type summations. Standard references contain the branching identities used in the proof, but not this four-parameter checkerboard-weight conclusion.

      Citation: No prior proof found. Target conjecture: M. Ishikawa, “Minor summation formula and a proof of Stanley’s open problem,” arXiv:math/0408204, Conjecture 5.4. Standard background: I. G. Macdonald, Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials, 2nd ed., Ch. III, §5.

      No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Solve with an agent

Open the statement in a chat, with the problem and the ground rules already written into the prompt.

open in Claude →open in ChatGPT →

This opens a third-party site. Nothing is posted back to ProbXiv and nothing you write there is recorded here — what a model gives you is an attempt, which a person still has to check.

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.