Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

In the context of iteration of functions I'm working with the power series for $$ \small f(x)=\log(\Gamma(\exp(x))) =\sum_{k=1}^\infty a_k x^k \sim -0.577216 x + 0.533859 x^2 + 0.325579 x^3 + 0.125274 x^4+ O(x^5)$$ and want to write about its radius of convergence $\rho_f$ . What I've done was to scale the coefficients of the power series such that they appear to become roughly constant in their magnitude. If I write $$ c_k = \pi^k a_k $$ then it seems that the coefficients at indexes $ c_{4j},c_{4j+2}$ up to $j=128$ become roughly of magnitude $0.008$ and that at indexes$ c_{4j+1},c_{4j+3}$ about 1/100 of that - but still decreasing. It seems, if I increase the scaling factor only a little bit over $\pi$ I always run into a divergent sequence of $c_k$ - only that they "begin to diverge" later, where it is not visible using truncated power series.

If I rescale $$ d_k = (k+1) \pi^k a_k $$ then I get impressive convergence of the $d_{4j} \to 2$ , $d_{4j+2} \to -2$ while $d_{4j+1}, d_{4j+3}$ still decrease in magnitude; so this looks even much better. However, the introduction of the $ (k+1)$ cofactor does not extend that radius if we have a sequence of geometric decrease (I think so).

So I would tend to say, that the radius of convergence of $ \rho_f \sim \pi $ - is that meaningful?

[update] It seems, a bit help of wolfram alpha and decoding its output gave a good idea such that I found now a meaningful decomposition in term of zetas, stirling numbers 2nd kind and factorials: $ \displaystyle \quad \small \begin{array} {} a_1 &=& (- 1 \gamma &.&.&.&)/1!\\ a_2 &=& (- 1 \gamma & +1 \zeta(2) &.&.&)/2! \\ a_3 &=& (- 1 \gamma & +3 \zeta(2) & -2 \zeta(3) &.&)/3! \\ a_4 &=& (- 1 \gamma & +7 \zeta(2) & -12 \zeta(3) &+6 \zeta(4)&)/4! \\ \ldots& & \ldots \end{array} $
(I should have seen this before because I already had an expression for that series using the matrix-product $ \small \operatorname{fS2F}\cdot \operatorname{ZETA} \cdot \operatorname{fS1F}$, where the names of the matrices are simply from my Pari/GP-conventions but indicate their contents) However, this does not immediately answer my question about the range of convergence but maybe is a step in the correct direction

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted


  • the series converges up to the next singularity
  • $\Gamma(x)$ is never 0
  • $\Gamma(x)$ has a simple pole for $x=0,-1,-2, \dots$
  • $\exp(x)$ is never 0
  • $\exp(\pm i\pi) = -1$
  • the singularities of $\log(x)$ are the branch points at $x=0,\infty$.

These hints should be enough to convince you that the nearest singularity of the function $f(x) = \log (\Gamma(e^{x}))$ to the origin is at $x=\pm i \pi$ which sets the convergence radius to $\pi$.

The next singularities are then at $x= \log(2) \pm i \pi$ and $x=\pm i 3\pi$ and so on.

share|cite|improve this answer
:-) . Hmmm, that's a lot of hints - thanks, I'll have to chew on them (somehow it looks that I should have got some of them myself ...). Meanwhile I've found a very nice decomposition of the entries, see my updated question, maybe this answers the question directly. – Gottfried Helms Jan 15 '13 at 18:10
Fabian: The nearest singularity is at $x=i \pi$, because $\exp(i \pi)=-1$ and $\Gamma(-1) $ is a singularity which is also not "captured" by the $\log$ - function - is that observation already sufficient? – Gottfried Helms Jan 15 '13 at 18:40
@GottfriedHelms: yes, this is exactly what the hints should have pointed to. And as the nearest singularity is at $x= \pm i\pi$ the convergence radius is $\pi$ (as you have already observed) – Fabian Jan 15 '13 at 18:41

Here are some suggestions:

1) Try to use Carleman Matrix, since you are using iteration of functions or

2) You can work on the function

$$ g(x)=f'(x) = e^{x}\psi(e^x) $$ and then integrate the resulting series term by term.

share|cite|improve this answer
Yes, thanks; my matrix-formula in the update in my question contains the two carleman-matrices for $\exp$ and $\log$ and the extending matrix for the $\text{ZETA}$ - polynomials which precisely describe the composition of the $a_k$ as given by wolframalpha (and translated by me from $\psi$,/,$\pi$ - to $\zeta$-expressions) – Gottfried Helms Jan 15 '13 at 19:18
Here is a current state of my study of this where I approach this with the help of Carleman-matrices. It's just a manuscript-in-progress. See – Gottfried Helms Jan 15 '13 at 19:57
@GottfriedHelms: Thanks for the article. – Mhenni Benghorbal Jan 16 '13 at 1:32

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.