13
$\begingroup$

I tried putting the series $$ |1+1+1|+|1+1-1|\\+|1-1+1|+|1-1-1|\\+|-1+1+1|+|-1+1-1|\\+|-1-1+1|+|-1-1-1| $$ into Wolfram Alpha and typing "in summation notation" but it wouldn't tell me what it is in summation notation. I tried to figure it out on my own but I can't figure out how to put this series into summation notation.

How would I express this sequence in summation notation?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 17
    $\begingroup$ Well, the easiest way to express this would be $12$. ;) $\endgroup$ – EKons Jul 27 '17 at 13:44
  • $\begingroup$ $$\sum_{v\in C_3}\left|\sum_{i=1}^3(-1)^{v_i}\right|$$ where $v\in C_3$ runs over the vertices of the 3-dimensional unit cube. This generalizes to $$\sum_{v\in C_n}\left|\sum_{i=1}^n(-1)^{v_i}\right|$$ where $C_n$ is the n-dimensional unit hypercube :) Please don't ever actually do this. $\endgroup$ – Michael Ala Jul 27 '17 at 17:41
  • $\begingroup$ this is not a series, just a (finite) sum. $\endgroup$ – Masacroso Jul 27 '17 at 17:51
35
$\begingroup$

$\sum_{i,j,k=0}^1 | (-1)^i + (-1)^j + (-1)^k |$

$\endgroup$
24
$\begingroup$

A less formal, but common style, would be $$ \sum_{\epsilon_i = \pm 1} \lvert \epsilon_1+\epsilon_2+\epsilon_3 \rvert $$

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I'm not sure that I would recognize this expression outside the context of already knowing what it's supposed to mean. Kinda looks like $\Sigma_{\forall\epsilon_i\in \left\{-1,1\right\} }{\left|\epsilon_1+\epsilon_2+\epsilon_3\right|}$, where I'd reason that it'd sum $\epsilon_i$ for each value ${\pm}1$, though that inference would strike me as less obvious here. Does this style have a name, or a rule set? Or is it, as you'd stated, a more informal style that a practicing mathematician would just be liable to recognize? $\endgroup$ – Nat Jul 27 '17 at 16:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ $\pm 1$ is one of those funny special cases where there are plenty of ways of writing it (see other answers). But I think most mathematicians would decode the notation with little trouble: subscripts are hard to read, so it is traditional to abbreviate quite significantly. Witness the product for the zeta function, which is often written as $\prod_p (1-p^{-s})^{-1}$ instead of $\prod_{p \text{ prime}} (\dots)$. I would say that I've never seen a $\forall$ sign in the sum: it's completely implicit. $\endgroup$ – Chappers Jul 27 '17 at 18:00
  • $\begingroup$ (On the other hand, there are certainly plenty of mathematicians whom one would not accuse of writing mathematics that is easy to read...) $\endgroup$ – Chappers Jul 27 '17 at 18:00
10
$\begingroup$

There are several options. It's good to know many; different ideas are convenient in different situations.

Here is one that hasn't been suggested yet but I would recommend considering: $$ \sum_{a=\pm1}\sum_{b=\pm1}\sum_{c=\pm1}|a+b+c|. $$ This is quite similar to the one by Chappers, but the three sums are more explicit here. You can also consider replacing "$a=\pm1$" with "$a\in\{-1,+1\}$".

Here are some more options for the record: $$ \sum_{a,b,c=\pm1}|a+b+c|,\\ \sum_{a,b,c=-1,+1}|a+b+c|,\\ \sum_{a,b,c\in\{-1,+1\}}|a+b+c|,\\ \sum_{a=-1,+1}\sum_{b=-1,+1}\sum_{c=-1,+1}|a+b+c|. $$ As roger suggested in another answer, you can also let each index $i$ go from 0 to 1 and then sum $(-1)^i$. This leads to many more variations of the formulas above.

$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

$$\sum_{n=0}^{7}|(-1)^{[n/4]}+(-1)^{[n/2]}+(-1)^{n}|$$

where $[x]$ is the integer that satisfies $[x]\leq x < [x]+1$.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ This is a clever one! It produces the correct sum, but it's a little hard to see it at a glance. I would argue that this is not a summation notation for the desired sum, but instead a sum that turns out to be the same after some manipulation or thought. $\endgroup$ – Joonas Ilmavirta Jul 27 '17 at 12:13
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I disagree. This is just a binary expansion of @roger's version of the desired sum. $\endgroup$ – Alex Jul 27 '17 at 15:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Alex This is nothing of no one's solution because this is the very first answer that this question got. There were not even comments around. $\endgroup$ – Peyton Jul 29 '17 at 2:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Peyton I didn't mean that you stole it from roger-- when I said I disagree, I meant to disagree with Joonas's statement that this is not a summation notation for the desired sum. I meant to point out that this is a summation notation for the desired sum-- in fact, the same summation notation that the number 1 answerer, roger, used. Sorry for the ambiguity. I upvoted your answer btw. $\endgroup$ – Alex Aug 1 '17 at 15:10
5
$\begingroup$

$$\sum_{a=0}^1 \sum_{b=0}^1 \sum_{c=0}^1 |(-1)^a + (-1)^b + (-1)^c|$$

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

$$ \sum_{X\in\{-1, +1\}^3} \vert \sum_{i = 0}^{2} X_i \vert $$

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

$$\sum_{i,\ j,\ k\ =\ -1}^1 |ijk\left(i + j + k\right)|$$

$ijk$ vanishes when any of them are zero, allowing the summation to be written in the standard form.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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