Evaluating product of Upper Incomplete Gamma functions











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I have checked several posts but couldn't find the equivalent of $Gamma(m,a) cdot Gamma(m,b)$, where '$cdot$' means multiplication. I suspect that it can be solved by applying the equivalent of Gamma function $(n-1)!e^{-x}sum limits_{k=0}^{m}dfrac{x^k}{k!}$ but then there will be two summations with same limits which I have no clue how to solve
Any suggestions?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • What do you understand by $;Gamma(m,a);$ ? That's not the usual Gamma Function...
    – DonAntonio
    Nov 19 at 1:06










  • Its the upper incomplete Gamma function
    – hakkunamattata
    Nov 19 at 1:11












  • I think it'd be a rather good idea to explicitly say that, and not only "Gamma Functions", which can mislead.
    – DonAntonio
    Nov 19 at 1:17










  • Upper or lower incomplete? "*" means multiplication (or something else)? The formula you state only applies when the first argument is a positive integer; is $m$ a positive integer?
    – Eric Towers
    Nov 19 at 1:19












  • yes m is positive, I have changed the title. Thanks for suggestion
    – hakkunamattata
    Nov 19 at 1:23















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I have checked several posts but couldn't find the equivalent of $Gamma(m,a) cdot Gamma(m,b)$, where '$cdot$' means multiplication. I suspect that it can be solved by applying the equivalent of Gamma function $(n-1)!e^{-x}sum limits_{k=0}^{m}dfrac{x^k}{k!}$ but then there will be two summations with same limits which I have no clue how to solve
Any suggestions?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • What do you understand by $;Gamma(m,a);$ ? That's not the usual Gamma Function...
    – DonAntonio
    Nov 19 at 1:06










  • Its the upper incomplete Gamma function
    – hakkunamattata
    Nov 19 at 1:11












  • I think it'd be a rather good idea to explicitly say that, and not only "Gamma Functions", which can mislead.
    – DonAntonio
    Nov 19 at 1:17










  • Upper or lower incomplete? "*" means multiplication (or something else)? The formula you state only applies when the first argument is a positive integer; is $m$ a positive integer?
    – Eric Towers
    Nov 19 at 1:19












  • yes m is positive, I have changed the title. Thanks for suggestion
    – hakkunamattata
    Nov 19 at 1:23













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











I have checked several posts but couldn't find the equivalent of $Gamma(m,a) cdot Gamma(m,b)$, where '$cdot$' means multiplication. I suspect that it can be solved by applying the equivalent of Gamma function $(n-1)!e^{-x}sum limits_{k=0}^{m}dfrac{x^k}{k!}$ but then there will be two summations with same limits which I have no clue how to solve
Any suggestions?










share|cite|improve this question















I have checked several posts but couldn't find the equivalent of $Gamma(m,a) cdot Gamma(m,b)$, where '$cdot$' means multiplication. I suspect that it can be solved by applying the equivalent of Gamma function $(n-1)!e^{-x}sum limits_{k=0}^{m}dfrac{x^k}{k!}$ but then there will be two summations with same limits which I have no clue how to solve
Any suggestions?







summation gamma-function gamma-distribution






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 19 at 1:24









David G. Stork

9,30321232




9,30321232










asked Nov 19 at 1:01









hakkunamattata

454




454












  • What do you understand by $;Gamma(m,a);$ ? That's not the usual Gamma Function...
    – DonAntonio
    Nov 19 at 1:06










  • Its the upper incomplete Gamma function
    – hakkunamattata
    Nov 19 at 1:11












  • I think it'd be a rather good idea to explicitly say that, and not only "Gamma Functions", which can mislead.
    – DonAntonio
    Nov 19 at 1:17










  • Upper or lower incomplete? "*" means multiplication (or something else)? The formula you state only applies when the first argument is a positive integer; is $m$ a positive integer?
    – Eric Towers
    Nov 19 at 1:19












  • yes m is positive, I have changed the title. Thanks for suggestion
    – hakkunamattata
    Nov 19 at 1:23


















  • What do you understand by $;Gamma(m,a);$ ? That's not the usual Gamma Function...
    – DonAntonio
    Nov 19 at 1:06










  • Its the upper incomplete Gamma function
    – hakkunamattata
    Nov 19 at 1:11












  • I think it'd be a rather good idea to explicitly say that, and not only "Gamma Functions", which can mislead.
    – DonAntonio
    Nov 19 at 1:17










  • Upper or lower incomplete? "*" means multiplication (or something else)? The formula you state only applies when the first argument is a positive integer; is $m$ a positive integer?
    – Eric Towers
    Nov 19 at 1:19












  • yes m is positive, I have changed the title. Thanks for suggestion
    – hakkunamattata
    Nov 19 at 1:23
















What do you understand by $;Gamma(m,a);$ ? That's not the usual Gamma Function...
– DonAntonio
Nov 19 at 1:06




What do you understand by $;Gamma(m,a);$ ? That's not the usual Gamma Function...
– DonAntonio
Nov 19 at 1:06












Its the upper incomplete Gamma function
– hakkunamattata
Nov 19 at 1:11






Its the upper incomplete Gamma function
– hakkunamattata
Nov 19 at 1:11














I think it'd be a rather good idea to explicitly say that, and not only "Gamma Functions", which can mislead.
– DonAntonio
Nov 19 at 1:17




I think it'd be a rather good idea to explicitly say that, and not only "Gamma Functions", which can mislead.
– DonAntonio
Nov 19 at 1:17












Upper or lower incomplete? "*" means multiplication (or something else)? The formula you state only applies when the first argument is a positive integer; is $m$ a positive integer?
– Eric Towers
Nov 19 at 1:19






Upper or lower incomplete? "*" means multiplication (or something else)? The formula you state only applies when the first argument is a positive integer; is $m$ a positive integer?
– Eric Towers
Nov 19 at 1:19














yes m is positive, I have changed the title. Thanks for suggestion
– hakkunamattata
Nov 19 at 1:23




yes m is positive, I have changed the title. Thanks for suggestion
– hakkunamattata
Nov 19 at 1:23










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
0
down vote













We have that
$$
eqalign{
& Gamma (m,a)Gamma (m,b) = Gamma (m)^{,2} Q(m,a)Q(m,b) = cr
& = Gamma (m)^{,2} e^{, - left( {a + b} right)} sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}}
sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}} cr}
$$



The sum is over a square in $k,j$ and , also with the help of the following scheme,



Gamma_Inc^2_1



we can re-write it as
$$
eqalign{
& sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}} sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}}
= sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} b^{,j} } over {k!j!}}} } = cr
& = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {k!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
- sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,m + k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
- sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,m + k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } = cr
& = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {{{left( {a + b} right)^{,s} } over {s!}}}
- a^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
- b^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } cr}
$$

note the summation extends to $m-1$, not to $m$.



The formula above can be managed in various other ways, but I cannot see
a way of getting rid of the $m+k$ at denominator.






share|cite|improve this answer























    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3004372%2fevaluating-product-of-upper-incomplete-gamma-functions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    0
    down vote













    We have that
    $$
    eqalign{
    & Gamma (m,a)Gamma (m,b) = Gamma (m)^{,2} Q(m,a)Q(m,b) = cr
    & = Gamma (m)^{,2} e^{, - left( {a + b} right)} sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}}
    sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}} cr}
    $$



    The sum is over a square in $k,j$ and , also with the help of the following scheme,



    Gamma_Inc^2_1



    we can re-write it as
    $$
    eqalign{
    & sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}} sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}}
    = sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} b^{,j} } over {k!j!}}} } = cr
    & = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {k!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
    - sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,m + k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
    - sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,m + k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } = cr
    & = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {{{left( {a + b} right)^{,s} } over {s!}}}
    - a^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
    - b^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } cr}
    $$

    note the summation extends to $m-1$, not to $m$.



    The formula above can be managed in various other ways, but I cannot see
    a way of getting rid of the $m+k$ at denominator.






    share|cite|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      We have that
      $$
      eqalign{
      & Gamma (m,a)Gamma (m,b) = Gamma (m)^{,2} Q(m,a)Q(m,b) = cr
      & = Gamma (m)^{,2} e^{, - left( {a + b} right)} sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}}
      sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}} cr}
      $$



      The sum is over a square in $k,j$ and , also with the help of the following scheme,



      Gamma_Inc^2_1



      we can re-write it as
      $$
      eqalign{
      & sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}} sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}}
      = sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} b^{,j} } over {k!j!}}} } = cr
      & = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {k!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
      - sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,m + k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
      - sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,m + k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } = cr
      & = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {{{left( {a + b} right)^{,s} } over {s!}}}
      - a^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
      - b^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } cr}
      $$

      note the summation extends to $m-1$, not to $m$.



      The formula above can be managed in various other ways, but I cannot see
      a way of getting rid of the $m+k$ at denominator.






      share|cite|improve this answer

























        up vote
        0
        down vote










        up vote
        0
        down vote









        We have that
        $$
        eqalign{
        & Gamma (m,a)Gamma (m,b) = Gamma (m)^{,2} Q(m,a)Q(m,b) = cr
        & = Gamma (m)^{,2} e^{, - left( {a + b} right)} sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}}
        sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}} cr}
        $$



        The sum is over a square in $k,j$ and , also with the help of the following scheme,



        Gamma_Inc^2_1



        we can re-write it as
        $$
        eqalign{
        & sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}} sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}}
        = sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} b^{,j} } over {k!j!}}} } = cr
        & = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {k!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
        - sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,m + k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
        - sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,m + k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } = cr
        & = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {{{left( {a + b} right)^{,s} } over {s!}}}
        - a^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
        - b^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } cr}
        $$

        note the summation extends to $m-1$, not to $m$.



        The formula above can be managed in various other ways, but I cannot see
        a way of getting rid of the $m+k$ at denominator.






        share|cite|improve this answer














        We have that
        $$
        eqalign{
        & Gamma (m,a)Gamma (m,b) = Gamma (m)^{,2} Q(m,a)Q(m,b) = cr
        & = Gamma (m)^{,2} e^{, - left( {a + b} right)} sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}}
        sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}} cr}
        $$



        The sum is over a square in $k,j$ and , also with the help of the following scheme,



        Gamma_Inc^2_1



        we can re-write it as
        $$
        eqalign{
        & sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} } over {k!}}} sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{b^{,j} } over {j!}}}
        = sumlimits_{k = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{j = 0}^{m - 1} {{{a^{,k} b^{,j} } over {k!j!}}} } = cr
        & = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {k!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
        - sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,m + k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
        - sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,m + k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } = cr
        & = sumlimits_{s = 0}^{2m - 1} {{{left( {a + b} right)^{,s} } over {s!}}}
        - a^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,k} b^{,s - k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} }
        - b^{,m} sumlimits_{s = 0}^{m - 1} {sumlimits_{k = 0}^s {{{a^{,s - k} b^{,k} } over {left( {m + k} right)!left( {s - k} right)!}}} } cr}
        $$

        note the summation extends to $m-1$, not to $m$.



        The formula above can be managed in various other ways, but I cannot see
        a way of getting rid of the $m+k$ at denominator.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Nov 19 at 15:51

























        answered Nov 19 at 2:49









        G Cab

        17.2k31237




        17.2k31237






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3004372%2fevaluating-product-of-upper-incomplete-gamma-functions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Aardman Animations

            Are they similar matrix

            “minimization” problem in Euclidean space related to orthonormal basis