- Circle
- This is Interactive Mathematics
- 9ABS302 Mathematics III
- Introduction to Actuarial Science - Elementary
- Finding the PI Value and Proving the Formulas of Circle Area and Circumference Calculations
- 09 Findingf
- zeta2
- Random
- Stat Rev
- Math Research Final Paper
- Gauss Quadrature
- Project Mgt
- r05012101 Numerical Methods
- Risk Analysis Template
- rss15-mrst SPE PAPER.pdf
- PreCalc1
- Manual IDEC FC5A Advanced
- New Microsoft Office Word Document (2)
- Fungsi Trigonometri
- T1-7 T.pdf
- Sample Assessment Materials Model Answers–Pure for as and a Level Mathematics
- 9795_s14_qp_1
- integral
- biophysics final project
- AP Calculus Summer Packet 2015
- Analyzing Structural Members
- 3 Discrete Random Variables and Probability Distributions
- AM-sln-08(E)
- h alg 2 t10 3 filled in
- javascript mini books
- My Class Schedule
- Final Report Group 1
- Rachmaninoff - Piano Concerto No.4 Op.40 Orchestra Score
- Piazzolla - AVE MARIA - Score - Vo Pf
- Love Story Meets Viva La Vida (Piano and Cello) - Jon Schmidt

**Uniform Random Walks on the Plane
**

A case study in experimental mathematics

James Wan

14 January, 2013

1 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

What is Experimental Mathematics?

The use of computers beyond routine simulations and calculations.

As deﬁned by J. Borwein and D. Bailey:

1

Use graphics to suggest underlying principles; test conjectures;

conﬁrm analytical results.

2

Gain intuition; discover patterns; suggest approaches for proof.

Computation as the third form of discovery, after theory and

experiment:

Algorithms of Celine, Gosper, Wilf-Zeilberger completely

automate binomial sums etc.

Find answer ﬁrst, then reverse engineer.

tool < computer ≤ collaborator.

A journal since 1992.

2 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

What is Experimental Mathematics?

The use of computers beyond routine simulations and calculations.

As deﬁned by J. Borwein and D. Bailey:

1

Use graphics to suggest underlying principles; test conjectures;

conﬁrm analytical results.

2

Gain intuition; discover patterns; suggest approaches for proof.

Computation as the third form of discovery, after theory and

experiment:

Algorithms of Celine, Gosper, Wilf-Zeilberger completely

automate binomial sums etc.

Find answer ﬁrst, then reverse engineer.

tool < computer ≤ collaborator.

A journal since 1992.

2 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

What is Experimental Mathematics?

The use of computers beyond routine simulations and calculations.

As deﬁned by J. Borwein and D. Bailey:

1

Use graphics to suggest underlying principles; test conjectures;

conﬁrm analytical results.

2

Gain intuition; discover patterns; suggest approaches for proof.

Computation as the third form of discovery, after theory and

experiment:

Algorithms of Celine, Gosper, Wilf-Zeilberger completely

automate binomial sums etc.

Find answer ﬁrst, then reverse engineer.

tool < computer ≤ collaborator.

A journal since 1992.

2 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

What is Experimental Mathematics?

The use of computers beyond routine simulations and calculations.

As deﬁned by J. Borwein and D. Bailey:

1

Use graphics to suggest underlying principles; test conjectures;

conﬁrm analytical results.

2

Gain intuition; discover patterns; suggest approaches for proof.

Computation as the third form of discovery, after theory and

experiment:

Algorithms of Celine, Gosper, Wilf-Zeilberger completely

automate binomial sums etc.

Find answer ﬁrst, then reverse engineer.

tool < computer ≤ collaborator.

A journal since 1992.

2 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

What is Experimental Mathematics?

The use of computers beyond routine simulations and calculations.

As deﬁned by J. Borwein and D. Bailey:

1

Use graphics to suggest underlying principles; test conjectures;

conﬁrm analytical results.

2

Gain intuition; discover patterns; suggest approaches for proof.

Computation as the third form of discovery, after theory and

experiment:

Algorithms of Celine, Gosper, Wilf-Zeilberger completely

automate binomial sums etc.

Find answer ﬁrst, then reverse engineer.

tool < computer ≤ collaborator.

A journal since 1992.

2 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

What is Experimental Mathematics?

The use of computers beyond routine simulations and calculations.

As deﬁned by J. Borwein and D. Bailey:

1

Use graphics to suggest underlying principles; test conjectures;

conﬁrm analytical results.

2

Gain intuition; discover patterns; suggest approaches for proof.

Computation as the third form of discovery, after theory and

experiment:

Algorithms of Celine, Gosper, Wilf-Zeilberger completely

automate binomial sums etc.

Find answer ﬁrst, then reverse engineer.

tool < computer ≤ collaborator.

A journal since 1992.

2 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

What is Experimental Mathematics?

The use of computers beyond routine simulations and calculations.

As deﬁned by J. Borwein and D. Bailey:

1

Use graphics to suggest underlying principles; test conjectures;

conﬁrm analytical results.

2

Gain intuition; discover patterns; suggest approaches for proof.

Computation as the third form of discovery, after theory and

experiment:

Algorithms of Celine, Gosper, Wilf-Zeilberger completely

automate binomial sums etc.

Find answer ﬁrst, then reverse engineer.

tool < computer ≤ collaborator.

A journal since 1992.

2 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

What is Experimental Mathematics?

The use of computers beyond routine simulations and calculations.

As deﬁned by J. Borwein and D. Bailey:

1

Use graphics to suggest underlying principles; test conjectures;

conﬁrm analytical results.

2

Gain intuition; discover patterns; suggest approaches for proof.

Computation as the third form of discovery, after theory and

experiment:

Algorithms of Celine, Gosper, Wilf-Zeilberger completely

automate binomial sums etc.

Find answer ﬁrst, then reverse engineer.

tool < computer ≤ collaborator.

A journal since 1992.

2 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Examples of Experimental Mathematics

Area of parabola (weighing, c. 250BC, Archimedes)

AGM and elliptic integrals (1799, Gauss)

Feigenbaum constant (on HP calculator, 1975)

Four colour theorem (Appel and Haken, 1976)

Kepler conjecture (LP, Hales, 1992-8)

Independent computation of digits of π (BBP, 1995)

Solving checkers (Schaeﬀer, 2007)

Solving sudoku (Douglas-Rachford, convex optimization, 2010)

3 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Examples of Experimental Mathematics

Area of parabola (weighing, c. 250BC, Archimedes)

AGM and elliptic integrals (1799, Gauss)

Feigenbaum constant (on HP calculator, 1975)

Four colour theorem (Appel and Haken, 1976)

Kepler conjecture (LP, Hales, 1992-8)

Independent computation of digits of π (BBP, 1995)

Solving checkers (Schaeﬀer, 2007)

Solving sudoku (Douglas-Rachford, convex optimization, 2010)

3 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Examples of Experimental Mathematics

Area of parabola (weighing, c. 250BC, Archimedes)

AGM and elliptic integrals (1799, Gauss)

Feigenbaum constant (on HP calculator, 1975)

Four colour theorem (Appel and Haken, 1976)

Kepler conjecture (LP, Hales, 1992-8)

Independent computation of digits of π (BBP, 1995)

Solving checkers (Schaeﬀer, 2007)

Solving sudoku (Douglas-Rachford, convex optimization, 2010)

3 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Examples of Experimental Mathematics

Area of parabola (weighing, c. 250BC, Archimedes)

AGM and elliptic integrals (1799, Gauss)

Feigenbaum constant (on HP calculator, 1975)

Four colour theorem (Appel and Haken, 1976)

Kepler conjecture (LP, Hales, 1992-8)

Independent computation of digits of π (BBP, 1995)

Solving checkers (Schaeﬀer, 2007)

Solving sudoku (Douglas-Rachford, convex optimization, 2010)

3 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Examples of Experimental Mathematics

Area of parabola (weighing, c. 250BC, Archimedes)

AGM and elliptic integrals (1799, Gauss)

Feigenbaum constant (on HP calculator, 1975)

Four colour theorem (Appel and Haken, 1976)

Kepler conjecture (LP, Hales, 1992-8)

Independent computation of digits of π (BBP, 1995)

Solving checkers (Schaeﬀer, 2007)

Solving sudoku (Douglas-Rachford, convex optimization, 2010)

3 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Examples of Experimental Mathematics

Area of parabola (weighing, c. 250BC, Archimedes)

AGM and elliptic integrals (1799, Gauss)

Feigenbaum constant (on HP calculator, 1975)

Four colour theorem (Appel and Haken, 1976)

Kepler conjecture (LP, Hales, 1992-8)

Independent computation of digits of π (BBP, 1995)

Solving checkers (Schaeﬀer, 2007)

Solving sudoku (Douglas-Rachford, convex optimization, 2010)

3 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Examples of Experimental Mathematics

Area of parabola (weighing, c. 250BC, Archimedes)

AGM and elliptic integrals (1799, Gauss)

Feigenbaum constant (on HP calculator, 1975)

Four colour theorem (Appel and Haken, 1976)

Kepler conjecture (LP, Hales, 1992-8)

Independent computation of digits of π (BBP, 1995)

Solving checkers (Schaeﬀer, 2007)

Solving sudoku (Douglas-Rachford, convex optimization, 2010)

3 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Examples of Experimental Mathematics

Area of parabola (weighing, c. 250BC, Archimedes)

AGM and elliptic integrals (1799, Gauss)

Feigenbaum constant (on HP calculator, 1975)

Four colour theorem (Appel and Haken, 1976)

Kepler conjecture (LP, Hales, 1992-8)

Independent computation of digits of π (BBP, 1995)

Solving checkers (Schaeﬀer, 2007)

Solving sudoku (Douglas-Rachford, convex optimization, 2010)

3 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (1)

Gaussian quadrature:

Traditionally used to approximate integrals by ﬁnite sums and

orthogonal polynomials.

Computational insight: use discrete version to approximate sums;

use orthogonal rational functions.

Surprisingly good for lattice sums, e.g. 1.4 digits per term for

Madelung constant

m,n,p

(−1)

m+n+p

_

m

2

+ n

2

+ p

2

.

4 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (1)

Gaussian quadrature:

Traditionally used to approximate integrals by ﬁnite sums and

orthogonal polynomials.

Computational insight: use discrete version to approximate sums;

use orthogonal rational functions.

Surprisingly good for lattice sums, e.g. 1.4 digits per term for

Madelung constant

m,n,p

(−1)

m+n+p

_

m

2

+ n

2

+ p

2

.

4 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (1)

Gaussian quadrature:

Traditionally used to approximate integrals by ﬁnite sums and

orthogonal polynomials.

Computational insight: use discrete version to approximate sums;

use orthogonal rational functions.

Surprisingly good for lattice sums, e.g. 1.4 digits per term for

Madelung constant

m,n,p

(−1)

m+n+p

_

m

2

+ n

2

+ p

2

.

4 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (2)

Elliptic integrals: K(x) =

_

π/2

0

dt

√

1−x

2

sin

2

t

_

1

0

K(x)

3

dx =

3Γ(1/4)

8

1280π

2

≈ 7.090227004846.

Reversed engineered using the Inverse Symbolic Calculator (PSLQ,

can certiﬁes no closed form below a certain size exists).

RHS is the evaluation of a lattice sum, so proof found by bridging

two sides via θ functions.

Galilean experiment: either gives us conﬁdence in the view we are

taking or rules out some possibilities.

5 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (2)

Elliptic integrals: K(x) =

_

π/2

0

dt

√

1−x

2

sin

2

t

_

1

0

K(x)

3

dx =

3Γ(1/4)

8

1280π

2

≈ 7.090227004846.

Reversed engineered using the Inverse Symbolic Calculator (PSLQ,

can certiﬁes no closed form below a certain size exists).

RHS is the evaluation of a lattice sum, so proof found by bridging

two sides via θ functions.

Galilean experiment: either gives us conﬁdence in the view we are

taking or rules out some possibilities.

5 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (2)

Elliptic integrals: K(x) =

_

π/2

0

dt

√

1−x

2

sin

2

t

_

1

0

K(x)

3

dx =

3Γ(1/4)

8

1280π

2

≈ 7.090227004846.

Reversed engineered using the Inverse Symbolic Calculator (PSLQ,

can certiﬁes no closed form below a certain size exists).

RHS is the evaluation of a lattice sum, so proof found by bridging

two sides via θ functions.

Galilean experiment: either gives us conﬁdence in the view we are

taking or rules out some possibilities.

5 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (2)

Elliptic integrals: K(x) =

_

π/2

0

dt

√

1−x

2

sin

2

t

_

1

0

K(x)

3

dx =

3Γ(1/4)

8

1280π

2

≈ 7.090227004846.

Reversed engineered using the Inverse Symbolic Calculator (PSLQ,

can certiﬁes no closed form below a certain size exists).

RHS is the evaluation of a lattice sum, so proof found by bridging

two sides via θ functions.

Galilean experiment: either gives us conﬁdence in the view we are

taking or rules out some possibilities.

5 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (3)

Special functions:

Computer assisted discovery and automatic proof of the g.f.

(1 −cxy)

_

∞

n=0

u

n

x

n

__

∞

n=0

u

n

y

n

_

=

∞

n=0

u

n

P

n

_

(x + y)(1 + cxy) −2axy

(y −x)(1 −cxy)

__

y −x

1 −cxy

_

n

,

where (n + 1)

2

u

n+1

= (an

2

+ an + b)u

n

−cn

2

u

n−1

.

Brings together special functions, Ap´ery-like sequences, and

Ramanujan-type series for 1/π.

∞

n=0

_

n

k=0

k

j=0

_

n

k

__

−1

8

_

k

_

k

j

_

3

_

nP

n

_

5

3

√

3

__

4

3

√

3

_

n

=

9

√

3

2π

.

6 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (3)

Special functions:

Computer assisted discovery and automatic proof of the g.f.

(1 −cxy)

_

∞

n=0

u

n

x

n

__

∞

n=0

u

n

y

n

_

=

∞

n=0

u

n

P

n

_

(x + y)(1 + cxy) −2axy

(y −x)(1 −cxy)

__

y −x

1 −cxy

_

n

,

where (n + 1)

2

u

n+1

= (an

2

+ an + b)u

n

−cn

2

u

n−1

.

Brings together special functions, Ap´ery-like sequences, and

Ramanujan-type series for 1/π.

∞

n=0

_

n

k=0

k

j=0

_

n

k

__

−1

8

_

k

_

k

j

_

3

_

nP

n

_

5

3

√

3

__

4

3

√

3

_

n

=

9

√

3

2π

.

6 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (3)

Special functions:

Computer assisted discovery and automatic proof of the g.f.

(1 −cxy)

_

∞

n=0

u

n

x

n

__

∞

n=0

u

n

y

n

_

=

∞

n=0

u

n

P

n

_

(x + y)(1 + cxy) −2axy

(y −x)(1 −cxy)

__

y −x

1 −cxy

_

n

,

where (n + 1)

2

u

n+1

= (an

2

+ an + b)u

n

−cn

2

u

n−1

.

Brings together special functions, Ap´ery-like sequences, and

Ramanujan-type series for 1/π.

∞

n=0

_

n

k=0

k

j=0

_

n

k

__

−1

8

_

k

_

k

j

_

3

_

nP

n

_

5

3

√

3

__

4

3

√

3

_

n

=

9

√

3

2π

.

6 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (4)

Random walks:

Very basic problem; sum of n random complex numbers.

Not much known computationally or analytically before 2009.

Application: Brownian motion, superposition of waves and

vibrations, quantum chemistry, migration, cryptography.

All our discoveries were experimental.

Hypergeometric series:

p

F

q

_

a

1

, . . . , a

p

b

1

, . . . , b

q

¸

¸

¸

¸

z

_

=

∞

n=0

(a

1

)

n

· · · (a

p

)

n

(b

1

)

n

· · · (b

q

)

n

z

n

n!

.

7 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (4)

Random walks:

Very basic problem; sum of n random complex numbers.

Not much known computationally or analytically before 2009.

Application: Brownian motion, superposition of waves and

vibrations, quantum chemistry, migration, cryptography.

All our discoveries were experimental.

Hypergeometric series:

p

F

q

_

a

1

, . . . , a

p

b

1

, . . . , b

q

¸

¸

¸

¸

z

_

=

∞

n=0

(a

1

)

n

· · · (a

p

)

n

(b

1

)

n

· · · (b

q

)

n

z

n

n!

.

7 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

My use of Experimental Mathematics (4)

Random walks:

Very basic problem; sum of n random complex numbers.

Not much known computationally or analytically before 2009.

Application: Brownian motion, superposition of waves and

vibrations, quantum chemistry, migration, cryptography.

All our discoveries were experimental.

Hypergeometric series:

p

F

q

_

a

1

, . . . , a

p

b

1

, . . . , b

q

¸

¸

¸

¸

z

_

=

∞

n=0

(a

1

)

n

· · · (a

p

)

n

(b

1

)

n

· · · (b

q

)

n

z

n

n!

.

7 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Random walk integrals

Deﬁnition: For complex s,

W

n

(s) :=

_

[0,1]

n

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

n

k=1

e

2πx

k

i

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

s

dx

W

n

(1) is the expectation.

Deﬁnition:

The density p

n

is the (unique) function that satisﬁes

W

n

(s) =

_

n

0

p

n

(x)x

s

dx.

Dimension reduction: let x

1

= 0.

8 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Random walk integrals

Deﬁnition: For complex s,

W

n

(s) :=

_

[0,1]

n

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

n

k=1

e

2πx

k

i

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

s

dx

W

n

(1) is the expectation.

Deﬁnition:

The density p

n

is the (unique) function that satisﬁes

W

n

(s) =

_

n

0

p

n

(x)x

s

dx.

Dimension reduction: let x

1

= 0.

8 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Random walk integrals

Deﬁnition: For complex s,

W

n

(s) :=

_

[0,1]

n

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

n

k=1

e

2πx

k

i

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

s

dx

W

n

(1) is the expectation.

Deﬁnition:

The density p

n

is the (unique) function that satisﬁes

W

n

(s) =

_

n

0

p

n

(x)x

s

dx.

Dimension reduction: let x

1

= 0.

8 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Computational challenge

W

1

(s) = 1, p

1

(x) = δ

1

(x).

Maple 13 and Mathematica 7 think W

2

= 0.

p

2

(x) =

2

π

√

4−x

2

, W

2

(s) =

_

s

s/2

_

, W

2

(1) =

4

π

.

Tanh-sinh quadrature gives 175 digits for W

3

(1), but

everything fails for W

4

(1). 256 cores at LBNL:

W

5

(1) ≈ 2.0081618.

9 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Computational challenge

W

1

(s) = 1, p

1

(x) = δ

1

(x).

Maple 13 and Mathematica 7 think W

2

= 0.

p

2

(x) =

2

π

√

4−x

2

, W

2

(s) =

_

s

s/2

_

, W

2

(1) =

4

π

.

Tanh-sinh quadrature gives 175 digits for W

3

(1), but

everything fails for W

4

(1). 256 cores at LBNL:

W

5

(1) ≈ 2.0081618.

9 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Computational challenge

W

1

(s) = 1, p

1

(x) = δ

1

(x).

Maple 13 and Mathematica 7 think W

2

= 0.

p

2

(x) =

2

π

√

4−x

2

, W

2

(s) =

_

s

s/2

_

, W

2

(1) =

4

π

.

Tanh-sinh quadrature gives 175 digits for W

3

(1), but

everything fails for W

4

(1). 256 cores at LBNL:

W

5

(1) ≈ 2.0081618.

9 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Computational challenge

W

1

(s) = 1, p

1

(x) = δ

1

(x).

Maple 13 and Mathematica 7 think W

2

= 0.

p

2

(x) =

2

π

√

4−x

2

, W

2

(s) =

_

s

s/2

_

, W

2

(1) =

4

π

.

Tanh-sinh quadrature gives 175 digits for W

3

(1), but

everything fails for W

4

(1). 256 cores at LBNL:

W

5

(1) ≈ 2.0081618.

9 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Jan Cornelius Kluyver & John William Strutt

p

n

(t) =

_

∞

0

xtJ

0

(xt)J

n

0

(x) dx.

Probability of returning to the unit disk:

_

1

0

p

n

(t)dt =

_

∞

0

J

1

(x)J

n

0

(x) dx =

_

−J

0

(x)

n+1

n + 1

_

∞

0

=

1

n + 1

.

Rayleigh (multivariate CLT): p

n

(x) ≈

2x

n

e

−x

2

/n

.

10 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Jan Cornelius Kluyver & John William Strutt

p

n

(t) =

_

∞

0

xtJ

0

(xt)J

n

0

(x) dx.

Probability of returning to the unit disk:

_

1

0

p

n

(t)dt =

_

∞

0

J

1

(x)J

n

0

(x) dx =

_

−J

0

(x)

n+1

n + 1

_

∞

0

=

1

n + 1

.

Rayleigh (multivariate CLT): p

n

(x) ≈

2x

n

e

−x

2

/n

.

10 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Jan Cornelius Kluyver & John William Strutt

p

n

(t) =

_

∞

0

xtJ

0

(xt)J

n

0

(x) dx.

Probability of returning to the unit disk:

_

1

0

p

n

(t)dt =

_

∞

0

J

1

(x)J

n

0

(x) dx =

_

−J

0

(x)

n+1

n + 1

_

∞

0

=

1

n + 1

.

Rayleigh (multivariate CLT): p

n

(x) ≈

2x

n

e

−x

2

/n

.

10 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

p

n

with approximations superimposed.

11 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Probability

We condition the distance z of an (n + m)-step walk on x (n

steps), followed by y (m steps).

Cosine rule, z

2

= x

2

+ y

2

+ 2xy cos(θ).

\ θ

x

z

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

y

So W

n+m

(s) =

1

π

_

n

0

_

m

0

_

_

π

0

z

s

dθ

_

p

n

(x)p

m

(y) dxdy.

Change of variable:

W

n+m

(s) =

_

n+m

0

z

s

__

n

0

_

π

0

z

πy

p

n

(x)p

m

(y) dθdx

_

. ¸¸ .

p

n+m

(z)

dz.

12 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Probability

We condition the distance z of an (n + m)-step walk on x (n

steps), followed by y (m steps).

Cosine rule, z

2

= x

2

+ y

2

+ 2xy cos(θ).

\ θ

x

z

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

y

So W

n+m

(s) =

1

π

_

n

0

_

m

0

_

_

π

0

z

s

dθ

_

p

n

(x)p

m

(y) dxdy.

Change of variable:

W

n+m

(s) =

_

n+m

0

z

s

__

n

0

_

π

0

z

πy

p

n

(x)p

m

(y) dθdx

_

. ¸¸ .

p

n+m

(z)

dz.

12 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Probability

We condition the distance z of an (n + m)-step walk on x (n

steps), followed by y (m steps).

Cosine rule, z

2

= x

2

+ y

2

+ 2xy cos(θ).

\ θ

x

z

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

y

So W

n+m

(s) =

1

π

_

n

0

_

m

0

_

_

π

0

z

s

dθ

_

p

n

(x)p

m

(y) dxdy.

Change of variable:

W

n+m

(s) =

_

n+m

0

z

s

__

n

0

_

π

0

z

πy

p

n

(x)p

m

(y) dθdx

_

. ¸¸ .

p

n+m

(z)

dz.

12 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Probability

We condition the distance z of an (n + m)-step walk on x (n

steps), followed by y (m steps).

Cosine rule, z

2

= x

2

+ y

2

+ 2xy cos(θ).

\ θ

x

z

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

j

y

So W

n+m

(s) =

1

π

_

n

0

_

m

0

_

_

π

0

z

s

dθ

_

p

n

(x)p

m

(y) dxdy.

Change of variable:

W

n+m

(s) =

_

n+m

0

z

s

__

n

0

_

π

0

z

πy

p

n

(x)p

m

(y) dθdx

_

. ¸¸ .

p

n+m

(z)

dz.

12 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Recursion for p

n

∴ p

n

is a single integral over p

n−1

. So

p

3

(x) =

2

√

3x

π(3 + x

2

)

2

F

1

_

1

3

,

2

3

1

¸

¸

¸

¸

x

2

(9 −x

2

)

2

(3 + x

2

)

3

_

.

(Found experimentally, proof by DE.)

Pearson posed the problem (1905), thought p

5

had a straight

line. Disproved in 1963.

p

4

hard to compute; we resort to moments and analytic

continuation.

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1 2 3 4

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

13 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Recursion for p

n

∴ p

n

is a single integral over p

n−1

. So

p

3

(x) =

2

√

3x

π(3 + x

2

)

2

F

1

_

1

3

,

2

3

1

¸

¸

¸

¸

x

2

(9 −x

2

)

2

(3 + x

2

)

3

_

.

(Found experimentally, proof by DE.)

Pearson posed the problem (1905), thought p

5

had a straight

line. Disproved in 1963.

p

4

hard to compute; we resort to moments and analytic

continuation.

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1 2 3 4

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

13 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Recursion for p

n

∴ p

n

is a single integral over p

n−1

. So

p

3

(x) =

2

√

3x

π(3 + x

2

)

2

F

1

_

1

3

,

2

3

1

¸

¸

¸

¸

x

2

(9 −x

2

)

2

(3 + x

2

)

3

_

.

(Found experimentally, proof by DE.)

Pearson posed the problem (1905), thought p

5

had a straight

line. Disproved in 1963.

p

4

hard to compute; we resort to moments and analytic

continuation.

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1 2 3 4

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

13 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Combinatorics and analysis

Binomial expansion:

W

n

(s) = n

s

m≥0

(−1)

m

n

2m

_

s

2

m

_

I

n,m

.

I

3,m

found experimentally on the OEIS, generalized to I

n,m

guessing, then proven combinatorially.

It follows that

W

n

(2k) =

a

1

+...+a

n

=k

_

k

a

1

, ..., a

n

_

2

.

Has a recursion ⇒ lifts to a functional equation ⇒ W

n

(s) has

analytical continuation to C with poles at negative integers.

14 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Combinatorics and analysis

Binomial expansion:

W

n

(s) = n

s

m≥0

(−1)

m

n

2m

_

s

2

m

_

I

n,m

.

I

3,m

found experimentally on the OEIS, generalized to I

n,m

guessing, then proven combinatorially.

It follows that

W

n

(2k) =

a

1

+...+a

n

=k

_

k

a

1

, ..., a

n

_

2

.

Has a recursion ⇒ lifts to a functional equation ⇒ W

n

(s) has

analytical continuation to C with poles at negative integers.

14 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Combinatorics and analysis

Binomial expansion:

W

n

(s) = n

s

m≥0

(−1)

m

n

2m

_

s

2

m

_

I

n,m

.

I

3,m

found experimentally on the OEIS, generalized to I

n,m

guessing, then proven combinatorially.

It follows that

W

n

(2k) =

a

1

+...+a

n

=k

_

k

a

1

, ..., a

n

_

2

.

Has a recursion ⇒ lifts to a functional equation ⇒ W

n

(s) has

analytical continuation to C with poles at negative integers.

14 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Combinatorics and analysis

Binomial expansion:

W

n

(s) = n

s

(−1)

m

n

2m

_

s

2

m

_

I

n,m

.

I

3,m

found experimentally on the OEIS, generalized to I

n,m

guessing, then proven combinatorially.

It follows that

W

n

(2k) =

a

1

+...+a

n

=k

_

k

a

1

, ..., a

n

_

2

.

Has a recursion ⇒ lifts to a functional equation ⇒ W

n

(s) has

analytical continuation to C with poles at negative integers.

14 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Three steps

Recursion + subtle analysis ⇒ convolution formula for W

4

(s)

in terms of W

3

.

By playing around,

W

3

(k) = Re

3

F

2

_

1/2, −k/2, −k/2

1, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

4

_

.

Theorem (1), Borwein, Nuyens, Straub, W. (2009)

W

3

(1) =

16

3

√

4π

2

Γ(

1

3

)

6

+

3Γ(

1

3

)

6

8

3

√

4π

4

≈ 1.57459723755.

Proven using elementary manipulation of integrand and the

transform Re K(1/x) = xK(x).

15 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Three steps

Recursion + subtle analysis ⇒ convolution formula for W

4

(s)

in terms of W

3

.

By playing around,

W

3

(k) = Re

3

F

2

_

1/2, −k/2, −k/2

1, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

4

_

.

Theorem (1), Borwein, Nuyens, Straub, W. (2009)

W

3

(1) =

16

3

√

4π

2

Γ(

1

3

)

6

+

3Γ(

1

3

)

6

8

3

√

4π

4

≈ 1.57459723755.

Proven using elementary manipulation of integrand and the

transform Re K(1/x) = xK(x).

15 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Three steps

Recursion + subtle analysis ⇒ convolution formula for W

4

(s)

in terms of W

3

.

By playing around,

W

3

(k) = Re

3

F

2

_

1/2, −k/2, −k/2

1, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

4

_

.

Theorem (1), Borwein, Nuyens, Straub, W. (2009)

W

3

(1) =

16

3

√

4π

2

Γ(

1

3

)

6

+

3Γ(

1

3

)

6

8

3

√

4π

4

≈ 1.57459723755.

Proven using elementary manipulation of integrand and the

transform Re K(1/x) = xK(x).

15 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Three steps

Recursion + subtle analysis ⇒ convolution formula for W

4

(s)

in terms of W

3

.

By playing around,

W

3

(k) = Re

3

F

2

_

1/2, −k/2, −k/2

1, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

4

_

.

Theorem (1), Borwein, Nuyens, Straub, W. (2009)

W

3

(1) =

16

3

√

4π

2

Γ(

1

3

)

6

+

3Γ(

1

3

)

6

8

3

√

4π

4

≈ 1.57459723755.

Proven using elementary manipulation of integrand and the

transform Re K(1/x) = xK(x).

15 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Four steps

Theorem (2), Borwein, Straub, W., Zudilin (2010)

W

4

(1) ≈ 1.79909248 is given by

3π

4

7

F

6

_

7

4

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

3

4

, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

−

3π

8

7

F

6

_

7

4

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

3

4

, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

.

Guessed using PSLQ (based on W

4

(−1)).

Meijer G-function: deﬁned as a contour integral of ratios of

Γ’s. The mother of all special functions.

Important in CAS: many deﬁnite integrations are Meijer G

transformations.

W

4

(s) =

2

s

π

3

Γ(1 + s/2)

Γ(−s/2)

G

2,4

4,4

_

1, (1 −s)/2, 1, 1

1/2, −s/2, −s/2, −s/2

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

.

16 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Four steps

Theorem (2), Borwein, Straub, W., Zudilin (2010)

W

4

(1) ≈ 1.79909248 is given by

3π

4

7

F

6

_

7

4

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

3

4

, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

−

3π

8

7

F

6

_

7

4

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

3

4

, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

.

Guessed using PSLQ (based on W

4

(−1)).

Meijer G-function: deﬁned as a contour integral of ratios of

Γ’s. The mother of all special functions.

Important in CAS: many deﬁnite integrations are Meijer G

transformations.

W

4

(s) =

2

s

π

3

Γ(1 + s/2)

Γ(−s/2)

G

2,4

4,4

_

1, (1 −s)/2, 1, 1

1/2, −s/2, −s/2, −s/2

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

.

16 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Four steps

Theorem (2), Borwein, Straub, W., Zudilin (2010)

W

4

(1) ≈ 1.79909248 is given by

3π

4

7

F

6

_

7

4

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

3

4

, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

−

3π

8

7

F

6

_

7

4

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

3

4

, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

.

Guessed using PSLQ (based on W

4

(−1)).

Meijer G-function: deﬁned as a contour integral of ratios of

Γ’s. The mother of all special functions.

Important in CAS: many deﬁnite integrations are Meijer G

transformations.

W

4

(s) =

2

s

π

3

Γ(1 + s/2)

Γ(−s/2)

G

2,4

4,4

_

1, (1 −s)/2, 1, 1

1/2, −s/2, −s/2, −s/2

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

.

16 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Four steps

Theorem (2), Borwein, Straub, W., Zudilin (2010)

W

4

(1) ≈ 1.79909248 is given by

3π

4

7

F

6

_

7

4

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

3

4

, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

−

3π

8

7

F

6

_

7

4

,

3

2

,

3

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

3

4

, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

.

Guessed using PSLQ (based on W

4

(−1)).

Meijer G-function: deﬁned as a contour integral of ratios of

Γ’s. The mother of all special functions.

Important in CAS: many deﬁnite integrations are Meijer G

transformations.

W

4

(s) =

2

s

π

3

Γ(1 + s/2)

Γ(−s/2)

G

2,4

4,4

_

1, (1 −s)/2, 1, 1

1/2, −s/2, −s/2, −s/2

¸

¸

¸

¸

1

_

.

16 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Experimental proofs

Transform to G

2,2

4,4

.

Nesterenko’s theorem: ‘nice’ G

2,2

4,4

=⇒ triple integral.

a := G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

−

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

= −2πW

4

(1) not nice.

c := −G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

is nice. Experimentally a = 4c.

Once found, easy to prove. Introduce parameter z as

argument in a ⇒ diﬀerentiation.

Split triple integral in 2, Zudilin’s theorem: =⇒

7

F

6

.

17 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Experimental proofs

Transform to G

2,2

4,4

.

Nesterenko’s theorem: ‘nice’ G

2,2

4,4

=⇒ triple integral.

a := G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

−

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

= −2πW

4

(1) not nice.

c := −G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

is nice. Experimentally a = 4c.

Once found, easy to prove. Introduce parameter z as

argument in a ⇒ diﬀerentiation.

Split triple integral in 2, Zudilin’s theorem: =⇒

7

F

6

.

17 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Experimental proofs

Transform to G

2,2

4,4

.

Nesterenko’s theorem: ‘nice’ G

2,2

4,4

=⇒ triple integral.

a := G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

−

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

= −2πW

4

(1) not nice.

c := −G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

is nice. Experimentally a = 4c.

Once found, easy to prove. Introduce parameter z as

argument in a ⇒ diﬀerentiation.

Split triple integral in 2, Zudilin’s theorem: =⇒

7

F

6

.

17 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Experimental proofs

Transform to G

2,2

4,4

.

Nesterenko’s theorem: ‘nice’ G

2,2

4,4

=⇒ triple integral.

a := G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

−

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

= −2πW

4

(1) not nice.

c := −G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

is nice. Experimentally a = 4c.

Once found, easy to prove. Introduce parameter z as

argument in a ⇒ diﬀerentiation.

Split triple integral in 2, Zudilin’s theorem: =⇒

7

F

6

.

17 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Experimental proofs

Transform to G

2,2

4,4

.

Nesterenko’s theorem: ‘nice’ G

2,2

4,4

=⇒ triple integral.

a := G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

−

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

= −2πW

4

(1) not nice.

c := −G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

is nice. Experimentally a = 4c.

Once found, easy to prove. Introduce parameter z as

argument in a ⇒ diﬀerentiation.

Split triple integral in 2, Zudilin’s theorem: =⇒

7

F

6

.

17 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Experimental proofs

Transform to G

2,2

4,4

.

Nesterenko’s theorem: ‘nice’ G

2,2

4,4

=⇒ triple integral.

a := G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

−

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

= −2πW

4

(1) not nice.

c := −G

2,2

4,4

_

0,1,1,1

1

2

,

1

2

,−

1

2

,−

1

2

¸

¸

1

_

is nice. Experimentally a = 4c.

Once found, easy to prove. Introduce parameter z as

argument in a ⇒ diﬀerentiation.

Split triple integral in 2, Zudilin’s theorem: =⇒

7

F

6

.

17 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

3

p

3

(x) =

2x

√

3π

∞

k=0

W

3

(2k)

_

x

3

_

2k

.

With care, for small α > 0,

_

α

0

p

3

(x)x

s

dx =

2α

s+2

√

3π(s + 2)

+

2α

s+4

3

√

3π(s + 4)

+· · ·

Residues of W

3

(s) come from series coeﬃcients.

Also explains the shape of p

5

.

If p

4

admits a Taylor series around 0, this argument would

give simple poles for W

4

(s), but it has double poles. !?

18 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

3

p

3

(x) =

2x

√

3π

∞

k=0

W

3

(2k)

_

x

3

_

2k

.

With care, for small α > 0,

_

α

0

p

3

(x)x

s

dx =

2α

s+2

√

3π(s + 2)

+

2α

s+4

3

√

3π(s + 4)

+· · ·

Residues of W

3

(s) come from series coeﬃcients.

Also explains the shape of p

5

.

If p

4

admits a Taylor series around 0, this argument would

give simple poles for W

4

(s), but it has double poles. !?

18 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

3

p

3

(x) =

2x

√

3π

∞

k=0

W

3

(2k)

_

x

3

_

2k

.

With care, for small α > 0,

_

α

0

p

3

(x)x

s

dx =

2α

s+2

√

3π(s + 2)

+

2α

s+4

3

√

3π(s + 4)

+· · ·

Residues of W

3

(s) come from series coeﬃcients.

Also explains the shape of p

5

.

If p

4

admits a Taylor series around 0, this argument would

give simple poles for W

4

(s), but it has double poles. !?

18 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

3

p

3

(x) =

2x

√

3π

k=0

W

3

(2k)

_

x

3

_

2k

.

With care, for small α > 0,

_

α

0

p

3

(x)x

s

dx =

2α

s+2

√

3π(s + 2)

+

2α

s+4

3

√

3π(s + 4)

+· · ·

Residues of W

3

(s) come from series coeﬃcients.

Also explains the shape of p

5

.

If p

4

admits a Taylor series around 0, this argument would

give simple poles for W

4

(s), but it has double poles. !?

18 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

3

p

3

(x) =

2x

√

3π

∞

k=0

W

3

(2k)

_

x

3

_

2k

.

With care, for small α > 0,

_

α

0

p

3

(x)x

s

dx =

2α

s+2

√

3π(s + 2)

+

2α

s+4

3

√

3π(s + 4)

+· · ·

Residues of W

3

(s) come from series coeﬃcients.

Also explains the shape of p

5

.

If p

4

admits a Taylor series around 0, this argument would

give simple poles for W

4

(s), but it has double poles. !?

18 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Series for p

4

Plot p

4

(x) for small x was best done from ﬁrst principles.

Instead of using

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(x)

h

,

I foolishly used

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(h)

x

.

Amazingly, they produced almost the same plot, except mine

was translated up by r ≈ 0.14.

This means p

4

almost satisﬁes the diﬀerential equation

f

(x) + r =

f(x)

x

,

Solution: f(x) = (a −r log x)x, a ≈ 0.33, explaining the

double pole!

19 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Series for p

4

Plot p

4

(x) for small x was best done from ﬁrst principles.

Instead of using

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(x)

h

,

I foolishly used

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(h)

x

.

Amazingly, they produced almost the same plot, except mine

was translated up by r ≈ 0.14.

This means p

4

almost satisﬁes the diﬀerential equation

f

(x) + r =

f(x)

x

,

Solution: f(x) = (a −r log x)x, a ≈ 0.33, explaining the

double pole!

19 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Series for p

4

Plot p

4

(x) for small x was best done from ﬁrst principles.

Instead of using

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(x)

h

,

I foolishly used

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(h)

x

.

Amazingly, they produced almost the same plot, except mine

was translated up by r ≈ 0.14.

This means p

4

almost satisﬁes the diﬀerential equation

f

(x) + r =

f(x)

x

,

Solution: f(x) = (a −r log x)x, a ≈ 0.33, explaining the

double pole!

19 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Series for p

4

Plot p

(x) for small x was best done from ﬁrst principles.

Instead of using

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(x)

h

,

I foolishly used

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(h)

x

.

Amazingly, they produced almost the same plot, except mine

was translated up by r ≈ 0.14.

This means p

4

almost satisﬁes the diﬀerential equation

f

f(x)

x

,

Solution: f(x) = (a −r log x)x, a ≈ 0.33, explaining the

double pole!

19 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Series for p

4

Plot p

(x) for small x was best done from ﬁrst principles.

Instead of using

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(x)

h

,

I foolishly used

lim

h→0

p

4

(x + h) −p

4

(h)

x

.

Amazingly, they produced almost the same plot, except mine

was translated up by r ≈ 0.14.

This means p

4

almost satisﬁes the diﬀerential equation

f

(x) + r =

f(x)

x

,

Solution: f(x) = (a −r log x)x, a ≈ 0.33, explaining the

double pole!

19 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

4

To be consistent, we must have:

p

4

(x) =

∞

n=1

_

a

4

(n) −r

4

(n) log x

_

x

2n−1

,

a

4

(n): residues at −2n; r

4

(n): coeﬃcients of the double pole.

Guessed that p

4

satisﬁes a DE, shared by the g.f. for W

4

(2k)

(c.f. p

3

), and is a solution with a logarithmic singularity.

DE rigorously produced by Mellin transform, PDE regularity,

and a Gosper type algorithm.

More work on modular forms:

Theorem (3) Borwein, Straub, W., Zudilin (2010)

p

4

(x) =

2

√

16 −x

2

π

2

x

Re

3

F

2

_

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

5

6

,

7

6

¸

¸

¸

¸

(16 −x

2

)

3

108x

4

_

.

20 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

4

To be consistent, we must have:

p

4

(x) =

∞

n=1

_

a

4

(n) −r

4

(n) log x

_

x

2n−1

,

a

4

(n): residues at −2n; r

4

(n): coeﬃcients of the double pole.

Guessed that p

4

satisﬁes a DE, shared by the g.f. for W

4

(2k)

(c.f. p

3

), and is a solution with a logarithmic singularity.

DE rigorously produced by Mellin transform, PDE regularity,

and a Gosper type algorithm.

More work on modular forms:

Theorem (3) Borwein, Straub, W., Zudilin (2010)

p

4

(x) =

2

√

16 −x

2

π

2

x

Re

3

F

2

_

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

5

6

,

7

6

¸

¸

¸

¸

(16 −x

2

)

3

108x

4

_

.

20 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

4

To be consistent, we must have:

p

4

(x) =

∞

n=1

_

a

4

(n) −r

4

(n) log x

_

x

2n−1

,

a

4

(n): residues at −2n; r

4

(n): coeﬃcients of the double pole.

Guessed that p

4

satisﬁes a DE, shared by the g.f. for W

4

(2k)

(c.f. p

3

), and is a solution with a logarithmic singularity.

DE rigorously produced by Mellin transform, PDE regularity,

and a Gosper type algorithm.

More work on modular forms:

Theorem (3) Borwein, Straub, W., Zudilin (2010)

p

4

(x) =

2

√

16 −x

2

π

2

x

Re

3

F

2

_

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

5

6

,

7

6

¸

¸

¸

¸

(16 −x

2

)

3

108x

4

_

.

20 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

Closed form for p

4

To be consistent, we must have:

p

4

(x) =

∞

n=1

_

a

4

(n) −r

4

(n) log x

_

x

2n−1

,

a

4

(n): residues at −2n; r

4

(n): coeﬃcients of the double pole.

Guessed that p

4

satisﬁes a DE, shared by the g.f. for W

4

(2k)

(c.f. p

3

), and is a solution with a logarithmic singularity.

DE rigorously produced by Mellin transform, PDE regularity,

and a Gosper type algorithm.

More work on modular forms:

Theorem (3) Borwein, Straub, W., Zudilin (2010)

p

4

(x) =

2

√

16 −x

2

π

2

x

Re

3

F

2

_

1

2

,

1

2

,

1

2

5

6

,

7

6

¸

¸

¸

¸

(16 −x

2

)

3

108x

4

_

.

20 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

“Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a

computer. Art is everything else we do.” – Donald Knuth

“Mathematics is much less formally complete and precise than

computer programs.” – William Thurston

Thank you!

J. M. Borwein, D. Nuyens, A. Straub, J. Wan

Some arithmetic properties of short random walk integrals.

Ramanujan Journal, 26, (2011), 109–132.

J. M. Borwein, A. Straub, J. Wan

Three-step and four-step random walk integrals. Experimental

Mathematics, 22, (2013), 1–14.

J. M. Borwein, A. Straub, J. Wan, W. Zudilin (& D. Zagier)

Densities of short uniform random walks. Canadian Journal of

Mathematics, 64, (2012), 961–990.

21 / 21

Intro Random walk Densities Expectations 3 and 4 steps

“Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a

computer. Art is everything else we do.” – Donald Knuth

“Mathematics is much less formally complete and precise than

computer programs.” – William Thurston

Thank you!

J. M. Borwein, D. Nuyens, A. Straub, J. Wan

Some arithmetic properties of short random walk integrals.

Ramanujan Journal, 26, (2011), 109–132.

J. M. Borwein, A. Straub, J. Wan

Three-step and four-step random walk integrals. Experimental

Mathematics, 22, (2013), 1–14.

J. M. Borwein, A. Straub, J. Wan, W. Zudilin (& D. Zagier)

Densities of short uniform random walks. Canadian Journal of

Mathematics, 64, (2012), 961–990.

21 / 21

- CircleUploaded byjetxz
- This is Interactive MathematicsUploaded byShukrani Ndauka
- 9ABS302 Mathematics IIIUploaded bysivabharathamurthy
- Introduction to Actuarial Science - ElementaryUploaded byPolelar
- Finding the PI Value and Proving the Formulas of Circle Area and Circumference CalculationsUploaded byAgus Nasir
- 09 FindingfUploaded bySachithHiroshanaWijethunga
- zeta2Uploaded byIoana Suciu
- RandomUploaded byeviews
- Stat RevUploaded byLeo Balverde Malagar
- Math Research Final PaperUploaded byChristopher Bradley
- Gauss QuadratureUploaded byAbera Deressa
- Project MgtUploaded byanjaligoyal
- r05012101 Numerical MethodsUploaded bySrinivasa Rao G
- Risk Analysis TemplateUploaded bysociatte
- rss15-mrst SPE PAPER.pdfUploaded byWlad Cha
- PreCalc1Uploaded byareddy_b
- Manual IDEC FC5A AdvancedUploaded byJoako Filipovich
- New Microsoft Office Word Document (2)Uploaded byAmy Smith
- Fungsi TrigonometriUploaded byAbdul Manaf
- T1-7 T.pdfUploaded bymyasmreg
- Sample Assessment Materials Model Answers–Pure for as and a Level MathematicsUploaded bynaz2you
- 9795_s14_qp_1Uploaded byRoger Chau
- integralUploaded byWilliam Agudelo
- biophysics final projectUploaded byapi-291457308
- AP Calculus Summer Packet 2015Uploaded byAnonymous ylMh90F
- Analyzing Structural MembersUploaded byKishore Bhat
- 3 Discrete Random Variables and Probability DistributionsUploaded byRenukadevi Rpt
- AM-sln-08(E)Uploaded byapi-3842687
- h alg 2 t10 3 filled inUploaded byapi-261379705
- javascript mini booksUploaded byEdwin Wong

- My Class ScheduleUploaded byrayquaza_hyperbeam6916
- Final Report Group 1Uploaded byrayquaza_hyperbeam6916
- Rachmaninoff - Piano Concerto No.4 Op.40 Orchestra ScoreUploaded byrayquaza_hyperbeam6916
- Piazzolla - AVE MARIA - Score - Vo PfUploaded byrayquaza_hyperbeam6916
- Love Story Meets Viva La Vida (Piano and Cello) - Jon SchmidtUploaded byrayquaza_hyperbeam6916