Paper detail

Parity biases in partitions and restricted partitions

Let $p_{o}(n)$ (resp. $p_{e}(n)$) denote the number of partitions of $n$ with more odd parts (resp. even parts) than even parts (resp. odd parts). Recently, Kim, Kim, and Lovejoy proved that $p_{o}(n)>p_{e}(n)$ for all $n>2$ and conjectured that $d_{o}(n)>d_{e}(n)$ for all $n>19$ where $d_{o}(n)$ (resp. $d_{e}(n)$) denote the number of partitions into distinct parts having more odd parts (resp. even parts) than even parts (resp. odd parts). In this paper we provide combinatorial proofs for both the result and the conjecture of Kim, Kim and Lovejoy. In addition, we show that if we restrict the smallest part of the partition to be $2$, then the parity bias is reversed. That is, if $q_{o}(n)$ (resp. $q_{e}(n)$) denote the number of partitions of $n$ with more odd parts (resp. even parts) than even parts (resp. odd parts) where the smallest part is at least $2$, then we have $q_o(n)<q_e(n)$ for all $n>7$. We also look at some more parity biases in partitions with restricted parts.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.