The document presents an alternative proof of the derangements formula, which gives the number of permutations where no elements map to themselves. It starts with a recurrence relation for the number of derangements and uses that to obtain a second recurrence relation by subtracting a term. Solving this new recurrence relation yields the standard derangements formula normally proven using inclusion-exclusion.
The document presents an alternative proof of the derangements formula, which gives the number of permutations where no elements map to themselves. It starts with a recurrence relation for the number of derangements and uses that to obtain a second recurrence relation by subtracting a term. Solving this new recurrence relation yields the standard derangements formula normally proven using inclusion-exclusion.
The document presents an alternative proof of the derangements formula, which gives the number of permutations where no elements map to themselves. It starts with a recurrence relation for the number of derangements and uses that to obtain a second recurrence relation by subtracting a term. Solving this new recurrence relation yields the standard derangements formula normally proven using inclusion-exclusion.
A derangement is a permutation in which none of the elements is mapped to
itself. The formula for the number of derangements on elements is
This formula is normally proved using inclusion-exclusion (and, in fact, it is one
of the classic illustrations of inclusion-exclusion). A few days ago on math.SE robjohn posted a nice proof of this formula that I had never seen before. It starts with the recurrence relation and initial conditions . (The recurrence relation can be proved combinatorially; see robjohns post or mine on the same question.) Then, subtract from both sides of the recurrence relation to get Let With