2

(This exercise is pulled from a past real analysis qualifying exam.) Let $\alpha, \beta$ be nonnegative real numbers. For precisely what set of pairs $(\alpha, \beta)$ do we have \begin{align} \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) < \infty ? \end{align}

Admittedly, I'm not sure what angle to attack this problem from. One possible way is to look at it from a "growth rates" perspective. Pick $\alpha$ and $\beta$ that cause $n^\alpha$ to grow either at the same rate as or faster than $\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k)$. But how could I even begin to try and check what $\alpha$'s and $\beta$'s work here? The numerator $\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k)$ is a summation, while the denominator $n^\alpha$ is a product.

Here is another perspective I thought of: If we have \begin{align} \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) = M \end{align} then $\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k)$ tends to $Mn^\alpha$ as $n$ tends to $\infty$. But it is difficult for me to imagine any situation where the function starts to "look" like the function on the right. Assume for instance $\beta = 1$. Then, $$\sum_{k=1}^n k \log(k) = \log\left(\prod_{k=1}^n k^k\right)~.$$

One more idea is to think of $$f(k) = \frac{1}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k)$$ as a measurable funciton over ($\mathbb{N}$,$2^\mathbb{N}$, $c$). Now our problem is to find $\alpha, \beta$ for which $\int_\mathbb{N} f$ is finite over this measure space.

What should I look for to get this problem done? I believe with a well-worded hint I can get this figured out.

nmasanta
  • 9,640
  • 2
    $\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) \le \log(n)\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \lesssim \log(n)n^{\beta+1}$, so $\alpha > \beta+1$ works. And, for any $M \ge 1$, for $n \ge M$, $\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) \ge \sum_{k=M}^n k^\beta \log(k) \ge \log(M)\sum_{k=M}^n k^\beta \gtrsim \log(M) n^{\beta+1}$, so you can't have $\alpha \le \beta+1$. – mathworker21 Aug 31 '19 at 04:11
  • @mathworker21 What does the symbol $\lesssim$ mean, please? – saulspatz Aug 31 '19 at 05:54
  • @saulspatz $\le C$ for some absolute $C$. for the $\gtrsim$ I used, you probably need $n \ge 2M$ – mathworker21 Aug 31 '19 at 06:06
  • @mathworker21 Thank you. I suspected that was it, but I couldn't figure out how to Google it. – saulspatz Aug 31 '19 at 06:07

3 Answers3

2

The denominator $n^\alpha$ is increasing and unbounded in $n$, so that the Stolz–Cesàro theorem can be applied: $$ \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) = \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{n^\beta \log(n)}{n^\alpha - (n-1)^\alpha} $$ if the latter limit exists (as a finite value or $\infty$). From the mean-value theorem we get that $$ n^\alpha - (n-1)^\alpha = \alpha n^{\alpha - 1} (1+o(1)) $$ so that $$ \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{n^\beta \log(n)}{n^\alpha - (n-1)^\alpha} = \frac 1 \alpha \lim_{n \to \infty} n^{\beta - \alpha +1} \log(n) $$ and that is zero if $\beta - \alpha + 1 < 0$, and $\infty$ otherwise. It follows that $$ \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{1}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) = \begin{cases} 0 & \text{if } \beta - \alpha + 1 < 0 \, ,\\ \infty & \text{if } \beta - \alpha + 1 \ge 0 \, . \end{cases} $$

Martin R
  • 128,226
1

From $$\frac{\log{2}}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=2}^n k^\beta < \frac{1}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) < \frac{\log{n}}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta$$ or $$\frac{\log{2}}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta - \frac{\log{2}}{n^\alpha} < \frac{1}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) < \frac{\log{n}}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta$$ or $$\frac{n^{\beta+1}\log{2}}{n^\alpha}\color{red}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n \left(\frac{k}{n}\right)^\beta} - \frac{\log{2}}{n^\alpha} < \frac{1}{n^\alpha}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k) < \frac{n^{\beta+1}\log{n}}{n^\alpha}\color{red}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n \left(\frac{k}{n}\right)^\beta} \tag{1}$$

Now, from this (i.e. Riemann sums) $$\color{red}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n \left(\frac{k}{n}\right)^\beta} \to \int\limits_0^1 x^{\beta}dx=\frac{1}{\beta +1}$$ and this $$\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{\log^k{n}}{n^{\varepsilon}}=0$$

We see that

  • For $\alpha>\beta+1$ both LHS and RHS of $(1)$ converge to $0$. Thus the sequence in question converges to $0$ as well.
  • For $\alpha<\beta+1$ LHS of $(1)$ goes to $+\infty$. Thus the sequence in question goes to $+\infty$.

The final part is $\alpha=\beta+1$. This time we have $$\frac{1}{n^{\beta+1}}\sum_{k=1}^n k^\beta \log(k)= \frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n \left(\frac{k}{n}\right)^\beta \left(\log\left(\frac{k}{n}\right)+\log{n}\right)=\\ \color{green}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n \left(\frac{k}{n}\right)^\beta \log\left(\frac{k}{n}\right)}+\log{n}\color{red}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n \left(\frac{k}{n}\right)^\beta}=...$$ and (left as an exercise) $$\color{green}{\frac{1}{n}\sum_{k=1}^n \left(\frac{k}{n}\right)^\beta \log\left(\frac{k}{n}\right)} \to \int\limits_0^1 x^{\beta}\log{x} dx = -\frac{1}{(\beta+1)^2}$$ as a result $$...\sim -\frac{1}{(\beta+1)^2} + \log{n}\cdot \frac{1}{\beta+1} \to +\infty$$

rtybase
  • 17,398
  • -1. why must $\frac{\log n}{n^{\alpha-\beta-1}}$ converge? it's an upper bound. that's why I did the $\log M$ stuff in my comment on the question – mathworker21 Aug 31 '19 at 14:05
  • @mathworker21 it's a squeeze, don't you see it? – rtybase Aug 31 '19 at 14:49
  • Obviously $\alpha > \beta+1$ is sufficient. I was just asking how you know you can't have $\alpha = \beta+1$? according to you, it's because you have a divergent upper bound and a convergent lower bound – mathworker21 Aug 31 '19 at 15:00
  • Indeed, if it converges, we are good. If LHS diverges, we are not good. And your comment should have been "what about $\alpha=\beta+1$ case?". And a few minutes later, I'd reply with and answer and update. But you already downvoted me without giving me a chance ... – rtybase Aug 31 '19 at 18:30
  • It's not just the "$\alpha = \beta+1$ case" I was commenting on though. The logic in your answer is wrong. you say the remaining part is to find $\alpha,\beta$ for which those two both converge. that does just not logically follow. of course, since the LHS diverges for $\alpha < \beta+1$, you end up with $\alpha \ge \beta+1$ and then just need to address $\alpha = \beta+1$. But my point was that the logic in your post is flawed. That was why I asked "why must $\frac{\log n}{n^{\alpha-\beta-1}}$ converge. – mathworker21 Aug 31 '19 at 18:32
  • Now you understand why my first comment was what it was. Furthermore, I hope you see why your response to that first comment was very inadequate, since I was not asking if we're good or not when it converges. In regards to the downvote, I downvote bad answers. Downvotes are not permanent. If you make the answer good, I'll remove the downvote and possibly upvote. I hope all is clear now. Regards, mathworker21 – mathworker21 Aug 31 '19 at 18:34
  • @mathworker21 you asked, I fixed. – rtybase Aug 31 '19 at 20:12
  • +1, though first "sentence" is a fragment. also, there should be commas before "or" to avoid ambiguity (if there are no commas, then it sounds like you're giving two options) – mathworker21 Aug 31 '19 at 20:46
1

Note that $x^\beta \log x$ is monotonically increasing for $\beta \in [0,\infty)$, hence

$$\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}k^\beta \log k < \int_1^nx^\beta \log x\;dx < \sum_{k=2}^nk^\beta \log k = \sum_{k=1}^nk^\beta \log k$$ or with obviously defined notation: $$S_{n-1}(\beta) < I_n(\beta) < S_n(\beta)$$

Using integration by parts we find \begin{align*} I_n(\beta) &= \int_1^n \underbrace{\log x}_{u}\underbrace{x^\beta\;dx}_{dv} = \frac{n^{\beta+1} \log n}{\beta+1} - \frac{1}{\beta+1} \int_1^nx^{\beta+1}\;\frac{dx}{x}\\ &= \frac{n^{\beta+1}\log n}{\beta+1} - \frac{n^{\beta+1}-1}{(\beta+1)^2}\\ &=\frac{1}{\beta+1}\left(\log n - \frac{1}{\beta+1} \right) n^{\beta+1} + \frac{1}{(\beta+1)^2} \end{align*}

then clearly $$\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{I_n(\beta)}{n^\alpha} = \begin{cases} \infty &\text{if $\beta-\alpha+1 \geq 0$,}\\ 0 & \text{if $\beta-\alpha+1 < 0$.} \end{cases}$$

If $\beta-\alpha+1 \geq 0$ then

$$\frac{I_n(\beta)}{n^\alpha} < \frac{S_n(\beta)}{n^\alpha} \to \infty$$

whereas if $\beta-\alpha+1 < 0$

$$ 0 < \frac{S_n}{n^\alpha} = \frac{S_{n-1} + n^\beta \log n}{n^\alpha} < \frac{I_n}{n^\alpha} + \underbrace{n^{\beta-\alpha+1} \frac{\log n}{n}}_{\to\, 0} \to 0 $$

adfriedman
  • 3,722
  • 1
  • 15
  • 13
  • I like this answer the most because it's self-contained and solves the problem using only knowledge from calculus – redlaserbm Aug 31 '19 at 21:54