Talk:Composition (combinatorics)
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
{{WikiProject Mathematics|importance = low}}
}}
Untitled
Why not add the "more refined argument shows that the number of compositions of n into exactly k parts is given by the binomial coefficient"
Basically the same array is used but choose (k-1) places to put commas and fill the rest with plusses. This can be placed 1-1 with compositions into k parts. There are (n-1) boxes, hence the result. This is not more refined but quite understandable (A1jrj (talk) 18:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC))
This is also easily understandable from the fact that 2^k = (1+1)^k, and then just use the binomial coefficient. 77.127.178.95 (talk) 21:30, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Lacks a definition
Inaccurate statement
The statement "This is a power of two, because every composition matches a binary number" is not quite correct. The "matches" have to exhaust (the binary representations of) the integers in the set {0, 1, ..., 2^(n-1) - 1} or some other set with cardinality 2^(n-1). Ed Jeffery (talk) 06:41, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
: Indeed, I've removed the nonsense sentence.
"Composition (number theory" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Composition (number theory and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#Composition (number theory until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:59, 27 October 2022 (UTC)