Proof of the recurrence for derangements by the image of the last point
Builds on DerangementPermutationRule of sumBijection principle
Proof
We sort the derangements by the image of the last point and count each class by a bijection.
- Conjugating by a bijection between two sets with elements matches their derangements. So by the bijection principle, depends only on .
- Let be a natural number, let , let , and let . So .
- Let be a derangement of . Then , so .
- Fix . Let be the set of derangements of with . Split into , where , and , where .
- Count . Let , a set with elements. For , maps onto itself, so its restriction to is a permutation of .
- This restriction has no fixed point, since has none. Conversely, a derangement of extended by and lies in .
- These two maps are inverse to each other. So .
- Count . For , let . Then because , and because .
- Define by and for . These values lie in , since only is sent to by .
- The map is a bijection of . Indeed, maps onto , since and . Adding gives all of .
- The map has no fixed point. For , . Also by step 8.
- Conversely, let be a derangement of , and let . Define on by , , and for the other .
- This is a permutation of , because maps onto , and adds and . It has no fixed point: , , and otherwise.
- Moreover . Otherwise , so , which is false for a derangement. Thus .
- The constructions of steps 9 and 12 are inverse to each other. Starting from , we get , so step 12 recovers the same and then . Starting from , we get , so step 9 recovers . Hence .
- By the rule of sum, .
- By step 3, the derangements of are the disjoint union of the sets for the elements .
- By the rule of sum, .
Idea
Look at where the last point goes, say to . If also sends back to , removing the swap leaves a derangement of points. Otherwise, short-circuiting out of leaves a derangement of points.
Reading path
To understand this page from the ground up, read these 39 pages in order. The foundations come first. The path takes the proofs Proof that a composition of injections is injective, Proof that a function is bijective iff it has a two-sided inverse, Proof that a composition of surjections is surjective, Proof of the rule of sum, Proof of the bijection principle.
Show the path as a graph
- no evidence level
- Cardinality of a finite set definition
- Element definition
- Permutation definition
- Proposition concept
- Set definition
- Derangement definition
- Conjunction definition
- Implication definition
- Predicate definition
- Empty set object
- Ordered pair definition
- Intersection definition
- Existential quantifier definition
- Universal quantifier definition
- Cartesian product definition
- Disjoint sets definition
- Subset definition
- Uniqueness quantifier definition
- Binary relation definition
- Function definition
- Codomain definition
- Function composition definition
- Identity function definition
- Injective function definition
- Surjective function definition
- Left inverse definition
- Right inverse definition
- Proof that a composition of injections is injective proof
- Proof that a composition of surjections is surjective proof
- Bijective function definition
- Composition of injections is injective statement
- Composition of surjections is surjective statement
- Proof of the rule of sum proof
- Proof that a function is bijective iff it has a two-sided inverse proof
- Rule of sum statement
- Bijective iff it has a two-sided inverse statement
- Proof of the bijection principle proof
- Bijection principle statement
- Proof of the recurrence for derangements by the image of the last point proof
Where this leads
1 page builds on this one.
Further reading
- Web https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derangement, Counting derangements
About this page
| Tag | G1ST9Y1DEP |
|---|---|
| URI | m2://G1ST9Y1DEP |
| Kind | proof |
| Writing | W0 stub |
| MSC | 05A05 |
| Proves | Recurrence for derangements |
| Uses | Derangement, Permutation, Rule of sum, Bijection principle |
| Changed | 4 November 2026 |
Markdown · JSON · Edit on GitHub
What this page needs for W1
- an inventory row: the row of the inventory that the node accounts for (0 of 1)
The writing levels say how complete the text of a page is. They do not measure its truth.
What links here
No page links to this page yet.