1: \input amstex

2: 

3: 

4: \input texdraw

5: \input epsf

6: 

7: \documentstyle{amsppt}

8: %\magnification=\magstep1

9: \pagewidth{5.5truein}

10: \hcorrection{0.55in}

11: \pageheight{7.5truein}\vcorrection{0.75in}

12: %\pagewidth{6.48truein}%\hcorrection{0.55in}

13: %\pageheight{9.0truein}%\vcorrection{0.75in}

14: \TagsOnRight

15: \NoRunningHeads

16: 

17: 

18: 

19: \catcode`\@=11

20: \font@\twelverm=cmr10 scaled\magstep1

21: \font@\twelveit=cmti10 scaled\magstep1

22: \font@\twelvebf=cmbx10 scaled\magstep1

23: \font@\twelvei=cmmi10 scaled\magstep1

24: \font@\twelvesy=cmsy10 scaled\magstep1

25: \font@\twelveex=cmex10 scaled\magstep1

26: 

27: \font@\fourteenrm=cmr10 scaled\magstep2

28: \font@\fourteenit=cmti10 scaled\magstep2

29: \font@\fourteensl=cmsl10 scaled\magstep2

30: \font@\fourteensmc=cmcsc10 scaled\magstep2

31: \font@\fourteentt=cmtt10 scaled\magstep2

32: \font@\fourteenbf=cmbx10 scaled\magstep2

33: \font@\fourteeni=cmmi10 scaled\magstep2

34: \font@\fourteensy=cmsy10 scaled\magstep2

35: \font@\fourteenex=cmex10 scaled\magstep2

36: \font@\fourteenmsa=msam10 scaled\magstep2

37: \font@\fourteeneufm=eufm10 scaled\magstep2

38: \font@\fourteenmsb=msbm10 scaled\magstep2

39: \newtoks\fourteenpoint@

40: \def\fourteenpoint{\normalbaselineskip15\p@

41:  \abovedisplayskip18\p@ plus4.3\p@ minus12.9\p@

42:  \belowdisplayskip\abovedisplayskip

43:  \abovedisplayshortskip\z@ plus4.3\p@

44:  \belowdisplayshortskip10.1\p@ plus4.3\p@ minus5.8\p@

45:  \textonlyfont@\rm\fourteenrm \textonlyfont@\it\fourteenit

46:  \textonlyfont@\sl\fourteensl \textonlyfont@\bf\fourteenbf

47:  \textonlyfont@\smc\fourteensmc \textonlyfont@\tt\fourteentt

48: %Erg\"anzung des fetten Small-Capitals-Fonts:

49: %

50:  \ifsyntax@ \def\big##1{{\hbox{$\left##1\right.$}}}%

51:   \let\Big\big \let\bigg\big \let\Bigg\big

52:  \else

53:   \textfont\z@=\fourteenrm  \scriptfont\z@=\twelverm  \scriptscriptfont\z@=\tenrm

54:   \textfont\@ne=\fourteeni  \scriptfont\@ne=\twelvei  \scriptscriptfont\@ne=\teni

55:   \textfont\tw@=\fourteensy \scriptfont\tw@=\twelvesy \scriptscriptfont\tw@=\tensy

56:   \textfont\thr@@=\fourteenex \scriptfont\thr@@=\twelveex

57:         \scriptscriptfont\thr@@=\twelveex

58:   \textfont\itfam=\fourteenit \scriptfont\itfam=\twelveit

59:         \scriptscriptfont\itfam=\twelveit

60:   \textfont\bffam=\fourteenbf \scriptfont\bffam=\twelvebf

61:         \scriptscriptfont\bffam=\tenbf

62:   \setbox\strutbox\hbox{\vrule height12.2\p@ depth5\p@ width\z@}%

63:   \setbox\strutbox@\hbox{\lower.72\normallineskiplimit\vbox{%

64:         \kern-\normallineskiplimit\copy\strutbox}}%

65:  \setbox\z@\vbox{\hbox{$($}\kern\z@}\bigsize@=1.7\ht\z@

66:  \fi

67:  \normalbaselines\rm\ex@.2326ex\jot4.3\ex@\the\fourteenpoint@}

68: \catcode`\@=13

69: 

70: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

71: %Input-Datei zum Erzeugen von Gitterpunktwegen.%

72: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

73: %entering a path: 

74: %  \Pfad(x-coordinate of starting point,y-coordinate of starting point),path

75: %  as 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-word\endPfad

76: %(1=step in x-direction, 2=step in y-direction, 3=upward diagonal step, 4=downward diagonal step)

77: %(5=step in negative x-direction, 6=step in negative y-direction, 7=downward left diagonal step, 8=upward left diagonal step)

78: %

79: %entering a dotted path: 

80: %  \SPfad(x-coordinate of starting point,y-coordinate of starting point),path

81: %  as 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-word\endSPfad

82: %(1=step in x-direction, 2=step in y-direction, 3=upward diagonal step, 4=downward diagonal step)

83: %(5=step in negative x-direction, 6=step in negative y-direction, 7=downward left diagonal step, 8=upward left diagonal step)

84: %

85: %coordinate-axes:

86: %  \Koordinatenachsen(length of positive x-axes, length of positive y-axes)(length of negative x-axes, length of negative y-axes)

87: %The length of negative axes are entered as negative numbers.

88: %

89: %lattice:

90: %  \Gitter(number of points in positive x-direction, number of points in positive y-direction)(number of points in negative x-direction, number of points in negative y-direction)

91: %

92: %diagonal lines:

93: %  \Diagonale(x-coordinate of SW-most point,y-coordinate of SW-most point)length of the projection on the x-axes

94: %

95: %antidiagonal lines:

96: %  \AntiDiagonale(x-coordinate of NW-most point,y-coordinate of NW-most point)length of the projection on the x-axes

97: %

98: %vectors:

99: %  \Vektor(x-coordinate of incline, y-coordinate of incline)length(x-coordinate of starting point, y-coordinate of starting point)

100: %

101: %labelling of points:

102: %  \Label[location?]{[label]}(x-coordinate,y-coordinate)

103: %where:

104: %  [location?]=\l,\lo,\lu,\r,\ro,\ru,\o,\u

105: %and l=left, r=right, u=bottom, o=top.

106: %In addition, if by \Einheit?cm the basic unit is changed, there exist

107: %\llo,\loo,\llu,\luu,\rro,\roo,\rru,\ruu.

108: %

109: %The basic unit can be changed by entering

110: %  \Einheit=?cm

111: %The default is \Einheit=0.5cm.

112: %

113: %The thickness of the paths can be changed by entering

114: %     \PfadDicke{?cm}

115: %The default is \PfadDicke=1pt.

116: %

117: %The following point sizes are available:

118: %\DuennPunkt, \NormalPunkt, \DickPunkt. Syntax:

119: %  \DickPunkt(x-coordinate,y-coordinate), etc.

120: %

121: %Besides, a circle is available by \Kreis. Syntax:

122: %  \Kreis(x-coordinate,y-coordinate)

123: %

124: \catcode`\@=11

125: \font\tenln    = line10

126: \font\tenlnw   = linew10

127: 

128: \newskip\Einheit \Einheit=0.5cm

129: \newcount\xcoord \newcount\ycoord

130: \newdimen\xdim \newdimen\ydim \newdimen\PfadD@cke \newdimen\Pfadd@cke

131: 

132: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

133: %LaTeX counters, dimensions, variables for lines%

134: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

135: \newcount\@tempcnta

136: \newcount\@tempcntb

137: 

138: \newdimen\@tempdima

139: \newdimen\@tempdimb

140: 

141: 

142: \newdimen\@wholewidth

143: \newdimen\@halfwidth

144: 

145: \newcount\@xarg

146: \newcount\@yarg

147: \newcount\@yyarg

148: \newbox\@linechar

149: \newbox\@tempboxa

150: \newdimen\@linelen

151: \newdimen\@clnwd

152: \newdimen\@clnht

153: 

154: \newif\if@negarg

155: 

156: \def\@whilenoop#1{}

157: \def\@whiledim#1\do #2{\ifdim #1\relax#2\@iwhiledim{#1\relax#2}\fi}

158: \def\@iwhiledim#1{\ifdim #1\let\@nextwhile=\@iwhiledim

159:         \else\let\@nextwhile=\@whilenoop\fi\@nextwhile{#1}}

160: 

161: \def\@whileswnoop#1\fi{}

162: \def\@whilesw#1\fi#2{#1#2\@iwhilesw{#1#2}\fi\fi}

163: \def\@iwhilesw#1\fi{#1\let\@nextwhile=\@iwhilesw

164:          \else\let\@nextwhile=\@whileswnoop\fi\@nextwhile{#1}\fi}

165: 

166: 

167: \def\thinlines{\let\@linefnt\tenln \let\@circlefnt\tencirc

168:   \@wholewidth\fontdimen8\tenln \@halfwidth .5\@wholewidth}

169: \def\thicklines{\let\@linefnt\tenlnw \let\@circlefnt\tencircw

170:   \@wholewidth\fontdimen8\tenlnw \@halfwidth .5\@wholewidth}

171: \thinlines

172: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

173: 

174: \PfadD@cke1pt \Pfadd@cke0.5pt

175: \def\PfadDicke#1{\PfadD@cke#1 \divide\PfadD@cke by2 \Pfadd@cke\PfadD@cke \multiply\PfadD@cke by2}

176: \long\def\LOOP#1\REPEAT{\def\BODY{#1}\ITERATE}

177: \def\ITERATE{\BODY \let\next\ITERATE \else\let\next\relax\fi \next}

178: \let\REPEAT=\fi

179: \def\Punkt{\hbox{\raise-2pt\hbox to0pt{\hss$\ssize\bullet$\hss}}}

180: \def\DuennPunkt(#1,#2){\unskip

181:   \raise#2 \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip#1 \Einheit

182:           \raise-2.5pt\hbox to0pt{\hss$\bullet$\hss}\hss}}

183: \def\NormalPunkt(#1,#2){\unskip

184:   \raise#2 \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip#1 \Einheit

185:           \raise-3pt\hbox to0pt{\hss\twelvepoint$\bullet$\hss}\hss}}

186: \def\DickPunkt(#1,#2){\unskip

187:   \raise#2 \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip#1 \Einheit

188:           \raise-4pt\hbox to0pt{\hss\fourteenpoint$\bullet$\hss}\hss}}

189: \def\Kreis(#1,#2){\unskip

190:   \raise#2 \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip#1 \Einheit

191:           \raise-4pt\hbox to0pt{\hss\fourteenpoint$\circ$\hss}\hss}}

192: 

193: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

194: %LaTeX line macros%

195: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

196: \def\Line@(#1,#2)#3{\@xarg #1\relax \@yarg #2\relax

197: \@linelen=#3\Einheit

198: \ifnum\@xarg =0 \@vline

199:   \else \ifnum\@yarg =0 \@hline \else \@sline\fi

200: \fi}

201: 

202: \def\@sline{\ifnum\@xarg< 0 \@negargtrue \@xarg -\@xarg \@yyarg -\@yarg

203:   \else \@negargfalse \@yyarg \@yarg \fi

204: \ifnum \@yyarg >0 \@tempcnta\@yyarg \else \@tempcnta -\@yyarg \fi

205: \ifnum\@tempcnta>6 \@badlinearg\@tempcnta0 \fi

206: \ifnum\@xarg>6 \@badlinearg\@xarg 1 \fi

207: \setbox\@linechar\hbox{\@linefnt\@getlinechar(\@xarg,\@yyarg)}%

208: \ifnum \@yarg >0 \let\@upordown\raise \@clnht\z@

209:    \else\let\@upordown\lower \@clnht \ht\@linechar\fi

210: \@clnwd=\wd\@linechar

211: \if@negarg \hskip -\wd\@linechar \def\@tempa{\hskip -2\wd\@linechar}\else

212:      \let\@tempa\relax \fi

213: \@whiledim \@clnwd <\@linelen \do

214:   {\@upordown\@clnht\copy\@linechar

215:    \@tempa

216:    \advance\@clnht \ht\@linechar

217:    \advance\@clnwd \wd\@linechar}%

218: \advance\@clnht -\ht\@linechar

219: \advance\@clnwd -\wd\@linechar

220: \@tempdima\@linelen\advance\@tempdima -\@clnwd

221: \@tempdimb\@tempdima\advance\@tempdimb -\wd\@linechar

222: \if@negarg \hskip -\@tempdimb \else \hskip \@tempdimb \fi

223: \multiply\@tempdima \@m

224: \@tempcnta \@tempdima \@tempdima \wd\@linechar \divide\@tempcnta \@tempdima

225: \@tempdima \ht\@linechar \multiply\@tempdima \@tempcnta

226: \divide\@tempdima \@m

227: \advance\@clnht \@tempdima

228: \ifdim \@linelen <\wd\@linechar

229:    \hskip \wd\@linechar

230:   \else\@upordown\@clnht\copy\@linechar\fi}

231: 

232: \def\@hline{\ifnum \@xarg <0 \hskip -\@linelen \fi

233: \vrule height\Pfadd@cke width \@linelen depth\Pfadd@cke

234: \ifnum \@xarg <0 \hskip -\@linelen \fi}

235: 

236: \def\@getlinechar(#1,#2){\@tempcnta#1\relax\multiply\@tempcnta 8

237: \advance\@tempcnta -9 \ifnum #2>0 \advance\@tempcnta #2\relax\else

238: \advance\@tempcnta -#2\relax\advance\@tempcnta 64 \fi

239: \char\@tempcnta}

240: 

241: \def\Vektor(#1,#2)#3(#4,#5){\unskip\leavevmode

242:   \xcoord#4\relax \ycoord#5\relax

243:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

244:          \Vector@(#1,#2){#3}\hss}}

245: 

246: \def\Vector@(#1,#2)#3{\@xarg #1\relax \@yarg #2\relax

247: \@tempcnta \ifnum\@xarg<0 -\@xarg\else\@xarg\fi

248: \ifnum\@tempcnta<5\relax

249: \@linelen=#3\Einheit

250: \ifnum\@xarg =0 \@vvector

251:   \else \ifnum\@yarg =0 \@hvector \else \@svector\fi

252: \fi

253: \else\@badlinearg\fi}

254: 

255: \def\@hvector{\@hline\hbox to 0pt{\@linefnt

256: \ifnum \@xarg <0 \@getlarrow(1,0)\hss\else

257:     \hss\@getrarrow(1,0)\fi}}

258: 

259: \def\@vvector{\ifnum \@yarg <0 \@downvector \else \@upvector \fi}

260: 

261: \def\@svector{\@sline

262: \@tempcnta\@yarg \ifnum\@tempcnta <0 \@tempcnta=-\@tempcnta\fi

263: \ifnum\@tempcnta <5

264:   \hskip -\wd\@linechar

265:   \@upordown\@clnht \hbox{\@linefnt  \if@negarg

266:   \@getlarrow(\@xarg,\@yyarg) \else \@getrarrow(\@xarg,\@yyarg) \fi}%

267: \else\@badlinearg\fi}

268: 

269: \def\@upline{\hbox to \z@{\hskip -.5\Pfadd@cke \vrule width \Pfadd@cke

270:    height \@linelen depth \z@\hss}}

271: 

272: \def\@downline{\hbox to \z@{\hskip -.5\Pfadd@cke \vrule width \Pfadd@cke

273:    height \z@ depth \@linelen \hss}}

274: 

275: \def\@upvector{\@upline\setbox\@tempboxa\hbox{\@linefnt\char'66}\raise

276:      \@linelen \hbox to\z@{\lower \ht\@tempboxa\box\@tempboxa\hss}}

277: 

278: \def\@downvector{\@downline\lower \@linelen

279:       \hbox to \z@{\@linefnt\char'77\hss}}

280: 

281: \def\@getlarrow(#1,#2){\ifnum #2 =\z@ \@tempcnta='33\else

282: \@tempcnta=#1\relax\multiply\@tempcnta \sixt@@n \advance\@tempcnta

283: -9 \@tempcntb=#2\relax\multiply\@tempcntb \tw@

284: \ifnum \@tempcntb >0 \advance\@tempcnta \@tempcntb\relax

285: \else\advance\@tempcnta -\@tempcntb\advance\@tempcnta 64

286: \fi\fi\char\@tempcnta}

287: 

288: \def\@getrarrow(#1,#2){\@tempcntb=#2\relax

289: \ifnum\@tempcntb < 0 \@tempcntb=-\@tempcntb\relax\fi

290: \ifcase \@tempcntb\relax \@tempcnta='55 \or

291: \ifnum #1<3 \@tempcnta=#1\relax\multiply\@tempcnta

292: 24 \advance\@tempcnta -6 \else \ifnum #1=3 \@tempcnta=49

293: \else\@tempcnta=58 \fi\fi\or

294: \ifnum #1<3 \@tempcnta=#1\relax\multiply\@tempcnta

295: 24 \advance\@tempcnta -3 \else \@tempcnta=51\fi\or

296: \@tempcnta=#1\relax\multiply\@tempcnta

297: \sixt@@n \advance\@tempcnta -\tw@ \else

298: \@tempcnta=#1\relax\multiply\@tempcnta

299: \sixt@@n \advance\@tempcnta 7 \fi\ifnum #2<0 \advance\@tempcnta 64 \fi

300: \char\@tempcnta}

301: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

302: 

303: \def\Diagonale(#1,#2)#3{\unskip\leavevmode

304:   \xcoord#1\relax \ycoord#2\relax

305:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

306:          \Line@(1,1){#3}\hss}}

307: \def\AntiDiagonale(#1,#2)#3{\unskip\leavevmode

308:   \xcoord#1\relax \ycoord#2\relax %\advance\xcoord by -0.05\relax

309:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

310:          \Line@(1,-1){#3}\hss}}

311: \def\Pfad(#1,#2),#3\endPfad{\unskip\leavevmode

312:   \xcoord#1 \ycoord#2 \thicklines\ZeichnePfad#3\endPfad\thinlines}

313: \def\ZeichnePfad#1{\ifx#1\endPfad\let\next\relax

314:   \else\let\next\ZeichnePfad

315:     \ifnum#1=1

316:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

317:          \vrule height\Pfadd@cke width1 \Einheit depth\Pfadd@cke\hss}%

318:       \advance\xcoord by 1

319:     \else\ifnum#1=2

320:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

321:         \hbox{\hskip-\PfadD@cke\vrule height1 \Einheit width\PfadD@cke depth0pt}\hss}%

322:       \advance\ycoord by 1

323:     \else\ifnum#1=3

324:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

325:          \Line@(1,1){1}\hss}

326:       \advance\xcoord by 1

327:       \advance\ycoord by 1

328:     \else\ifnum#1=4

329:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

330:          \Line@(1,-1){1}\hss}

331:       \advance\xcoord by 1

332:       \advance\ycoord by -1

333:     \else\ifnum#1=5

334:       \advance\xcoord by -1

335:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

336:          \vrule height\Pfadd@cke width1 \Einheit depth\Pfadd@cke\hss}%

337:     \else\ifnum#1=6

338:       \advance\ycoord by -1

339:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

340:         \hbox{\hskip-\PfadD@cke\vrule height1 \Einheit width\PfadD@cke depth0pt}\hss}%

341:     \else\ifnum#1=7

342:       \advance\xcoord by -1

343:       \advance\ycoord by -1

344:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

345:          \Line@(1,1){1}\hss}

346:     \else\ifnum#1=8

347:       \advance\xcoord by -1

348:       \advance\ycoord by +1

349:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

350:          \Line@(1,-1){1}\hss}

351:     \fi\fi\fi\fi

352:     \fi\fi\fi\fi

353:   \fi\next}

354: \def\hSSchritt{\leavevmode\raise-.4pt\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

355:   \raise-.4pt\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

356:   \raise-.4pt\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

357:   \raise-.4pt\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

358:   \raise-.4pt\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit}

359: \def\vSSchritt{\vbox{\baselineskip.2\Einheit\lineskiplimit0pt

360: \hbox{.}\hbox{.}\hbox{.}\hbox{.}\hbox{.}}}

361: \def\DSSchritt{\leavevmode\raise-.4pt\hbox to0pt{%

362:   \hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

363:   \raise.2\Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

364:   \raise.4\Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

365:   \raise.6\Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

366:   \raise.8\Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hss}}

367: \def\dSSchritt{\leavevmode\raise-.4pt\hbox to0pt{%

368:   \hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

369:   \raise-.2\Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

370:   \raise-.4\Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

371:   \raise-.6\Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hskip.2\Einheit

372:   \raise-.8\Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hss.\hss}\hss}}

373: \def\SPfad(#1,#2),#3\endSPfad{\unskip\leavevmode

374:   \xcoord#1 \ycoord#2 \ZeichneSPfad#3\endSPfad}

375: \def\ZeichneSPfad#1{\ifx#1\endSPfad\let\next\relax

376:   \else\let\next\ZeichneSPfad

377:     \ifnum#1=1

378:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

379:          \hSSchritt\hss}%

380:       \advance\xcoord by 1

381:     \else\ifnum#1=2

382:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

383:         \hbox{\hskip-2pt \vSSchritt}\hss}%

384:       \advance\ycoord by 1

385:     \else\ifnum#1=3

386:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

387:          \DSSchritt\hss}

388:       \advance\xcoord by 1

389:       \advance\ycoord by 1

390:     \else\ifnum#1=4

391:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

392:          \dSSchritt\hss}

393:       \advance\xcoord by 1

394:       \advance\ycoord by -1

395:     \else\ifnum#1=5

396:       \advance\xcoord by -1

397:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

398:          \hSSchritt\hss}%

399:     \else\ifnum#1=6

400:       \advance\ycoord by -1

401:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

402:         \hbox{\hskip-2pt \vSSchritt}\hss}%

403:     \else\ifnum#1=7

404:       \advance\xcoord by -1

405:       \advance\ycoord by -1

406:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

407:          \DSSchritt\hss}

408:     \else\ifnum#1=8

409:       \advance\xcoord by -1

410:       \advance\ycoord by 1

411:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit

412:          \dSSchritt\hss}

413:     \fi\fi\fi\fi

414:     \fi\fi\fi\fi

415:   \fi\next}

416: \def\Koordinatenachsen(#1,#2){\unskip

417:  \hbox to0pt{\hskip-.5pt\vrule height#2 \Einheit width.5pt depth1 \Einheit}%

418:  \hbox to0pt{\hskip-1 \Einheit \xcoord#1 \advance\xcoord by1

419:     \vrule height0.25pt width\xcoord \Einheit depth0.25pt\hss}}

420: \def\Koordinatenachsen(#1,#2)(#3,#4){\unskip

421:  \hbox to0pt{\hskip-.5pt \ycoord-#4 \advance\ycoord by1

422:     \vrule height#2 \Einheit width.5pt depth\ycoord \Einheit}%

423:  \hbox to0pt{\hskip-1 \Einheit \hskip#3\Einheit 

424:     \xcoord#1 \advance\xcoord by1 \advance\xcoord by-#3 

425:     \vrule height0.25pt width\xcoord \Einheit depth0.25pt\hss}}

426: \def\Gitter(#1,#2){\unskip \xcoord0 \ycoord0 \leavevmode

427:   \LOOP\ifnum\ycoord<#2

428:     \loop\ifnum\xcoord<#1

429:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit\Punkt\hss}%

430:       \advance\xcoord by1

431:     \repeat

432:     \xcoord0

433:     \advance\ycoord by1

434:   \REPEAT}

435: \def\Gitter(#1,#2)(#3,#4){\unskip \xcoord#3 \ycoord#4 \leavevmode

436:   \LOOP\ifnum\ycoord<#2

437:     \loop\ifnum\xcoord<#1

438:       \raise\ycoord \Einheit\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xcoord \Einheit\Punkt\hss}%

439:       \advance\xcoord by1

440:     \repeat

441:     \xcoord#3

442:     \advance\ycoord by1

443:   \REPEAT}

444: \def\Label#1#2(#3,#4){\unskip \xdim#3 \Einheit \ydim#4 \Einheit

445:   \def\lo{\advance\xdim by-.5 \Einheit \advance\ydim by.5 \Einheit}%

446:   \def\llo{\advance\xdim by-.25cm \advance\ydim by.5 \Einheit}%

447:   \def\loo{\advance\xdim by-.5 \Einheit \advance\ydim by.25cm}%

448:   \def\o{\advance\ydim by.25cm}%

449:   \def\ro{\advance\xdim by.5 \Einheit \advance\ydim by.5 \Einheit}%

450:   \def\rro{\advance\xdim by.25cm \advance\ydim by.5 \Einheit}%

451:   \def\roo{\advance\xdim by.5 \Einheit \advance\ydim by.25cm}%

452:   \def\l{\advance\xdim by-.30cm}%

453:   \def\r{\advance\xdim by.30cm}%

454:   \def\lu{\advance\xdim by-.5 \Einheit \advance\ydim by-.6 \Einheit}%

455:   \def\llu{\advance\xdim by-.25cm \advance\ydim by-.6 \Einheit}%

456:   \def\luu{\advance\xdim by-.5 \Einheit \advance\ydim by-.30cm}%

457:   \def\u{\advance\ydim by-.30cm}%

458:   \def\ru{\advance\xdim by.5 \Einheit \advance\ydim by-.6 \Einheit}%

459:   \def\rru{\advance\xdim by.25cm \advance\ydim by-.6 \Einheit}%

460:   \def\ruu{\advance\xdim by.5 \Einheit \advance\ydim by-.30cm}%

461:   #1\raise\ydim\hbox to0pt{\hskip\xdim

462:      \vbox to0pt{\vss\hbox to0pt{\hss$#2$\hss}\vss}\hss}%

463: }

464: \catcode`\@=13

465: 

466: 

467: 

468: \catcode`\@=11

469: \def\logo@{}

470: \footline={\ifnum\pageno>1 \hfil\folio\hfil\else\hfil\fi}

471: \topmatter

472: \title Enumeration of lozenge tilings of hexagons with cut off corners 

473: \endtitle

474: \author Mihai Ciucu {\rm and} Christian Krattenthaler\endauthor

475: \subjclass

476: Primary 05A15, 05A17, 05B45. 

477: Secondary 11P81, 52C20

478: \endsubjclass

479: \keywords

480: Plane partitions, symmetry classes, determinant evaluations, lozenge tilings, 

481: non-intersecting lattice paths, tiling enumeration, perfect matchings

482: \endkeywords

483: 

484: \thanks The first author was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-9802390.

485: \endthanks

486: \thanks The second author was partially supported by the Austrian

487: Science Foundation FWF, grant P13190-MAT.

488: \endthanks

489: \affil

490:   Georgia Institute of Technology\\

491:   School of Mathematics\\

492:   Atlanta, GA 30332, USA\\

493: \\

494: and\\

495: \\

496: Institut f\"ur Mathematik der Universit\"at Wien\\

497: Strudlhofgasse 4, A-1090 Wien, Austria

498: \endaffil

499: \date February, 2000\enddate

500: \abstract

501: Motivated by the enumeration of a class of plane partitions studied by Proctor and

502: by considerations about symmetry classes of plane partitions, we consider

503: the problem of enumerating lozenge tilings of a hexagon with ``maximal staircases'' removed from 

504: some of its vertices. The case of one vertex corresponds to Proctor's

505: problem. For two vertices there are several cases to consider, and most of them lead

506: to nice enumeration formulas. 

507: For three or more vertices there do not seem to exist

508: nice product formulas in general, but in one special situation a lot of factorization

509: occurs, and we pose the problem of finding a formula for the number of tilings in

510: this case.

511: \endabstract

512: \endtopmatter

513: \document

514: 

515: 

516: \def\mysec#1{\bigskip\centerline{\bf #1}\message{ * }\nopagebreak\par}

517: \def\subsec#1{\medskip{\it\noindent #1}\nopagebreak\par}

518: \def\myref#1{\item"{[{\bf #1}]}"} 

519: \def\same#1{\underbar{\phantom{#1}}} 

520: \def\pf{{\it Proof.\ }} 

521: \def\endpf{\hbox{\qed}\bigskip}

522: \def\cite#1{\relaxnext@

523:   \def\nextiii@##1,##2\end@{[{\bf##1},\,##2]}%

524:   \in@,{#1}\ifin@\def\next{\nextiii@#1\end@}\else

525:   \def\next{[{\bf#1}]}\fi\next}

526: \def\proclaimheadfont@{\smc}

527: 

528: \def\pf{{\it Proof.\ }}

529: \define\N{{\bold N}}

530: \define\Z{{\bold Z}}

531: \define\R{{\bold R}}

532: \define\wt{\operatorname{wt}}

533: \define\w{\operatorname{w}}

534: \define\twoline#1#2{\line{\hfill{\smc #1}\hfill{\smc #2}\hfill}}

535: \define\twolinetwo#1#2{\line{{\smc #1}\hfill{\smc #2}}}

536: \define\twolinethree#1#2{\line{\phantom{poco}{\smc #1}\hfill{\smc #2}\phantom{poco}}}

537: 

538: \def\epsfsize#1#2{0.40#1}

539: \def\mypic#1{\epsffile{#1}}

540: %\def\mypic#1{\epsffile{#1}}

541: 

542: %references

543: 

544: \def\Stenlp{25}

545: \def\Stapp{24}

546: \def\Robb{23}

547: \def\Proc88{22}

548: \def\PeWZAA{21}

549: \def\MacM{20}

550: \def\LindAA{19}

551: \def\Ku{18}

552: \def\KratBN{17}

553: \def\KratBD{16}

554: \def\Kast{15}

555: \def\GrKPAA{14}

556: \def\GospAB{13}

557: \def\GV{12}

558: \def\FuKrAC{11}

559: \def\Feller{10}

560: \def\EisTAA{9}

561: \def\DT{8}

562: \def\CiKrAD{7}

563: \def\CKpp2{6}

564: \def\CiKrAA{5}

565: \def\Cipp1{4}

566: \def\CiucAI{3}

567: \def\Ci1{2}

568: %\def\AnBuAA{2}

569: \def\Amdeb{1}

570: 

571: 

572: \def\po#1#2{(#1)_#2}

573: \def\({\left(}

574: \def\){\right)}

575: \def\[{\left[}

576: \def\]{\right]}

577: \def\al{\alpha}

578: \def\be{\beta}

579: \def\fl#1{\left\lfloor#1\right\rfloor}

580: 

581: 

582: 

583: \mysec{1. Introduction and statement of results}

584: 

585: \medskip

586: The study of lozenge tilings is warranted by the many useful insights they bring in

587: the subject of plane partitions. Some important instances of these are presented in

588: \cite{\Ku} and \cite{\CKpp2}. In this paper we present some more such connections.

589: 

590: %\medskip

591: A plane partition is a rectangular array of nonnegative integers with the property 

592: that all rows

593: and columns are weakly decreasing. A plane partition contained in an $a\times b$ 

594: rectangle and with entries at most $c$ can be identified with its three dimensional

595: diagram --- a stack of unit cubes contained in an $a\times b\times c$ box --- ,

596: which in turn can be regarded as a lozenge tiling of a hexagon $H(a,b,c)$ with 

597: side lengths $a$, $b$,

598: $c$, $a$, $b$, $c$ (in cyclic order) and angles of $120^\circ$ (see Figure~1.1

599: and \cite{\DT} or \cite{\Robb}; a lozenge tiling of

600: a region on the triangular lattice is a tiling by unit rhombi with angles of

601: $60^\circ$ and $120^\circ$, referred to as lozenges). 

602: This simple bijection is the crucial link between the theory of lozenge tilings and

603: that of plane partitions. For example, the number of tilings of $H(a,b,c)$ follows to

604: be equal to the number of plane partitions that fit in an $a\times b\times c$ box,

605: which is, 

606: by a result due to MacMahon \cite{\MacM},

607: $\prod_{i=1}^a\prod_{j=1}^b\prod_{k=1}^c 

608: (i+j+k-1)/(i+j+k-2)$.

609: 

610: %\medskip

611: As a variation of this, Proctor \cite{\Proc88} considered the problem of enumerating

612: those plane partitions $\pi$ contained in an $a\times b\times c$ box for which the

613: projection of $\pi$ on one of the coordinate planes, say on $Oxy$, fits in the ``maximal

614: staircase'' $\lambda=(b,b-1,\dotsc,b-a+1)$ 

615: (when $\lambda$ is viewed as the corresponding Ferrers diagram) 

616: contained in the $a\times b$ basis 

617: rectangle (we are assuming here, without loss of generality, that $a\leq b;$ see

618: Figure~1.1 for an example of such a plane partition with $a=5$, $b=8$, $c=3$). 

619: Proctor  \cite{\Proc88} found that this number is given by the simple product

620: $$\prod_{i=1}^a\left[\prod_{j=1}^{b-a+1}\frac{c+i+j-1}{i+j-1}

621: \prod_{j=b-a+2}^{b-a+i}\frac{2c+i+j-1}{i+j-1}\right].\tag1.1$$

622: By the above bijection, it is easily seen that Proctor's

623: problem is equivalent to counting the lozenge tilings of $H(a,b,c)$ with a maximal

624: ``staircase of lozenges'' removed from a corner at which edges of lengths $a$ and $b$

625: meet (simply view Figure~1.1 as being two dimensional%

626: ; there, a maximal staircase of lozenges was removed from the

627:   southeastern corner). 

628: 

629: %\medskip

630: What if we require that the projection of $\pi$ on {\it two} of the coordinate

631: planes be contained in the corresponding staircases? The above bijection shows that

632: the question is equivalent to counting the number of tilings of $H(a,b,c)$ with 

633: {\it two} maximal staircases removed, from vertices that are non-adjacent and

634: non-opposite (this is illustrated in Figure~1.2; 

635: there, maximal staircases were removed from the

636:   southeastern and the western corner; the plane partition is the same as

637: in Figure~1.1). There are six cases to consider, corresponding to the six relative

638: orderings of $a$, $b$ and $c$. These are shown in Figures~1.3(a)--(f). 

639: (At this point, the special marks in form of ellipses should be

640: ignored.)

641: Mirror reflection pairs up these six cases in three pairs --- the rows of Figure~1.3. 

642: 

643: \topinsert

644: \twoline{\mypic{1-1.eps}}{\mypic{1-2.eps}}

645: \twoline{Figure~1.1. {\rm \ \ \ \ \  }}{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Figure~1.2. {\rm }}

646: \endinsert

647: 

648: \topinsert

649: \twoline{\mypic{1-3e.eps}}{\mypic{1-3f.eps}}

650: \twoline{Figure~1.3{\rm (a). $H_{\text d}(8,3,5)$.}}

651: {Figure~1.3{\rm (b). $H_{\text d}(8,5,3)$.}}

652: \endinsert

653: 

654: \topinsert

655: \twoline{\mypic{1-3c.eps}}{\mypic{1-3d.eps}}

656: \twoline{Figure~1.3{\rm (c). $H_{\text d}(5,3,8)$.}}

657: {Figure~1.3{\rm (d). $H_{\text d}(5,8,3)$.}}

658: \endinsert

659: 

660: \topinsert

661: \twoline{\mypic{1-3a.eps}}{\mypic{1-3b.eps}}

662: \twoline{Figure~1.3{\rm (e). $H_{\text d}(3,5,8)$.}}

663: {Figure~1.3{\rm (f). $H_{\text d}(3,8,5)$.}}

664: \endinsert

665: 

666: %\medskip

667: We draw all the hexagons $H(a,b,c)$ and the regions obtained from them by

668: cutting corners so that the horizontal edges have length $b$, and the other two pairs

669: of parallel edges, as we move counterclockwise, have lengths $a$ and $c$.  

670: Let $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$ be the region obtained from $H(a,b,c)$ by removing

671: maximal staircases from the northwestern and eastern corners (the subscript stands for 

672: the ``diagonal'' position of the cut off corners).  

673: 

674: %Define M, M_*, M^*, M_*^*.

675: 

676: %\medskip

677: For a region $R$ on the triangular lattice, denote by $L(R)$ the number of

678: its lozenge tilings. In the special case when $R$ is obtained from a hexagon

679: $H(a,b,c)$ by removing staircases from two of its corners, we define three more

680: {\it weighted\/} tiling enumerators for $R$ as follows. Consider the tile positions that fit

681: in the indentations of the zig-zag cut that removed a staircase of lozenges (the

682: possible such positions are marked 

683: by ellipses in Figure~1.3(c)). By

684: weighting these tile positions by 1/2, one creates a new, weighted count of the

685: tilings of $R$: each tiling $T$ gets weight $1/2^k$, where $k$ is the number of 

686: lozenges of $T$ occupying positions weighted by 1/2, and the sum of weights of all

687: tilings $T$ of $R$ gives the weighted tiling enumeration

688: \footnote{The motivation to consider such weightings comes from the

689: fact that weightings of that kind arise whenever the Factorization

690: Theorem from \cite{\Ci1} is applied to a (symmetric) region on the

691: triangular lattice. 

692: See \cite{\Ci1, Sec.~6}\cite{\CiucAI}\cite{\Cipp1}\cite{\CiKrAA}\cite{\CKpp2}%

693: \cite{\EisTAA}\cite{\FuKrAC} and the proof of Theorem~1.4 in Section~2

694: for examples.}.

695: Clearly, one can choose to

696: weight by 1/2 {\it only} the tile positions along the cut that removed the 

697: northwestern corner of 

698: $H(a,b,c)$, or, furthermore, to weight by 1/2 {\it only} the tile

699: positions along the cut that removed the  

700: eastern corner. These three

701: possibilities define our three weighted enumerators. We denote them by

702: $L_*^*$, $L^*$, and $L_*$, where a superscript (respectively,

703: subscript) indicates weighting along the cut  

704: from the northwestern (respectively, eastern) corner.

705: 

706: If $b<c<a$ (see Figure~1.3(a)) --- or, by mirror reflection, $c<b<a$ 

707: (see Figure~1.3(b)), --- neither $L(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$, nor the

708: weighted enumerators $L^*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$, $L_*(H_{\text

709: d}(a,b,c))$, and $L^*_*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$

710: seem to be given by simple product formulas. The other

711: two cases lead to the following results.

712: 

713: 

714: \proclaim{Theorem 1.1} If $b\leq a\leq c$ $($see Figure~{\rm1.3(c)} for an

715: example$)$, we have

716: $$L(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))=(-1)^{b(b+1)/2} P_b(a-2b-1,b+c+1),\tag1.2$$

717: where $P_n(x,y)$ denotes the product on the right hand side of\/ 

718: {\rm(1.8)}.

719: \endproclaim

720: 

721: \flushpar

722: {\bf Note.} 

723: All the factors in $P_b(a-2b-1,b+c+1)$ are positive

724: except for the factors in the shifted factorial $(a-3b-c+2j-1)_j$, which are all negative

725: since for the largest factor in this product we have

726: $$a-3b-c+3j-2\leq a-c-2\leq -2,$$

727: as $a\leq c$ in the case addressed by Theorem~1.1. Therefore, for $a$, $b$ and $c$ as

728: in Theorem~1.1, the sign of $P_b(a-2b-1,b+c+1)$ is $(-1)^{b(b+1)/2}$, which checks that

729: the right hand side of (1.2) is non-negative.

730: 

731: Still keeping the relative order $b\le a\le c$ of the parameters,

732: the weighted enumerators $L^*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$

733: and $L_*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$ 

734: do not seem to be given by simple product formulas. But there is one

735: for $L^*_*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$.

736: 

737: \proclaim{Theorem 1.2} If $b\leq a\leq c$ $($see Figure~{\rm1.3(c)} for an

738: example$)$, we have

739: $$\multline

740: L^*_*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))\\

741: =2^{-a-b}

742: \prod _{j=1} ^{b}\frac {(j-1)!\, (a+c-b+2j-1)! \,(c-a+3j-1)_{b-j}\,

743: (a+2c+3j-1)_{b-j+1}} {(b+c+j-1)! \,(a-b+2j-1)!},

744: \endmultline\tag1.3$$

745: where the shifted factorial

746: $(\alpha)_k$ is defined by $(\alpha)_k:=\alpha(\alpha+1)\cdots(\alpha+k-1)$, 

747: $k\ge1$, and $(\alpha)_0:=1$.

748: \endproclaim

749: 

750: \smallpagebreak

751: For $a\leq b\leq c$, plain enumeration of the tilings of $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$

752: does not seem to be given by a simple product formula. There is, however, a simple

753: formula for $L^*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$.

754: As we are going to show in Section~2, the following result follows

755: easily from a determinant evaluation of the second author 

756: \cite{\KratBD, (5.3)}. 

757: 

758: \proclaim{Proposition 1.3} If $a\leq b\leq c$ $($see

759: Figure~{\rm1.3(e)} for an

760: example$)$, 

761: we have

762: $$\multline

763: L^*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))=\frac{1}{2^a}\prod_{j=1}^{a}

764: \frac{(j-1)!\,(b+2c-3a+3j)\,(b+c-2a+j)!}

765: {(c-a+2j-1)!}\\

766: \cdot\frac {(b+2c-3a+2j+1)_{j-1}\,(2b+c-3a+2j+1)_{j-1}}

767: {(b-a+2j-1)!}.

768: \endmultline$$

769: 

770: %L_*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))=... is equivalent to above by swapping b and c

771: 

772: \endproclaim

773: 

774: \flushpar

775: {\bf Note.} The special cases when $c=a-1$ or when $b=a-1$ form the

776: subject of \cite{\CKpp2, Pro\-pos\-i\-tion~2.2}.

777: 

778: \smallpagebreak

779: The weighted enumerator $L^*$ clearly makes sense also for the region $H_1(a,b,c)$

780: obtained from $H(a,b,c)$ by cutting off just the northwestern corner. We have the

781: following counterpart of Proctor's formula (1.1).

782: 

783: \proclaim{Theorem 1.4} For $a\leq b$, we have

784: $$L^*(H_1(a,b,c))=\frac{1}{2^a}\prod_{i=1}^a\left[\prod_{j=1}^{b-a}\frac{c+i+j-1}{i+j-1}

785: \prod_{j=b-a+i}^{b}\frac{2c+i+j-1}{i+j-1}\right].\tag1.4$$

786: \endproclaim

787: 

788: 

789: What if we require that the projection of $\pi$ on {\it all three} coordinate planes be

790: contained in the corresponding staircases? An example illustrating this, using the

791: same plane partition as in Figures~1.1 and 1.2, is shown in Figure~1.4.

792: Clearly, by the bijection between plane partitions and lozenge tilings, plane

793: partitions satisfying these conditions are identified with

794: tilings of the region $H_3(a,b,c)$ obtained from $H(a,b,c)$ by removing maximal

795: staircases from three alternating vertices.

796: No matter what the relative ordering of the side lengths $a$, $b$ and $c$ is, 

797: there are always two staircases that

798: ``interfere'' --- i.e., there is no portion of an edge of the hexagon $H(a,b,c)$

799: separating them. 

800: Data suggests that there are no simple product formulas in

801: general. 

802: (Note that, among the cases with two removed staircases, the relative

803: orders of $a,b,c$ not covered by Theorems~1.1, 1.2

804: and Proposition~1.3 are precisely those in which the staircases interfere.) 

805: 

806: However, the special case $a=b=c$ presents significant factorization. Indeed, letting 

807: $T_a$ stand for the triangular region $H_3(a,a,a)$ (the case $a=5$ is shown in

808: Figure~1.5), the number of tilings of $T_a$ factors as follows for $a\leq7$:

809: $$\align

810: L(T_1)&=2\\ 

811: L(T_2)&=3^2\\ 

812: L(T_3)&=2^3\cdot13\\ 

813: L(T_4)&=2^2\cdot5^2\cdot31\\ 

814: L(T_5)&=2\cdot3^2\cdot19^2\cdot37\\ 

815: L(T_6)&=2\cdot7^3\cdot13\cdot43\cdot127\\ 

816: L(T_7)&=2^7\cdot3^5\cdot5^3\cdot7\cdot13\cdot73.

817: \endalign$$ 

818: The amount of factorization is

819: remarkable (also for larger $a$; we have computed and factored $L(T_a)$ up to

820: $a=30$) and

821: comparable, say, to that of the

822: numbers enumerating domino tilings of squares (see \cite{\Kast}). Based on this, we

823: pose the following problem.

824: 

825: \topinsert

826: \twoline{\mypic{1-4.eps}}{\mypic{1-5.eps}}

827: \twoline{\ \ \ \ \ Figure~1.4.{\rm \ \ \ \ \  }}

828: {\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Figure~1.5. {\rm $T_5$.}}

829: \endinsert

830: 

831: \proclaim{Problem 1.5} Find a formula for the number of lozenge

832: tilings of $T_a$%

833: , that explains the large amount of prime factorization of these numbers.

834: \endproclaim

835: 

836: Let us now go back to the case  

837: of plane partitions with the property

838: that their projection on two coordinate planes is contained in the

839: corresponding staircases. As we saw, in terms of 

840: tilings this

841: amounts to counting the tilings of a hexagon with maximal staircases removed from two

842: non-adjacent and non-opposite vertices. What if we remove them from adjacent vertices?

843: This leads to the region $H_{\text a}(a,b,c)$ (illustrated in Figure~1.6%

844: ; evidently, the subscript stands for ``adjacent''), obtained

845: from $H(a,b,c)$ by removing maximal staircases from the top two corners (we assume that

846: these two staircases do not interfere --- otherwise the leftover region has no lozenge

847: tilings; non-interference amounts to $b\geq a+c-1$).

848: 

849: %\medskip

850: The $H_{\text a}(a,b,c)$'s form a family of regions that resemble the case

851: $b\leq a\leq c$ of the $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$'s (compare Figures~1.6 and 1.3(c)). 

852: Even though they are

853: different, it turns out that the enumeration of tilings of both families of regions 

854: reduces to the evaluation of the same determinant, the one in

855: Theorem~1.10. We have the 

856: following result. 

857: 

858: \proclaim{Theorem 1.6} For $b\geq a+c-1$, we have

859: %

860: $$L(H_{\text a}(a,b,c))=P_a(b-a,c),$$

861: %

862: where $P_n(x,y)$ is the product on the right hand side of\/ {\rm(1.8)}.

863: \endproclaim

864: 

865: \topinsert

866: \centerline{\mypic{1-6.eps}}

867: \centerline{Figure~1.6. {\rm $H_{\text a}(3,8,5)$.}}

868: \endinsert

869: 

870: Also here, let us consider weighted enumerators. As before, let us

871: denote by $L_*^*$, $L^*$, and $L_*$ the weighted tiling enumerators 

872: where a superscript (respectively,

873: subscript) indicates that the tiles along the northwestern zig-zag

874: line

875: (respectively, northeastern) are weighted by $1/2$. 

876: While $L^*(H_{\text a}(a,b,c))$

877: and $L_*(H_{\text a}(a,b,c))$ do not seem to be given by simple

878: product formulas, this is the case for $L_*^*(H_{\text

879: a}(a,b,c))$.

880: 

881: \proclaim{Theorem 1.7} For $b\geq a+c-1$, we have

882: %

883: $$\multline

884: L^*_*(H_{\text a}(a,b,c))=

885: 2^{-c-a}\frac {(b+2c-a+2)_a} {(a+b-c+2)_a}\\

886: \times

887: \prod _{j=1} ^{a}\frac {(j-1)! \,(b+c-a+2j-1)! \,(b-a-c+2j+2)_j 

888: \,(b+2c-a+3j+2)_{a-j}} {(b+2j-1)! \,(c+a-j)!}.

889: \endmultline$$

890: %

891: \endproclaim

892: 

893: In view of the previously made observation that in the case that

894: $b<a+c-1$ the maximal staircases interfere and their removal results

895: in a region which is not tilable, it may seem absurd to insist on

896: having ``analogues" of Theorems~1.6 an 1.7 for $b<a+c-1$. But why,

897: instead of removing {\it maximal\/} staircases, not remove 

898: {\it partial\/}

899: staircases? To be precise, if $a+b+c\equiv 0$ mod 2, then

900: let us remove the partial staircase $(a-1,a-2,\dots,(a-b+c)/2)$

901: from the top-left vertex of the hexagon, 

902: and the partial staircase $(c-1,c-2,\dots,(c-b+a)/2)$ 

903: from the top-right vertex. 

904: (See Figure~1.7(a), in which the removed

905: staircases are indicated by the white regions. The shades should be

906: ignored at this point.) We obtain a region that looks like a pentagon

907: with an ``artificial" peak glued on top. Any lozenge tiling of

908: this region is uniquely determined in the rhombus that is composed

909: out of the triangular peak and its upside-down mirror image. 

910: (In Figure~1.7(a) this rhombus is shaded, and the

911: unique way to tile this rhombus is shown.) Hence, we may equally well

912: remove this rhombus. The leftover region now has the form of a

913: pentagon with a notch (see Figure~1.7(b); at this point the ellipses

914: are without relevance). Let us denote this region by $H_{\text

915: n}(a,b,c)$. Remarkably, extensive computer calculations suggest that

916: the number of lozenge tilings of $H_{\text n}(a,b,c)$ is given by a

917: ``simple" product formula.

918: We state it as Conjecture~A.1 in the

919: Appendix. The fact that the result, 

920: even though given in terms of a

921: completely explicit product, is unusually

922: complex\footnote{No nontrivial simplifications seem to be possible.

923: We are not aware of any other ``nice" result which is similarly

924: involved.} may indicate that proving the conjecture may be a

925: formidable task.

926: 

927: %Christian: Relabelled figures 1.7 and 1.8, and moved the

928: %   new figure 1.8 to a later place.

929: \def\epsfsize#1#2{0.35#1}

930: \topinsert

931: \twoline{\mypic{1-12a.eps}}{\mypic{1-12b.eps}}

932: \twoline{Figure~1.7{\rm(a). \ \ \ \ \ \ }}{

933: Figure~1.7{\rm(b). $H_{\text n}(6,5,7)$}}

934: \vskip-5.3cm

935: \hbox{\hskip1.65cm

936: \btexdraw

937:   \drawdim truecm \setunitscale1.5

938:   \linewd.01

939: \htext(0.6 1){$a$}

940: \htext(-.75 0){$b$}

941: \htext(-2.1 1){$c$}

942: \htext(1.5 2.8){$(a+b-c)/2$}

943: \htext(4 2.8){$(c+b-a)/2$}

944: \htext(5 1){$a$}

945: \htext(3.6 -.1){$b$}

946: \htext(2 1){$c$}

947: \rtext td:-60 (2.1 2.6){$\left\{ \vbox{\vskip.9cm} \right. $}

948: \rtext td:-120 (4.7 2.5){$\left\{ \vbox{\vskip1.2cm} \right. $}

949: \rtext td:30 (2.2 1){$\left\{ \vbox{\vskip1.6cm} \right. $}

950: \rtext td:-30 (4.7 1) {$\left. \vbox{\vskip1.5cm} \right\} $}

951: \rtext td:90 (3.7 0.1){$\left\{ \vbox{\vskip1.2cm} \right. $}

952: \etexdraw

953: }

954: \vskip1cm

955: \endinsert

956: 

957: Moreover, it seems that the region $H_{\text n}(a,b,c)$ also allows a

958: weighted enumeration which is given by a simple product formula. Let

959: us, as before, denote by 

960: $L_*^*$, $L^*$, and $L_*$ the weighted tiling enumerators 

961: where a superscript (respectively,

962: subscript) indicates that the tiles along the northwestern zig-zag

963: line

964: (respectively, northeastern) are weighted by $1/2$. (In Figure~1.7(b)

965: these tiles are marked by ellipses.) While $L^*(H_{\text n}(a,b,c))$

966: and $L_*(H_{\text n}(a,b,c))$ do not seem to be given by simple

967: product formulas, this seems to be the case for $L_*^*(H_{\text

968: n}(a,b,c))$. We state it as Conjecture~A.2 in the Appendix. 

969: Again, the result is

970: unusually complex, which may indicate that a proof may be a

971: considerable undertaking.

972: 

973: \smallpagebreak

974: There is one more possibility for choosing two corners of the hexagon from which to

975: remove maximal staircases --- two {\it opposite} corners. Data suggests that in general

976: this does not lead to simple product formulas. There is one exception, when the sides

977: supporting the removed staircases are equal (see Figure~1.8 for an example), 

978: but this is a ``semi-frozen''

979: situation --- each tiling decomposes in tilings of parallel strips of width two (see

980: the proof of Proposition~1.8 in Section 2). 

981: 

982: \topinsert

983: \centerline{\mypic{1-7.eps}}

984: \centerline{Figure~1.8. {\rm $H_{\text o}(4,6,4)$.}}

985: \endinsert

986: 

987: %\medskip

988: Let $H_{\text o}(a,b,c)$ be the region obtained from $H(a,b,c)$ by removing maximal

989: staircases from the western and eastern corners. (Not unexpectedly,

990: here, the subscript stands for ``opposite.'')

991: 

992: \proclaim{Proposition 1.8}  $L(H_{\text o}(a,b,a))=(b+1)^a.$

993: \endproclaim

994: 

995: \topinsert

996: \twoline{\mypic{1-8.eps}}{\mypic{1-9.eps}}

997: \twoline{Figure~1.9.{\rm \ \ \ \ \  }}{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

998: Figure~1.10.{\rm }}

999: \endinsert

1000: 

1001: A different viewpoint that can naturally lead one to consider the regions

1002: introduced above (hexagons with

1003: corners cut off) is based on symmetry classes of plane partitions. (It was in fact

1004: this viewpoint that provided the original motivation to study these regions.) Consider

1005: the regular hexagon $H_{2n}:=H(2n,2n,2n)$. The ten symmetry classes of plane

1006: partitions contained in a cube of side $2n$ (see \cite{\Stapp} for their definition) are

1007: identified with the ten symmetry classes of tilings of $H_{2n}$ (see \cite{\Ku}). 

1008: Define a {\it ray} of tiles to be a sequence of $n$ tiles extending from the center of 

1009: $H_{2n}$ to the nearest point of one of its edges. The six rays of tiles of $H_{2n}$ 

1010: are shown, for $n=3$, in Figure~1.9. It is easy to see that the tilings of $H_{2n}$ 

1011: that have CSTC 

1012: symmetry (i.e., cyclically symmetric, transposed complementary tilings)

1013: contain 

1014: the tiles of all six rays, and the restriction of such a tiling to one of the six congruent regions 

1015: left by removing the rays determines the whole tiling uniquely (see

1016: Figure~1.9). The 

1017: regions $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$, $b\leq a\leq c$, form a two parameter generalization of 

1018: this (compare Figures~1.9 and 1.3(c)).

1019: 

1020: %\medskip

1021: Similarly, TC (i.e., transposed complementary) symmetry forces inclusion of two

1022: opposite rays in the tiling, and reduces to enumerating tilings of one of the two

1023: pieces left over after removing the two opposite rays of tiles (see

1024: Figure~1.10). 

1025: The regions

1026: corresponding to the plane partitions considered by Proctor (hexagons with one corner

1027: cut off) form a one parameter generalization of this (compare

1028: Figures~1.10 and 1.1).

1029: 

1030: \topinsert

1031: \twoline{\mypic{1-10.eps}}{\mypic{1-11.eps}}

1032: \twoline{Figure~1.11.{\rm \ \ \ \ \  }}{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

1033: Figure~1.12.{\rm }}

1034: \endinsert

1035: 

1036: We are thus naturally led

1037: to consider the regions generated by removing {\it three}

1038: alternating rays, as shown in Figure~1.11. This region does not correspond to a symmetry

1039: class of plane partitions, but it is nevertheless quite 

1040: compelling

1041: to consider in this 

1042: context. The regions $H_{\text a}(a,b,c)$ form a two parameter generalization of it

1043: (compare Figures~1.11 and 1.6).

1044: The two parameters were essential in conjecturing a formula for the number of tilings

1045: of these regions, based on data: polynomials fully factored into linear factors

1046: contain much more information than just integers factored into small primes. 

1047: 

1048: %\medskip

1049: To finish this analysis, we mention that removing {\it one} ray (see

1050: Figure~1.12) 

1051: leads to a region

1052: whose number of tilings has a simple product expression, as it easily follows from the

1053: Factorization Theorem of \cite{\Ci1} and the results of \cite{\Cipp1}. 

1054: 

1055: %\medskip

1056: To rephrase the above statements, if one regards the

1057: regions formed by removing rays as being built up of $60^\circ$ sectors, the

1058: tilings of the regions consisting of 1, 2, 3 or 6 sectors are enumerated by simple

1059: product formulas. Data suggests that this is not the case for 4 or 5

1060: sectors.

1061: 

1062: We prove our results in Section~2 

1063: by employing a standard bijection between lozenge

1064: tilings and 

1065: non-intersecting lattice paths, thus, due to the

1066: Lindstr\"om--Gessel--Viennot theorem \cite{\LindAA}\cite{\GV},

1067: obtaining a determinant for the number (respectively weighted count) 

1068: of tilings that we are

1069: interested in, and, finally, by evaluating the resulting determinants.

1070: In most of the cases, we obtain special cases of the two 

1071: determinant evaluations that we state in Theorems~1.9 and 1.10 below.

1072: Theorem~1.9 is due to the second author \cite{\KratBD, (5.3)} (see 

1073: \cite{\Amdeb} for a simple proof, which is reproduced in \cite{\CKpp2}). 

1074: The determinant evaluation in

1075: Theorem~1.10 

1076: does not seem to have appeared previously in the literature.

1077: The paper

1078: \cite{\CiKrAD} contains our original proof, which is rather involved,

1079: but has its own appeal as it contains a non-automatic (!) application

1080: of Gosper's algorithm \cite{\GospAB} (see also 

1081: \cite{\GrKPAA, Sec.~5.7}\cite{\PeWZAA, Sec.~II.5}). Later we

1082: discovered that, in fact, there is a combinatorial argument which

1083: transforms the determinant in Theorem~1.10 into an instance of the

1084: determinant in Theorem~1.9, so that these two determinant evaluations

1085: are actually equivalent. It is this argument that we give in

1086: Section~2.

1087: 

1088: \proclaim{Theorem 1.9}Let $x$, $y$ and $n$ be nonnegative integers with

1089: $x+y>0$. Let $K_n(x,y)$ be the matrix 

1090: $$\align

1091: K_n(x,y)&:=

1092: \left(\frac{(x+y+i+j-1)!}{(x+2i-j)!\,(y+2j-i)!}\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq

1093: n}\\

1094: &\hphantom{:}=

1095: \left(\frac{1}{x+2i-j}\binom {x+y+i+j-1}{y+2j-i}\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq

1096: n}.

1097: \tag1.5\endalign$$

1098: Then 

1099: $$\det(K_n(x,y))=\prod_{j=1}^{n}\frac{(j-1)!\,(x+y+j)!\,

1100: (2x+y+2j+1)_{j-1}\,(x+2y+2j+1)_{j-1}}

1101: {(x+2j-1)!\,(y+2j-1)!}.\tag1.6$$

1102: where, as before, the shifted factorial

1103: %Christian: To be consistent with the other places, I changed

1104: %  the a's here into \alpha's.

1105: $(\alpha)_k$ is defined by $(\alpha)_k:=\alpha(\alpha+1)\cdots

1106: (\alpha+k-1)$, $k\ge1$, and $(\alpha)_0:=1$.

1107: \endproclaim

1108: 

1109: \proclaim{Theorem 1.10} Let $n$ be a positive integer, and let $x$ and

1110: $y$ be nonnegative integers. Let $A_n(x,y)$ be the matrix 

1111: $$A_n(x,y):=\left(\binom{x+y+j}{x-i+2j}-\binom{x+y+j}{x+i+2j}\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq n}.

1112: \tag1.7$$

1113: Then 

1114: $$\det A_n(x,y)=\prod _{j=1} ^{n}\frac {(j-1)!\,(x+y+2j)!\,(x-y+2j+1)_j\,

1115: (x+2y+3j+1)_{n-j}} {(x+n+2j)!\,(y+n-j)!}.\tag1.8$$

1116: \endproclaim

1117: 

1118: \flushpar

1119: {\bf Note.} 

1120: Theorems~1.9 and 1.10 are only formulated for

1121: nonnegative integral $x$ and

1122: $y$. But in fact, with a

1123: generalized definition of factorials and binomials (cf\.

1124: \cite{\GrKPAA, \S5.5, (5.96), (5.100)},

1125: both theorems would also make sense and be true for complex $x$ and $y$. 

1126: 

1127: 

1128: \mysec{2. Proofs of the results}

1129: 

1130: \medskip

1131: 

1132: As already mentioned at the end of the Introduction,

1133: we employ in our proofs a standard bijection that maps each lozenge tiling $T$ of

1134: a region $R$ on the triangular lattice to a family of non-intersecting lattice paths 

1135: taking steps east or north on the grid lattice $\Z^2$. This bijection works as

1136: follows. Choose a lattice line direction $d$ --- without loss of generality, the

1137: horizontal direction --- , and mark with a dot the unit segments parallel to $d$ on the 

1138: boundary of $R$ (see Figure~2.1). 

1139: Each marked segment is either on top or at the bottom of the region $R$.

1140: Label from right to left the ones at the bottom of $R$ by

1141: $u_1,u_2,\dotsc,u_m$ and the

1142: ones on top of $R$ by $v_1,v_2,\dotsc,v_n$. 

1143: 

1144: \def\epsfsize#1#2{0.35#1}

1145: \topinsert

1146: \vbox{

1147: \twoline{\mypic{2-1.eps}}{\mypic{2-1a.eps}}

1148: \twoline{Figure~2.1.{\rm \ \ \ \ \  }}{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Figure~2.2.{\rm }}

1149: \vskip-1.2cm

1150: \centerline{\hskip7.2cm$u_3\ u_2\ u_1$}

1151: \vskip-5.9cm

1152: \centerline{\hskip6.7cm$v_1$}

1153: \vskip-0.05cm

1154: \centerline{\hskip5.4cm$v_2$}

1155: \vskip-0.05cm

1156: \centerline{\hskip4.1cm$v_3$}

1157: \vskip5cm

1158: }

1159: \endinsert

1160: 

1161: \topinsert

1162: \vskip10pt

1163: $$

1164: \Einheit=.4cm

1165: \Gitter(7,11)(-3,-2)

1166: \Koordinatenachsen(7,11)(-3,-2)

1167: \Pfad(0,0),1212211222212\endPfad

1168: \Pfad(-1,1),212212212212\endPfad

1169: \Pfad(-2,2),22221221221\endPfad

1170: \Diagonale(-1,-3){7}

1171: \DickPunkt(0,0)

1172: \DickPunkt(-1,1)

1173: \DickPunkt(-2,2)

1174: \DickPunkt(5,8)

1175: \DickPunkt(3,9)

1176: \DickPunkt(1,10)

1177: \Label\ru{y=x-2}(3,0)

1178: \Label\lu{u_1}(0,0)

1179: \Label\lu{u_2}(-1,1)

1180: \Label\lu{u_3}(-2,2)

1181: \Label\ro{v_1}(5,8)

1182: \Label\ro{v_2}(3,9)

1183: \Label\ro{v_3}(1,10)

1184: \hbox{\hskip5.5cm}

1185: \Gitter(7,11)(-3,-3)

1186: \Koordinatenachsen(7,11)(-3,-3)

1187: \Pfad(0,-1),21212211222212\endPfad

1188: \Pfad(-1,-2),222212212212212\endPfad

1189: \Pfad(-2,-3),2222222221221221\endPfad

1190: \Diagonale(-2,-4){8}

1191: \DickPunkt(0,0)

1192: \DickPunkt(-1,1)

1193: \DickPunkt(-2,2)

1194: \DickPunkt(0,-1)

1195: \DickPunkt(-1,-2)

1196: \DickPunkt(-2,-3)

1197: \DickPunkt(5,8)

1198: \DickPunkt(3,9)

1199: \DickPunkt(1,10)

1200: \Label\ru{y=x-2}(3,0)

1201: \hskip1.8cm

1202: $$

1203: \vskip7pt

1204: \twoline{Figure~2.3{\rm(a). \ \ \ \ \  }}{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

1205: Figure~2.3{\rm(b).  }}

1206: \vskip10pt

1207: \endinsert

1208: 

1209: Consider now the tile $t_1$ of $T$ resting on $u_i$, for some fixed $1\leq i\leq m$

1210: (see Figure~2.2 for an example of a tiling $T$ of the region from Figure 2.1).

1211: Let $t_2$ be the other tile of $T$ containing the side of $t_1$ opposite $u_i$.

1212: Continue the sequence of selected tiles by choosing $t_3$ to be the tile of $T$ sharing

1213: with $t_2$ the side of $t_2$ opposite the one common to $t_2$ and $t_1$. This

1214: procedure leads to a path of rhombic tiles growing upward, which clearly must end on

1215: one of the $v_j$'s. 

1216: This path of rhombi can be identified with a (linear) path that

1217: starts at the midpoint of $u_i$ and ends at the midpoint of $v_j$,

1218: see Figure~2.2. (There, the resulting linear paths are indicated by

1219: dotted segments.) After normalizing the oblique coordinate system and

1220: rotating it in standard position, we obtain a lattice path on

1221: $\Z^2$ that starts at the midpoint of $u_i$ (actually, its image

1222: after these normalizations), ends at the midpoint of $v_j$ (again, actually 

1223: its image after these normalizations) and takes 

1224: unit steps east or north. (See Figure~2.3(a) for the resulting

1225: lattice paths in our example.)

1226: One obtains this way a family $\Cal P$ of $m$ 

1227: lattice paths, one for each $1\leq

1228: i\leq m$, and they cannot touch each other

1229: since the corresponding paths of tiles are disjoint.

1230: We obtain in particular that $m\leq n$, and hence by symmetry $m=n$. It is easy to

1231: see that the correspondence $T\mapsto \Cal P$ is a bijection between the set of

1232: tilings $T$ of $R$ and the families $\Cal P$ 

1233: of non-intersecting lattice paths starting at the

1234: midpoints of $u_1,u_2,\dotsc,u_n$, ending at the midpoints of

1235: $v_1,v_2,\dotsc,v_n$ and

1236: contained within $R$.

1237: 

1238: 

1239: \proclaim{Lemma 2.1} For $b\leq a\leq c$, we have 

1240: $L(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))=(-1)^{b(b+1)/2} \det A_b(a-2b-1,b+c+1)$.

1241: \endproclaim

1242: 

1243: \pf Label the horizontal unit segments on the boundary of $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$ as

1244: described above. 

1245: %This yields segments $u_1,u_2,\dotsc,u_b$ below our region and segments

1246: %$v_1,v_2,\dotsc,v_b$ above it.

1247: Choose an oblique coordinate system with the origin at the midpoint of $u_1$ and

1248: coordinate axes parallel to the non-horizontal lattice lines of the triangular

1249: lattice (see Figure~2.1). 

1250: Applying the procedure described above to $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$ one obtains that 

1251: $L(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$ is equal to the number of families of non-intersecting

1252: lattice paths 

1253: with starting points $u_i=(-i+1,i-1)$, $i=1,2,\dotsc,b$, ending points

1254: $v_j=(a-2j+2,c+j-1)$, $j=1,2,\dotsc,b$, and with the additional requirement that they 

1255: do not touch the

1256: line 

1257: $y=x-2$.

1258: (This requirement ensures that the corresponding paths of rhombi stay

1259: within our region $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$; see Figure~2.3(a). 

1260: Note that by abuse of notation we denote the

1261: midpoints of the $u_i$'s and $v_j$'s by the same symbols we use for the

1262: segments.)

1263: 

1264: By the Lindstr\"om-Gessel-Viennot theorem 

1265: \cite{\LindAA, Lemma~1}\cite{\GV}\cite{\Stenlp, Theorem~1.2}, the number of 

1266: such families

1267: of non-intersecting lattice paths is given by the determinant of the $b\times b$ matrix

1268: whose $(i,j)$-entry is the number of lattice paths from $u_i$ to $v_j$ that

1269: are strictly above the line $y=x-2$. By Andr\'e's Reflection Principle \cite{\Feller}, 

1270: this number is

1271: $$\binom{a+c-j+1}{a-2j+i+1}-\binom{a+c-j+1}{a-2j-i+1}.$$

1272: Therefore, the Lindstr\"om-Gessel-Viennot theorem implies that

1273: $$L(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))=

1274: \det \left(\binom{a+c-j+1}{a-2j+i+1}-\binom{a+c-j+1}{a-2j-i+1}

1275: \right)_{1\leq i,j\leq b}.\tag2.1$$

1276: Reversing columns (i.e., replacing $j$ by $b+1-j$) in (2.1) the right

1277: hand side becomes

1278: $$(-1)^{b(b-1)/2}\det \left(\binom{a+c+j-b}{a+2j+i-2b-1}-\binom{a+c+j-b}{a+2j-i-2b-1}

1279: \right)_{1\leq i,j\leq b}.\tag2.2$$

1280: The entries of the matrix in (2.2) are readily seen to be precisely the negatives of

1281: the entries of $A_b(a-2b-1,b+c+1)$. This implies the statement of the Lemma.  $\square$

1282: 

1283: %$$\align

1284: %(-1)^{b(b-1)/2}\det \left(\binom{a+c+j-b}{a+2j+i-2b-1}-\binom{a+c+j-b}{a+2j-i-2b-1}

1285: %\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq b}&\\

1286: %(-1)^{b(b-1)/2}\det

1287: %\left(\binom{(a-2b-1)+(b+c+1)+j}{(a-2b-1)+2j+i}-\binom{(a-2b-1)+(b+c+1)+j}

1288: %{(a-2b-1)+2j-i}

1289: %\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq b}&\\

1290: %(-1)^{b+b(b-1)/2}\det A_b(a-2b-1,b+c+1)&,

1291: %\endalign$$

1292: 

1293: \smallpagebreak

1294: {\it Proof of Theorem 1.10.} The preceding proof of Lemma~2.1 shows

1295: (by renumbering the lattice paths from left to right)

1296: that $(-1)^{n(n+1)/2}A_n(x,y)$ counts the number of families $\Cal P$

1297: of $n$ non-intersecting lattice paths, with starting points

1298: $(-n+i,n-i)$, $i=1,2,\dots,n$, and end points $(x+2j+1,y-j-1)$,

1299: $j=1,2,\dots,n$,

1300: with the additional requirement that they do not touch the line

1301: $y=x-2$ (see Figure~2.3(a)

1302: for an example). Now, for each such family, 

1303: we prepend $(2n-2i+1)$ vertical steps to the

1304: $i$-th path. Thus we obtain families $\Cal P'$

1305: of $n$ non-intersecting lattice paths, with starting points

1306: $(-n+i,-n+i-1)$, $i=1,2,\dots,n$, and end points 

1307: $(x+2j+1,y-j-1)$, $j=1,2,\dots,n$,

1308: with the additional requirement that they do not touch the line

1309: $y=x-2$. (See Figure~2.3(b)

1310: for the resulting path family in our example.) In fact, this is a

1311: bijection between the former and latter path families, because the

1312: prepended path portions are in fact forced by the boundary $y=x-2$. 

1313: Therefore $(-1)^{n(n+1)/2}A_n(x,y)$ 

1314: is also equal to the number of the latter path

1315: families. 

1316: 

1317: Again we may apply the Lindstr\"om-Gessel-Viennot theorem. Since the

1318: Reflection Principle yields that the number of paths from

1319: $(-n+i,-n+i-1)$ to $(x+2j+1,y-j-1)$ which do not touch the line

1320: $y=x-2$ is given by

1321: $$\multline

1322: \binom {x+y+j+2n-2i+1}{x+2j+n-i+1}-\binom {x+y+j+2n-2i+1}{x+2j+n-i}\\

1323: =

1324: \frac {(y-x-3j)\,(x+y+j+2n-2i+1)!} {(x+2j+n-i+1)!\,(y+n-j-i+1)!},

1325: \endmultline$$

1326: we infer that $(-1)^{n(n+1)/2}A_n(x,y)$ is equal to

1327: $$\align

1328: \det\bigg(&\frac {(y-x-3j)\,(x+y+j+2n-2i+1)!}

1329: {(x+2j+n-i+1)!\,(y+n-j-i+1)!}\bigg)_{1\le i,j\le n}\\

1330: &=\prod _{j=1} ^{n}(y-x-3j)\cdot

1331: \det\left(\frac {1} {y+n-j-i+1}\binom {x+y+j+2n-2i+1}

1332: {x+2j+n-i+1}\right)_{1\le i,j\le n}\\

1333: &=\prod _{j=1} ^{n}(y-x-3j)\cdot

1334: \det\left(\frac {(-1)^{x+2j+n-i+1}} {y+n-j-i+1}\binom {-y-n+j+i-1}

1335: {x+2j+n-i+1}\right)_{1\le i,j\le n}\\

1336: &=\prod _{j=1} ^{n}\big((-1)^{x+n-j}(y-x-3j)\big)\\

1337: &\hskip2cm\times

1338: \det\left(\frac {1}

1339: {-y-x-2n+2i-j-2}\binom {-y-n+j+i-2}{x+2j+n-i+1}\right)_{1\le i,j\le n}.

1340: \endalign$$

1341: (At the second to last equality we used that

1342: $\binom{n}{k}=(-1)^k\binom{-n+k-1}{k}$.)

1343: This latter determinant is the determinant $\det K_n(-y-x-2n-2,x+n+1)$, 

1344: with $K_n(x,y)$ defined in (1.5). 

1345: In view of Theorem~1.9, this proves (1.8), after

1346: some manipulation. $\square$

1347: 

1348: \smallpagebreak

1349: {\it Proof of Theorem 1.1.} This follows directly from Lemma~2.1 and Theorem~1.10. 

1350: $\square$

1351: 

1352: \smallpagebreak

1353: {\it Proof of Theorem 1.2.} As in the proof of Lemma~2.1,

1354: we map the tilings to families $\Cal P$

1355: of non-intersecting lattice paths, with starting points 

1356: $u_i=(-i+1,i-1)$, $i=1,2,\dotsc,b$, ending points

1357: $v_j=(a-2j+2,c+j-1)$, $j=1,2,\dotsc,b$, and with the additional requirement 

1358: that they do not touch the line $y=x-2$ (see again Figure~2.3(a)). 

1359: Following the proof of

1360: Theorem~1.10, we prepend $2i-1$ vertical steps to the $i$-th path

1361: (because here we kept the numbering of the paths from right to left), so

1362: that we obtain families $\Cal P'$ 

1363: of non-intersecting lattice paths, with starting points 

1364: $u_i=(-i+1,-i)$, $i=1,2,\dotsc,b$, ending points

1365: $v_j=(a-2j+2,c+j-1)$, $j=1,2,\dotsc,b$, and with the additional requirement 

1366: that they do not touch the line $y=x-2$ (see again Figure~2.3(b)). 

1367: However, unlike in the

1368: proofs of Lemma~2.1 and Theorem~1.10, here each family has a certain

1369: weight, given by the $\ell$-th power of $1/2$, where $\ell$ is the number

1370: of lozenges that are weighted by $1/2$ in the corresponding tiling

1371: (compare Figures~1.3(c), 2.1 and 2.3(b)).

1372: 

1373: To realize this weight, we give each horizontal step from

1374: $(a-2k+1,c+k-1)$ to $(a-2k+2,c+k-1)$, for some $k$, 

1375: the weight $1/2$. This takes

1376: care of the fact that the lozenges along the northwestern zig-zag

1377: line are weighted by $1/2$. To also take into account that the

1378: lozenges along the eastern zig-zag line are weighted by $1/2$, we

1379: assign a weight of 2

1380: %Christian:

1381: (sic!) to each horizontal step from

1382: %Christian: Changed -k into k.

1383: $(k,k)$ to $(k+1,k)$,

1384: for some $k$

1385: (i.e., to each horizontal step which terminates directly at the line

1386: $y=x-1$

1387: the paths are not allowed to cross). This generates our weight, up

1388: to a multiplicative constant of $2^a$. 

1389: Indeed, for each marked lozenge position along the eastern boundary, 

1390: a tiling $T$ has

1391: a lozenge in that position if and only if the corresponding unit 

1392: segment weighted by 2

1393: %Christian: modified that place.

1394: is {\it not\/} a step on some lattice path 

1395: of the family corresponding to $T$, thereby giving rise to a missing

1396: weight of $1/2$ in comparison to path families where some path does

1397: contain that step. To give an explicit example,

1398: the tiling in Figure~2.2 contains two tiles weighted by $1/2$ 

1399: along the eastern boundary, the third and the fifth from the

1400: bottom. These are the ones which are completely white, as there

1401: is no lattice path running through them. Hence, in the corresponding

1402: path family shown in Figure~2.3(b), the step from $(2,2)$ to $(3,2)$

1403: and the step from $(4,4)$ to $(5,4)$ (both weighted by 2) 

1404: are not contained by 

1405: any of the paths.

1406: 

1407: Now we want to write down the Lindstr\"om--Gessel--Viennot determinant

1408: for our weighted count (as defined just above). 

1409: In order to do so, we need the weighted count

1410: of paths from $(-i+1,-i)$ to $(a-2j+2,c+j-1)$ which do not touch

1411: $y=x-2$.

1412: We claim that the weighted count of these latter paths is the same as the

1413: weighted count of {\it all\/} paths from $(-i+1,-i)$ to 

1414: $(a-2j+2,c+j-1)$, in which the last step of the

1415: path has weight $1/2$ if it is a horizontal step. (It should be noted

1416: that in this weighted count there are no steps with weight 2 anymore.) 

1417: This is seen as follows: suppose we are

1418: given a path from $(-i+1,-i)$ to $(a-2j+2,c+j-1)$ 

1419: which does not touch the line $y=x-2$, and which has exactly $\ell$

1420: touching points on the line $y=x-1$. These $\ell$ touching points on

1421: $y=x-1$ must be reached by horizontal steps from

1422: %Christian: Changed -k into k.

1423: $(k,k)$ to $(k+1,k)$, each of which contribute a weight of $2$.

1424: Thus, in total, this gives contribution of $2^\ell$ to the weight.

1425: Now we map such a path to $2^\ell$ paths from

1426: $(-i+1,-i)$ to $(a-2j+2,c+j-1)$ (without restriction), 

1427: by focussing on the path

1428: portions between two consecutive touching points, including the

1429: portion between $(-i+1,-i)$ and the first touching point, and keeping

1430: any of them either fixed or reflecting it in the line 

1431: $y=x-1$. This proves the assertion. 

1432: 

1433: %Christian: More text.

1434: By distinguishing between the cases where the last step of a path is

1435: vertical respectively horizontal, 

1436: the new weighted count of the paths from $(-i+1,-i)$ to $(a-2j+2,c+j-1)$ 

1437: then is seen to be

1438: $$\binom {a+c+2i-j-1}{a-2j+i+1}+\frac {1} {2}\binom

1439: {a+c+2i-j-1}{a-2j+i}=

1440: \frac {1} {2}\frac {(a+2c+3i-1)\,(a+c+2i-j-1)!}

1441: {(a-2j+i+1)!\,(c+i+j-1)!}.$$

1442: 

1443: Therefore the Lindstr\"om--Gessel--Viennot determinant 

1444: is seen, by manipulations similar to those in the proof of Theorem 1.10, to be

1445: $$\multline

1446: \det\bigg(\frac {1} {2}\frac {(a+2c+3i-1)\,(a+c+2i-j-1)!}

1447: {(a-2j+i+1)!\,(c+i+j-1)!}\bigg)_{1\le i,j\le b}\\

1448: =2^{-b}\prod _{i=1} ^{b}\big((-1)^{a+i}(a+2c+3i-1)\big)

1449: \det\left(\frac {1} {-a-c+j-2i}\binom {-c-i-j}{a-2j+i+1}\right)_{1\le i,j\le b}.

1450: \endmultline$$

1451: After reversing the order of rows and columns (i.e., after replacing $i$

1452: by $b+1-i$ and $j$ by $b+1-j$), it is seen that this

1453: determinant is the determinant $\det K_b(-a-c-b-1,a-b)$. Application

1454: of Theorem~1.9, division of the resulting expression by $2^a$, 

1455: and some rearrangement finish the proof of the

1456: theorem. $\square$

1457: 

1458: 

1459: 

1460: \smallpagebreak

1461: {\it Proof of Proposition 1.3.} Consider the region $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$ and choose the

1462: direction $d$ in the bijection between tilings and lattice paths to be the direction

1463: of the lattice lines going from southwest to northeast

1464: (see Figure~2.4). Consider the unit segments 

1465: parallel to $d$ on the boundary, and label the midpoints of those on the eastern 

1466: boundary, from top to bottom, by $u_1,u_2,\dotsc,u_a$, and the midpoints of those on the

1467: northwestern boundary by $v_1,v_2,\dotsc,v_a$. Choose an oblique coordinate system

1468: centered $\sqrt{3}$ units above $u_1$ (see Figure~2.4) and with axes along the 

1469: northwestern and western lattice line

1470: directions.

1471: 

1472: 

1473: \def\epsfsize#1#2{0.35#1}

1474: \topinsert

1475: \centerline{\mypic{2-2.eps}}

1476: \centerline{Figure~2.4. {\rm }}

1477: \endinsert

1478: 

1479: By the bijection between tilings and lattice paths, each tiling $T$ of $H_{\text

1480: d}(a,b,c)$ is identified with a family $\Cal P$ of 

1481: non-intersecting lattice paths with 

1482: starting points 

1483: %Christian: Unfortunately, the given coordinatization does not match

1484: %  with Figure 2.4. Either you have to shift the cordinate axes

1485: %  by two units up, or you have to add (2,-1) to the starting

1486: %  and end points. (I consider the latter solution less attractive.) 

1487: $(-2i,i)$, $i=1,2,\dotsc,a$, 

1488: and ending points $(c-a-j,b-a+2j)$, 

1489: $j=1,2,\dotsc,a$.

1490: (Unlike in the proof of Lemma~2.1, no additional requirements on the paths are

1491: needed). 

1492: 

1493: The weighted enumerator $L^*$ assumes that the northwesternmost $a$ tile positions

1494: are weighted by $1/2$ (these positions are marked in Figure~2.4). 

1495: Correspondingly, the paths of $\Cal P$ whose last step is a

1496: %Christian: just to be consistent with the rest

1497: %$y$-step 

1498: vertical step have weight $1/2$ 

1499: %Christian: minor addition

1500: (as before, the weight of a lattice path is the product of the weights

1501: of its steps). The weight of the family $\Cal P$ is the product of the weights of its

1502: members, and by construction it matches the weight of the tiling $T$. 

1503: By the Lindstr\"om-Gessel-Viennot theorem,

1504: the total weight of those families $\Cal P$ that are

1505: non-intersecting --- and hence $L^*(H_{\text d}(a,b,c))$ --- is given by the determinant of

1506: the $a\times a$ matrix whose $(i,j)$-entry equals the total weight of the paths from

1507: $u_i$ to $v_j$. Splitting the latter family in two according to the type of the last

1508: step, one obtains that its total weight is

1509: %

1510: $$\align

1511: &\binom{b+c-2a+i+j-1}{c-a+2i-j-1}+\frac{1}{2}\binom{b+c-2a+i+j-1}{c-a+2i-j}\\

1512: &\ \ \ \ =\frac{b+2c-3a+3i}{2}\frac{(b+c-2a+i+j-1)\,!}

1513: {(c-a+2i-j)\,!\,(b-a+2j-i)\,!}.

1514: \endalign

1515: $$

1516: %

1517: When computing the determinant of the above matrix, the $j$-free factors can be

1518: factored out along rows, and the leftover matrix is precisely the one in

1519: (1.5) with

1520: $n=a$, $x=c-a$, and $y=b-a$. 

1521: Using (1.6) and substituting the values of $x$ and $y$ one obtains the formula 

1522: in the statement of Proposition~1.3. $\square$

1523: 

1524: \smallpagebreak

1525: 

1526: %Christian: Some more text

1527: Now we turn our attention to the proof of Theorem~1.4.

1528: We deduce (1.4) from a well-known determinant evaluation 

1529: (see the proof of Lemma~2.2) and Proctor's 

1530: formula (1.1), using the Factorization Theorem for perfect matchings

1531: of \cite{\Ci1}. 

1532: 

1533: \def\epsfsize#1#2{0.35#1}

1534: \topinsert

1535: \centerline{\mypic{2-3.eps}}

1536: \centerline{Figure~2.5. {\rm $R(5,10,(7,6,4,2,-1))$.}}

1537: \endinsert

1538: 

1539: Let $m$ and $n$ be nonnegative integers, and let ${\bold l}=(l_1,l_2,\dotsc,l_n)$,

1540: $0\leq l_1\leq m$, $l_1>\cdots>l_n$ be a list of integers (some of which may be 

1541: negative). We define the regions $R(n,m,{\bold l})$ as follows. Consider an oblique

1542: coordinate system on the triangular lattice, centered at the midpoint of a lattice

1543: segment facing northeast and having the $x$-axis horizontal and the $y$-axis parallel 

1544: to the lattice

1545: lines going from southwest to northeast (see Figure~2.5). 

1546: Consider, on the one hand, the points $(-i+1,i-1)$,

1547: $i=1,2,\dotsc,n$, and on the other hand the points

1548: $(l_j,m-l_j)$, $j=1,2,\dotsc,n$. We construct $R(n,m,{\bold l})$ so that its

1549: tilings are in bijection with the families of non-intersecting lattice paths with

1550: these starting and ending points. It is easy to see that this determines 

1551: $R(n,m,{\bold l})$ to be the hexagon with side lengths 

1552: $n,l_1,m-l_1,l_1-l_n+1,l_n+n-1,m-l_n-n+1$ (in anticlockwise order, starting with

1553: the southwestern

1554: side), and having triangular dents along the northeastern side at the lattice segments

1555: with midpoints not among $(l_j,m-l_j)$, $j=1,2,\dotsc,n$. ($R(5,10,(7,6,4,2,-1))$

1556: is shown in Figure~2.5.)

1557: 

1558: 

1559: \proclaim{Lemma 2.2} 

1560: $$L(R(n,m,{\bold l}))=

1561: \frac {\prod _{1\le i<j\le n} ^{}(l_i-l_j)\prod _{i=1} ^{n}(m+i-1)!} 

1562: {\prod _{i=1} ^{n}(l_i+n-1)!\prod _{i=1} ^{n}(m-l_i)!}.$$

1563: \endproclaim

1564: 

1565: \pf By construction and by the Lindstr\"om-Gessel-Viennot theorem, we have that 

1566: %

1567: $$L(R(n,m,{\bold l}))=\det \left(\binom{m}{l_j+i-1}\right)_{1\leq i,j\leq n}.\tag2.3$$

1568: %

1569: This determinant can be evaluated, e.g., by means of \cite{\KratBN,

1570: (3.12)} with $A=m-1$ and $L_i=l_i-1$, $i=1,2,\dots,n$,

1571: and one obtains the formula in the statement of the Lemma.

1572: %By transposing, the $(i,j)$-entry becomes

1573: %

1574: %$$\binom{m}{l_i+j-1}=\binom{m}{\lambda_i+j-i}=e_{\lambda_i+j-i}(1^m),\tag2.3$$

1575: %

1576: %where $e_k(x_1,x_2,\dotsc)$ is the $k$-th elementary symmetric function, and the

1577: %symbol $1^m$ in the argument stands for the specialization $x_1=\cdots=x_m=1$,

1578: %$x_i=0$, $i>m$. By the N\"agelsbach--Kostka identity (see e.g. \cite{\Macd, I

1579: %\S3, (3.5)}), the

1580: %determinant in (2.3) equals then $s_{\lambda'}(1^m)$, where $s_\mu$ is the Schur

1581: %function indexed by partition $\mu$. Since the length of $\lambda'$ is $l_1\leq m$, 

1582: %by the formula for the principal specialization of Schur functions 

1583: %(see \cite{\Macd, I \S3, Ex. 1}) we obtain the statement of the Lemma.

1584: $\square$

1585: 

1586: 

1587: \smallpagebreak

1588: {\it Proof of Theorem 1.4.} 

1589: Consider the region $H_1(a,b,c)$ and weight by $1/2$ the $a$ tile positions required

1590: to be weighted so by $L^*$ (these are marked in Figure~2.6). Draw a line $l$ through

1591: the centers of the marked lozenges, and reflect $H_1(a,b,c)$ across $l$. The union

1592: $U$ of $H_1(a,b,c)$ with its mirror image is precisely the region $R(2c,a,{\bold l})$, 

1593: where ${\bold l}=(b,b-1,\dotsc,b-c+1,a-c,a-c-1,\dotsc,a-2c+1)$. Applying Lemma~2.2

1594: one obtains, after some manipulations, that

1595: %

1596: $$L(U)=\prod_{i=1}^a\left[\prod_{j=1}^{b-a}\left(\frac{c+i+j-1}{i+j-1}\right)^2

1597: \prod_{j=b-a+1}^b\frac{2c+i+j-1}{i+j-1}\right].\tag2.4$$

1598: %

1599: The region $U$ is symmetric about $l$, so we can apply to it the Factorization Theorem

1600: of \cite{\Ci1} (see \cite{\CiKrAA} for a phrasing of it in terms of lozenge tilings). 

1601: Following the prescriptions in the statement of this theorem, 

1602: cut $U$ along the zig-zag line following lattice segments

1603: just above $l$ (this is shown as a thick line in Figure~2.6), and denote the pieces

1604: above and below the cut by $U^+$ and $U^-$, respectively. In $U^-$, 

1605: weight the tile 

1606: positions just below the cut by $1/2$. Since $l$ cuts through $2a$

1607: unit triangles, the Factorization Theorem yields

1608: %

1609: $$L(U)=2^aL(U^+)L^*(U^-).\tag2.5$$

1610: %

1611: However, $U^-$ is by construction just $H_1(a,b,c)$. Moreover, in $U^+$ there is a row

1612: of forced tiles (shaded in Figure~2.6), and the region left upon their removal is

1613: congruent to $H_1(a,b-1,c)$. Solving for $L^*(U^-)$ in (2.5) and using 

1614: formulas (2.4) and (1.1), one obtains for $L^*(H_1(a,b,c))$ the product expression

1615: (1.4). $\square$

1616: 

1617: \smallpagebreak

1618: Even though the region $H_{\text a}(a,b,c)$ looks different from the case

1619: $b\leq a\leq c$ of $H_{\text d}(a,b,c)$, it turns out that their tiling enumerations 

1620: amount to evaluating the same determinant.

1621: 

1622: \proclaim{Lemma 2.3} For $b\ge a+c-1$ we have 

1623: $L(H_{\text a}(a,b,c))=\det A_a(b-a,c)$.

1624: \endproclaim

1625: 

1626: \topinsert

1627: \twoline{\mypic{2-4.eps}}{\mypic{2-5.eps}}

1628: \twoline{Figure~2.6.{\rm \ \ \ \ \  }}{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Figure~2.7.{\rm }}

1629: \endinsert

1630: 

1631: \pf Rotate the region $H_{\text a}(a,b,c)$ clockwise by 

1632: $60^\circ$, so that it is positioned as in Figure~2.7. 

1633: By the bijection between

1634: tilings and lattice paths, each tiling is identified with a family of 

1635: non-intersecting

1636: lattice paths with starting points $(-i+1,i-1)$, ending points

1637: $(c-j+1,b-a+2j-1)$, $i,j=1,2,\dotsc,a$, and such that all lattice paths stay strictly above

1638: the line $y=x-2$. Just as in the proof of Theorem~1.1, the 

1639: Lindstr\"om-Gessel-Viennot theorem implies that

1640: %

1641: $$L(H_{\text a}(a,b,c))=

1642: \det \left(\binom{b+c-a+j}{b-a+2j-i}-\binom{b+c-a+j}{b-a+2j+i}

1643: \right)_{1\leq i,j\leq a}.$$

1644: %

1645: The above determinant is readily recognized 

1646: as $A_a(b-a,c)$. $\square$

1647: 

1648: \smallpagebreak

1649: {\it Proof of Theorem 1.6.} This follows directly from Lemma 2.3 and Theorem 1.10.

1650: $\square$

1651: 

1652: \smallpagebreak

1653: {\it Proof of Theorem 1.7.} We use the bijection between tilings and

1654: families of non-inter\-sect\-ing lattice paths from the 

1655: %Christian: Now it is not the preceding proof anymore ...

1656: %preceding 

1657: proof of Lemma~2.3.

1658: In addition, we prepend $(2i-1)$ vertical steps to the $i$-th path.

1659: Thus we obtain families $\Cal P'$ of non-inter\-sect\-ing lattice paths,

1660: with starting points $(-i+1,-i)$, $i=1,2,\dots,a$, ending points

1661: $(c-j+1,b-a+2j-1)$, $j=1,2,\dotsc,a$, 

1662: and such that all lattice paths stay strictly above

1663: the line $y=x-2$. For the rest of the proof one follows the arguments

1664: in the proof of Theorem~1.2, which have to be adjusted only

1665: insignificantly. $\square$

1666: 

1667: \smallpagebreak

1668: {\it Proof of Proposition 1.8.} Let $T$ be a tiling of $H_{\text o}(a,b,a)$. Consider

1669: the $b$ tiles containing the lattice segments on the bottom part of its boundary.

1670: Because of forcing, there is precisely one dent in the upper boundary of the union of

1671: these tiles (see Figure~2.8). This dent has to be covered by some other tile $t$

1672: (shaded dark in Figure~2.8), which 

1673: in turn forces $b$ more tiles in place. Thus, a subregion congruent to $H(1,b,1)$ at

1674: the bottom of $H_{\text o}(a,b,a)$ ends up being tiled by the restriction of the

1675: tiling $T$. Since there are $b+1$ tilings of $H(1,b,1)$ (corresponding to the $b+1$

1676: possible positions of $t$), this implies

1677: %

1678: $$L(H_{\text o}(a,b,a))=(b+1)\,L(H_{\text o}(a-1,b,a-1)).$$

1679: %

1680: Repeated application of this gives the statement of the Proposition. $\square$

1681: 

1682: \def\epsfsize#1#2{0.35#1}

1683: \topinsert

1684: \centerline{\mypic{2-6.eps}}

1685: \centerline{Figure~2.8. {\rm }}

1686: \endinsert

1687: 

1688: \mysec{Appendix}

1689: 

1690: \proclaim{Conjecture A.1}

1691: The number of lozenge tilings of the region $H_{\text n}(x,m+y,x+m-y)$ 

1692: {\rm(}see Figure~{\rm1.7(b)} for an example{\rm)}

1693: is equal to

1694: $$\multline 

1695: \prod _{i=1} ^{m}\frac {(x+i)!} {(x-i+m+y+1)!\,(2i-1)!}

1696: \prod _{i=m+1} ^{m+y}\frac {(x+2m-i+1)!}

1697: {(2m+2y-2i+1)!\,(m+x-y+i-1)!}\\

1698: \times

1699: {2^{\binom {m}2 + \binom y2 }}

1700:       \prod_{i = 1}^{m-1}i!   

1701:       \prod_{i = 1}^{y-1}i!   

1702:       \prod_{i \ge 0}^{}

1703:         ({ \textstyle x+i+{\frac{3}{2}} }) _{m-2i-1}    

1704:       \prod_{i \ge 0}^{}

1705:         ({ \textstyle   x - y+{\frac{5}{2}} + 3 i}) _{ \left \lfloor

1706:          {\frac{3 y}{2}} -{\frac{9 i}{2}}  \right \rfloor-2}\\    

1707: \times      \prod_{i \ge 0}^{}

1708:         ({ \textstyle   x + {\frac{3 m}{2}} - y  + \left \lceil

1709:          {\frac{3 i}{2}} \right \rceil+\frac {3} {2}}) 

1710:       _{ 3 \left \lceil {\frac{y}{2}}

1711:          \right \rceil - \left \lceil

1712:          {\frac{9 i}{2}} \right \rceil -2}    

1713:            \prod_{i \ge 0}

1714:         ^{}

1715:         ({ \textstyle {  x+ {\frac{3 m}{2}} - y + \left \lfloor

1716:          {\frac{3 i}{2}} \right \rfloor+2}}) _{ 3 \left \lfloor

1717:          {\frac{y}{2}} \right \rfloor - \left \lfloor {\frac{9 i}{2}} \right

1718:          \rfloor-1}\\

1719: \times      \prod_{i \ge 0}^{}

1720:         ({ \textstyle  x+m - \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right

1721:          \rfloor}+i+1) _{  2 \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right

1722:          \rfloor-m - 2 i }

1723:      \prod_{i \ge 0}

1724:         ^{}

1725:         ({ \textstyle  x + \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right \rfloor+i+2})

1726:          _{m - 2 \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right \rfloor-2i-2} 

1727: \\\times

1728: {\frac{ \dsize

1729:       \prod_{i = 0}^{y}

1730:         ({ \textstyle x - y+3i+1}) _{m + 2 y-4i}    

1731:       \prod_{i = 0}^{ \left \lceil {\frac{y}{2}} \right \rceil-1}

1732:         ({ \textstyle x+m - y+i+1}) _{3 y-m-4i}    

1733:    }

1734: {\dsize

1735:       \prod_{i \ge 0}^{}

1736:         ({ \textstyle x+ {\frac{m}{2}}  - {\frac{y}{2}}+i+1}) _{y-2i}\,

1737:   ({ \textstyle  x + {\frac{m}{2}}-

1738:           {\frac{y}{2}}+i+{\frac{3}{2}}}) _{y-2i-1}   }}\\

1739: \times\frac {\dsize

1740:       \prod_{i = 0}^{y}

1741:         ({ \textstyle x+i+2 }) _{2m - 2 i - 1}    }

1742:  {  ({ \textstyle  x + y+2}) _{ m - y-1}  \,(m+x-y+1)_{m+y} }.

1743: \endmultline\tag A.1$$

1744: Here, shifted factorials occur with positive as well as with negative

1745: indices. The convention with respect to which these have

1746: to be interpreted is

1747: $$(\alpha)_k:=\cases \alpha(\alpha+1)\cdots(\alpha+k-1)&\text {if

1748: }k>0,\\

1749: 1&\text {if }k=0,\\

1750: 1/(\alpha-1)(\alpha-2)\cdots(\alpha+k)&\text {if }k<0.

1751: \endcases$$ 

1752: All products $\prod

1753: _{i\ge0} ^{}(f(i))_{g(i)}$ in {\rm(A.1)} have to interpreted as the products over

1754: all $i\ge0$ for which $g(i)\ge0$.

1755: \endproclaim

1756: 

1757: For a proof one could try to proceed as follows:

1758: first we introduce nonintersecting lattice paths, with

1759: starting points along the bottom, and end points along the

1760: northeastern and northwestern zig-zag lines. On

1761: introducing a suitable coordinate system, the starting points can be

1762: represented as $A_i=(-i,i)$, $i=1,2,\dots,m+y$, and the end points as

1763: $E_i=(x-i,2i)$, $i=1,2,\dots,m$, $E_i=(m+y-2i+1,m+x-y+i)$,

1764: $i=m+1,m+2,\dots,m+y$. The corresponding 

1765: Lindstr\"om--Gessel--Viennot determinant is

1766: $$ \det_{1\le i,j\le m+y}\left(\left\{\matrix \binom

1767: {x+i}{x-i+j}&i=1,\dots,m\hfill\\

1768: \binom{x+2m-i+1}{m+y-2i+j+1}&i=m+1,\dots,m+y

1769: \endmatrix\right\}\right).\tag A.2$$

1770: The task is to evaluate this determinant. In principle, after having

1771: taken suitable factors out of the determinant (so that the new

1772: determinant is a polynomial in $x$), the

1773: ``identification of factors" method, as described in Section~2.4 of

1774: \cite{\KratBN}, should be capable of accomplishing the determinant

1775: evaluation.

1776: 

1777: \proclaim{Conjecture A.2}

1778: The weighted count of lozenge tilings of the region 

1779: $H_{\text n}(x,m+y,x+m-y)$, where the lozenges along

1780: the two zig-zag lines are weighted by $1/2$

1781: {\rm(}see Figure~{\rm1.7(b)} for an example; the lozenges that are

1782: weighted by $1/2$ are marked by ellipses{\rm)}, 

1783: is equal to

1784: $$\multline 

1785: \prod _{i=1} ^{m}\frac {(x+i-1)!} {(x-i+m+y+1)!\,(2i-1)!}

1786: \prod _{i=m+1} ^{m+y}\frac {(x+2m-i)!}

1787: {(2m+2y-2i+1)!\,(m+x-y+i-1)!}\\

1788: \times

1789: {2^{\binom {m}2 + \binom y2 }} 

1790:       \prod_{i = 1}^{m-1}i!   

1791:       \prod_{i = 1}^{y-1}i!   

1792:       \prod_{i \ge 0}^{}

1793:         ({ \textstyle x+i+{\frac{3}{2}}}) _{m-2 i -1}    

1794:       \prod_{i \ge 0}^{}

1795:         ({ \textstyle x - y+3i+{\frac{7}{2}}}) _{ \left \lceil

1796:           {\frac{3 y}{2}}-{\frac{9 i}{2}}  \right \rceil-4}\\    

1797: \times           \prod_{i \ge 0}

1798:         ^{}

1799:         ({ \textstyle x+ {\frac{3 m}{2}} - y + \left \lfloor

1800:          {\frac{3 i}{2}} \right \rfloor+\frac {3} {2}}) 

1801:     _{ 3 \left \lceil {\frac{y}{2}}

1802:          \right \rceil-\left \lfloor

1803:          {\frac{9 i}{2}} \right \rfloor -1} 

1804:       \prod_{i \ge 0}^{}

1805:         ({ \textstyle x+ {\frac{3 m}{2}} - y + \left \lceil

1806:          {\frac{3 i}{2}} \right \rceil+1  }) 

1807:         _{ 3 \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right

1808:          \rfloor- \left \lceil

1809:          {\frac{9 i}{2}} \right \rceil +1}  \\

1810: \times   \prod_{i \ge 0}

1811:         ^{}

1812:         ({ \textstyle  x+m - \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right

1813:          \rfloor+i+1}) _{ 2 \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right

1814:          \rfloor-m - 2 i  }     \prod_{i \ge 0}

1815:         ^{}

1816:         ({ \textstyle  x + \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right \rfloor+i+2})

1817:          _{ m - 2 \left \lfloor {\frac{y}{2}} \right \rfloor-2i-2} \\

1818: \times

1819: {\frac{\dsize

1820:      ({ \textstyle  x - y+{\frac{1}{2}}}) _{ \left \lfloor

1821:       {\frac{m}{2}} \right \rfloor+2y}  ({ \textstyle x +m- y}) _{y+1}  

1822:       \prod_{i = 0}^{y}

1823:         ({ \textstyle x+i+1}) _{2m - 2 i }    

1824:   }

1825: {({ \textstyle

1826:         x+{\frac{m}{2}} - {\frac{y}{2}}+ {\frac{1}{2}} }) 

1827:        _{\left \lfloor {\frac{ 3y}{2}} \right \rfloor} 

1828:        ({ \textstyle x + {\frac{3 m}{2}}  -

1829:       {\frac{y}{2}}+1}) _{y+1}  ({ \textstyle x + {\frac{m}{2}} +

1830:       {\frac{y}{2}}+1}) _{\left \lceil {\frac{y-2 }{2}} \right \rceil}  

1831: }}\\

1832: \times

1833: \frac {  \dsize    \prod_{i = 0}^{y}

1834:         ({ \textstyle x - y+3i+1}) _{ m + 2 y-4i}    

1835:       \prod_{i = 0}^{ \left \lceil {\frac{y}{2}} \right \rceil-1}

1836:         ({ \textstyle x +m- y+i+1}) _{3 y-m-4i}    } 

1837: {  \dsize (m+x-y)_{m+y+1}\,

1838:     ({ \textstyle x + y + \left \lceil {\frac{m}{2}} \right \rceil}) _{

1839:      \left \lfloor {\frac{m}{2}} \right \rfloor- y + 1}  

1840:      \prod _{i=0} ^{\lceil y/2\rceil-1}(x-y+1+3i)      }\\

1841: \times

1842: \frac {1}

1843:  { \dsize     {\prod}_{i \ge 0}^{}

1844:         ({ \textstyle x+ {\frac{m}{2}} - {\frac{y}{2}}+i+1}) _{y-2i}

1845:   ({ \textstyle x + {\frac{m}{2}}-

1846:           {\frac{y}{2}}+i+{\frac{3}{2}} }) _{y-2i-1}  },

1847: \endmultline \tag A.3$$

1848: with the same conventions as in the previous conjecture.

1849: \endproclaim

1850: 

1851: For a proof, one could again 

1852: introduce nonintersecting lattice paths, with

1853: starting points and end points as before.

1854: The corresponding Lindstr\"om--Gessel--Viennot determinant is

1855: $$ \det_{1\le i,j\le m+y}\left(\left\{\matrix 

1856: \frac {(x+i-1)!\,(x+j/2)} {(x-i+j)!\,(2i-j)!}&i=1,\dots,m\hfill\\

1857: \frac {(x+2m-i)!\,(3m/2+x-y/2-j/2+1/2)} 

1858: {(m+y-2i+j+1)!\,(m+x-y+i-j)!}&i=m+1,\dots,m+y

1859: \endmatrix\right\}\right).\tag A.4$$

1860: The remarks after (A.2) apply also here.

1861: 

1862: 

1863: 

1864: 

1865: 

1866: 

1867: 

1868: \mysec{References}

1869: {\openup 1\jot \frenchspacing\raggedbottom

1870: \roster

1871: 

1872: \myref{\Amdeb}

1873:   T. Amdeberhan, Lewis strikes again!, electronic manuscript dated 1997.

1874: (available at http://www.math.temple.edu/$\sim$tewodros/programs/kradet.html).

1875: %\myref{\AnBuAA}

1876: %  G. E. Andrews and W. H. Burge, Determinant identities, {\it Pacific J. Math.} {\bf

1877: %158} (1993), 1--14.

1878: \myref{\Ci1}

1879:   M. Ciucu, Enumeration of perfect matchings in graphs with reflective symmetry, 

1880: {\it J. Combin\. Theory Ser\.~A} {\bf 77} (1997), 67--97.

1881: \myref{\CiucAI} 

1882: M.    Ciucu, Enumeration of lozenge

1883: tilings of punctured hexagons, {\it J. Combin\. Theory Ser.~A\/}

1884: {\bf 83} (1998), 268--272.

1885: \myref{\Cipp1}

1886:   M. Ciucu, Plane partitions I: a generalization of MacMahon's

1887: formula, 

1888: %Christian: Is there any update?

1889: preprint 

1890: (available at http://www.math.gatech.edu/$\sim$ciucu/pp1.ps).

1891: \myref{\CiKrAA}

1892:   M. Ciucu and C. Krattenthaler, The number of centered lozenge tilings of a symmetric 

1893: hexagon, {\it J. Combin\. Theory Ser\.~A } {\bf 86} (1999), 103-126. 

1894: \myref{\CKpp2}

1895:   M. Ciucu and C. Krattenthaler, Plane partitions II: 5 1/2 symmetry classes, 

1896: {\it Advanced Studies in Pure Mathematics}, 

1897: in: Combinatorial Methods in Representation 

1898: Theory, M. Kashiwara, K. Koike, S. Okada, I. Terada, H. Yamada, eds.,

1899: Advanced Studies in Pure Mathematics, vol.~28, RIMS, Kyoto,

1900: 2000, pp.~83--103.

1901: \myref{\CiKrAD}

1902:  M.    Ciucu and C. Krattenthaler, A non-automatic (!) application of 

1903: Gosper's algorithm evaluates a determinant from tiling enumeration,

1904: %Christian:

1905: %preprint, 

1906: Rocky Mountain J. Math\. (to appear), {\tt math/0011047}.

1907: \myref{\DT}

1908:   G. David and C. Tomei, The problem of the calissons, {\it Amer\. Math\. 

1909: Monthly} {\bf 96} (1989), 429--431.

1910: \myref{\EisTAA}

1911: T.    Eisenk\"olbl, Rhombus tilings

1912: of a hexagon with two triangles missing on the symmetry axis,

1913: {\it Electron\. J. Combin\.} {\bf 6} {\rm(1)} (1999) \#R30, 19~pp. 

1914: \myref{\Feller}

1915:   W. Feller, ``An introduction to probability theory and its applications,'' Vol.~I, 

1916: John Wiley \& Sons, 1968.

1917: \myref{\FuKrAC} 

1918: M.    Fulmek and C. Krattenthaler,

1919: The number of rhombus tilings of a symmetric hexagon which contain a

1920: fixed rhombus on the symmetry axis, I,

1921: {\it Ann\. Combin\.} {\bf 2} (1998), 19--40.

1922: \myref{\GV}

1923:   I. M. Gessel and X. Viennot, Binomial determinants, paths, and hook length formulae,

1924: {\it Adv\. in Math\.} {\bf 58} (1985), 300--321.

1925: \myref{\GospAB}

1926:  R. W. Gosper, Decision procedure for indefinite hypergeometric

1927: summation, {\it Proc\. Natl\. Acad\. Sci\. USA} {\bf 75} (1978),

1928: 40--42.

1929: \myref{\GrKPAA}

1930:  R. L. Graham, D. E. Knuth and O. Patashnik, ``Concrete Mathematics,'' 

1931: Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1989.

1932: \myref{\Kast}

1933:   P. W. Kasteleyn, The statistics of dimers on a lattice, I: the number of

1934: dimer arrangements on a quadratic lattice, {\it Physica} {\bf 27} (1961), 

1935: 1209--1225.

1936: \myref{\KratBD}

1937:   C. Krattenthaler, Determinant identities and a generalization of the number of 

1938: totally symmetric self-complementary plane partitions, {\it Electron\. J. Combin\.} 

1939: {\bf 4} No.~1 (1997), 

1940: \#R27.

1941: \myref{\KratBN}

1942:   C. Krattenthaler, Advanced determinant calculus, {\it 

1943: S\'eminaire Lotharingien 

1944: Combin\.} {\bf 42} ("The Andrews Festschrift") (1999), paper B42q.

1945: \myref{\Ku}

1946:   G. Kuperberg, Symmetries of plane partitions and the permanent-de\-ter\-mi\-nant

1947: me\-thod, {\it J. Combin\. Theory Ser\.~A} {\bf 68} (1994), 115--151.

1948: \myref{\LindAA}

1949: B.    Lindstr\"om, On the vector

1950: representations of induced matroids, {\it Bull\. London

1951: Math\. Soc\.} {\bf 5} (1973) 85--90.

1952: \myref{\MacM}

1953:   P. A. MacMahon, Memoir on the theory of the partition of numbers --- Part V. Partitions

1954: in two-dimensional space, {\it Phil\. Trans\. R. S.}, 1911, A.

1955: \myref{\PeWZAA}

1956:  M.    Petkov\v sek, H. Wilf and D. Zeilberger, 

1957: ``A=B,'' A.K. Peters, Wellesley, 1996.

1958: \myref{\Proc88}

1959:   R. A. Proctor, Odd symplectic groups, {\it Invent\. Math\.} {\bf 92} (1988),

1960: 307--332.

1961: \myref{\Robb}

1962:   D. P. Robbins, The story of $1$, $2$, $7$, $42$, $429$, $7436,\dotsc,$ {\it Math.

1963: Intelligencer} {\bf 13} (1991), No.~2, 12--19.

1964: \myref{\Stapp}

1965:   R. P. Stanley, Symmetries of plane partitions, {\it J. Combin\. Theory Ser.~A} 

1966: {\bf 43} (1986), 103--113.

1967: \myref{\Stenlp}

1968:   J. R. Stembridge, Nonintersecting paths, Pfaffians and plane partitions, 

1969: {\it Adv\. in Math\.} {\bf 83} (1990), 96--131.

1970: 

1971: 

1972: 

1973: \endroster\par}

1974: 

1975: \enddocument

1976: 

1977: 

1978: