1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

2: \usepackage{amsmath}

3: \usepackage{amssymb}

4: \usepackage{amsthm,amsxtra}

5: \usepackage{epsf}

6: \usepackage{eepic}

7: \usepackage{amsfonts, amscd, euscript,

8: graphics,psfrag}

9:  \headheight 0cm \headsep 0cm

10: \newlength{\mytopmargin}

11: \newlength{\myleftmargin}

12: \setlength{\mytopmargin}{2.8cm}

13: \setlength{\myleftmargin}{2.5cm}

14: \setlength{\topmargin}{-1in}

15: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-1in}

16: %\setlength{\extrarowheight}{4pt}

17: \addtolength{\topmargin}{\mytopmargin}

18: \addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{\myleftmargin}

19: \textwidth 16cm

20: \textheight 23cm

21: 

22: \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}

23: \newtheorem{cor}{Corollary}

24: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}

25: \newtheorem{prop}{Proposition}

26: \setlength{\parindent}{1.5em}

27: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}

28: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}

29: 

30: \newcommand{\zz}{\mathbb Z}

31: \newcommand{\zed}{{\mathbb Z}}

32: \newcommand{\vol}{{\hbox{vol}}}

33: \newcommand{\reals}{{\mathbb R}}

34: 

35: \newcommand\psymmU{%

36: \begin{picture}(1,1)(0,0)%

37: \allinethickness{0.5pt}%

38: \path(0,0)(0,1)(1,1)(1,0)(0,0)%

39: \end{picture}}

40: \newcommand\psymmUU{%

41: \begin{picture}(1,1)(0,0)%

42: \allinethickness{0.5pt}%

43: \path(0,0)(0,1)(1,1)(1,0)(0,0)%

44: \put(0.5,0.5){\makebox(0,0){$\cdot$}}%

45: \end{picture}}

46: \newcommand\psymmO{%

47: \begin{picture}(1,1)(0,0)%

48: \allinethickness{0.5pt}%

49: \path(0,0)(0,1)(1,1)(1,0)(0,0)%

50: \path(0,0)(1,1)%

51: \end{picture}}

52: \newcommand\psymmS{%

53: \begin{picture}(1,1)(0,0)%

54: \allinethickness{0.5pt}%

55: \path(0,0)(0,1)(1,1)(1,0)(0,0)%

56: \path(1,0)(0,1)%

57: \end{picture}}

58: \newcommand\psymmu{%

59: \begin{picture}(1,1)(0,0)%

60: \allinethickness{0.5pt}%

61: \path(0,0)(0,1)(1,1)(1,0)(0,0)%

62: \path(0,0)(1,1)%

63: \path(0,1)(1,0)%

64: \end{picture}}

65: 

66: 

67: \newbox\tsymmUbox

68: \newbox\tsymmUUbox

69: \newbox\tsymmObox

70: \newbox\tsymmSbox

71: \newbox\tsymmubox

72: \setbox\tsymmUbox =\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{6pt}\psymmU \kern0.75pt}

73: 

74: \setbox\tsymmUUbox=\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{6pt}\psymmUU\kern0.75pt}

75: \setbox\tsymmObox =\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{6pt}\psymmO \kern0.75pt}

76: \setbox\tsymmSbox =\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{6pt}\psymmS \kern0.75pt}

77: \setbox\tsymmubox =\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{6pt}\psymmu \kern0.75pt}

78: \def\tsymmU{{\copy\tsymmUbox}}

79: \def\tsymmUU{{\copy\tsymmUUbox}}

80: \def\tsymmO{{\copy\tsymmObox}}

81: \def\tsymmS{{\copy\tsymmSbox}}

82: \def\tsymmu{{\copy\tsymmubox}}

83: \newbox\symmUbox

84: \newbox\symmUUbox

85: \newbox\symmObox

86: \newbox\symmSbox

87: \newbox\symmubox

88: \setbox\symmUbox =\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{4.5pt}\psymmU \kern0.75pt}

89: \setbox\symmUUbox=\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{4.5pt}\psymmUU\kern0.75pt}

90: \setbox\symmObox =\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{4.5pt}\psymmO \kern0.75pt}

91: \setbox\symmSbox =\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{4.5pt}\psymmS \kern0.75pt}

92: \setbox\symmubox =\hbox{\kern0.75pt\setlength{\unitlength}{4.5pt}\psymmu \kern0.75pt}

93: \def\symmU{{\copy\symmUbox}}

94: \def\symmUU{{\copy\symmUUbox}}

95: \def\symmO{{\copy\symmObox}}

96: \def\symmS{{\copy\symmSbox}}

97: \def\symmu{{\copy\symmubox}}

98: 

99: \def\tsymmg{\circledast}

100: \def\symmg{\circledast}

101: 

102: \newcommand{\Tr}{{\hbox{\rm Tr}}}

103: \newcommand{\Sc}{{\hbox{\rm Sc}}}

104: \newcommand{\Rc}{{\hbox{\rm Rc}}}

105: %\newcommand{\det}{{\hbox{\rm det}}}

106: \newcommand{\HS}{{\hbox{\rm HS}}}

107: \newcommand{\E}{{\mathbb E}}

108: \newcommand{\Eh}{\E_{\mu_N}}

109: \newcommand{\Eu}{\E_{U_N}}

110: \newcommand{\natls}{{\mathbb N}}

111: \newcommand{\col}{{\hbox{col}}}

112: \newcommand{\row}{{\hbox{row}}}

113: \def\mtrx#1#2#3#4{\begin{pmatrix} #1 & #2  \\ #3 & #4\end{pmatrix}}

114: 

115: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}

116: 

117: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}

118: %\newcommand{\P}{\mathcal{P}}

119: \newcommand{\B}{\mathcal{B}}

120: \newcommand{\card}{{\rm card}}

121: \newcommand{\Sp}{{\rm Sp}}

122: \newcommand{\oO}{{\rm O}}

123: 

124: \begin{document}

125: \vspace{4cm}

126: \noindent

127: {\bf Counting formulas associated with some random matrix averages}

128: 

129: \vspace{5mm} \noindent Peter J.~Forrester${}^{*}$ and Alex

130: Gamburd${}^\dagger$

131: 

132: \noindent

133: ${}^*$Department of Mathematics and Statistics,

134: University of Melbourne, \\

135: Victoria 3010, Australia ; \\

136: ${}^\dagger$ Department of Mathematics, University of California,

137: Santa Cruz \\and  Department of Mathematics, Stanford University,

138: \\Stanford, CA 94305 USA

139: %\email{agamburd@math.stanford.edu}\\

140: 

141: 

142: 

143: 

144: \small

145: \begin{quote}

146: Abstract: Moments of secular and inverse secular coefficients,

147: averaged over random matrices from classical groups, are related to

148: the enumeration of non-negative matrices with prescribed row and

149: column sums. Similar random matrix averages are related to certain

150: configurations of vicious random walkers and to the enumeration of

151: plane partitions. The combinatorial meaning of the average of the

152: characteristic polynomial of random Hermitian and Wishart matrices

153: is also investigated, and consequently several simple

154: universality results are derived.

155: \end{quote}

156: 

157: \section{Introduction}

158: The richness of random matrix theory was greatly enhanced during

159: the last couple of years of the millennium by the discovery of its

160: intimate connections with increasing subsequences and

161: non-intersecting lattice paths in enumerative and asymptotic

162: combinatorics (for reviews see \cite{AD99, Fo03}). These topics

163: relate to non-negative integer matrices via the celebrated

164: Robinson-Schensted-Knuth (RSK) correspondence \cite{Fu97, knuth}.

165: A special class of non-negative matrices are so called magic

166: squares

167: --- they have the property that the sum of the elements in any row

168: or column is equal to a prescribed positive integer $j$ say. Such

169: matrices are natural objects in RSK theory, so one might expect a

170: relationship between magic squares and random matrices. This is

171: indeed the case, and its development forms the main theme of the

172: recent work \cite{DiGa} (see \cite{BCAG} for related results). One

173: of the goals of the present paper is to continue the development

174: of this theme.

175: 

176: Magic squares are special cases of non-negative integer $m \times

177: n$ rectangular matrices in which the sum of the elements in each

178: row $j$ is equal to $\mu_j$, while the sum of the elements in each

179: column $k$ is equal to $\tilde{\mu}_k$. Without loss of

180: generality, for the purpose of enumeration we can insist that

181: $\mu_1 \ge \cdots \ge \mu_m$ and $\tilde{\mu}_1 \ge \cdots \ge

182: \tilde{\mu}_n$ so that $\mu := (\mu_1,\dots,\mu_m)$ and

183: $\tilde{\mu} := (\tilde{\mu}_1,\dots,\tilde{\mu}_n)$ form

184: partitions. We denote the total number of such matrices by $N_{\mu

185: \tilde{\mu}}$. Writing the partitions in terms of the frequencies

186: of their parts by

187: \begin{equation}\label{0.1}

188: \mu = \langle 1^{a_1} \cdots l^{a_l} \rangle, \qquad

189: \tilde{\mu} = \langle 1^{b_1} \cdots l^{b_l} \rangle

190: \end{equation}

191: where $l = {\rm max}(\mu_1,\tilde{\mu}_1)$, it was proved in

192: \cite[Thm.~2]{DiGa} that for $N \ge {\rm max}(\sum_{j=1}^l j a_j,

193: \sum_{j=1}^l j b_j)$

194: \begin{equation}\label{1}

195: N_{\mu \tilde{\mu}} =

196: {\mathbb E}_{M \in U(N)} \prod_{j=1}^l ( {\rm Sc}_j(M))^{a_j}

197: (\overline{{\rm Sc}_j(M))}^{b_j}.

198: \end{equation}

199: In (\ref{1}) the average is over matrices $M$ chosen from the group

200: $U(N)$ at random with respect to the Haar measure (uniform distribution), while

201: ${\rm Sc}_j(M)$ is the $j$th secular coefficient of the characteristic

202: polynomial of $M$,

203: \begin{equation}\label{1.1}

204: P_M(z)=\det(M - zI_N) = \sum_{j=0}^N {\rm Sc}_j(M) (-z)^{N-j}.

205: \end{equation}

206: {}From (\ref{1}) it follows that the number $H_k(j)$ of $k \times k$

207: magic squares,

208: specified as $k \times k$

209: non-negative integer matrices with the sum of elements in

210: each row and column equal to $j$, is for $N \ge kj$, given by the formula

211: \begin{equation}

212: H_k(j) = {\mathbb E}_{M \in U(N)} | {\rm Sc}_j(M) |^{2k}.

213: \end{equation}

214: 

215: We will extend the formula (\ref{1}) in a number of directions.

216: The first relates to counting formulas analogous to (\ref{1}) in

217: the case that the matrices are constrained by a symmetry property.

218: Two such formulas, both relating to $n \times n$ symmetric

219: matrices, are known from \cite{DiGa}. Thus with the row sums

220: (which must be equal to the column sums as the matrices are

221: symmetric) labelled by the partition $\mu = (\mu_1,\dots,\mu_n) =

222: \langle 1^{a_1} \cdots l^{a_l} \rangle$ we have that for $|\mu| :=

223: \sum_{j=1}^l j a_j$ even, $N \ge |\mu|$, and all elements on the

224: diagonal zero, the total number $N_\mu^{\rm O}$ of such

225: non-negative integer matrices is given by

226: \begin{equation}\label{2}

227: N_{\mu}^{\rm O}

228: = {\mathbb E}_{M \in O(N)} \prod_{j=1}^l ( {\rm Sc}_j(M))^{a_j}.

229: \end{equation}

230: If instead all elements on the diagonal are permitted to be even, the total

231: number $N_\mu^{\rm Sp}$ of such matrices is given by

232: \begin{equation}\label{3}

233: N_{\mu}^{\rm Sp} = {\mathbb E}_{M \in USp(2N)} \prod_{j=1}^l (

234: {\rm Sc}_j(M))^{a_j}.

235: \end{equation}

236: In (\ref{2}) the average is over the group of orthogonal matrices

237: $O(N)$, while in (\ref{3}) it is over the group of $2N \times 2N$

238: unitary symplectic matrices $USp(2N)$ (both with the Haar

239: measure). In Section 2 we will extend (\ref{2}) and (\ref{3}) to

240: the case that the diagonal elements have no special restriction.

241: We also give analogous formulas in the case of square matrices

242: symmetric about both the diagonal and anti-diagonal, and for

243: matrices symmetric about the centre point of the matrix. That such

244: symmetrizations relate to averages over classical groups is a

245: consequence of results of Rains \cite{Ra98}, and  Baik and Rains

246: \cite{BR02}. Another tractable case in terms of a random matrix

247: average to be considered is the setting relating to (\ref{1}) but

248: with the entries of the matrix restricted to 0's and 1's.

249: If the matrix has a $2 \times 2$ block structure, with the two

250: diagonal blocks having non-negative integer entries, and the off

251: diagonal blocks having entries 0 or 1, counting formulas of the

252: type (\ref{1}) can be obtained by studying ratios of characteristic

253: polynomials averaged over the classical groups. This is done in

254: Section \ref{ratio}.

255: 

256: The topic of Section \ref{path} is the relationship between

257: enumeration formulas (\ref{1}) and (\ref{3}) and certain classes

258: of non-intersecting lattice paths, or equivalently certain

259: configurations of vicious random walkers. This is motivated by the

260: graphical representation of the RSK correspondence in terms of

261: non-intersecting lattice paths \cite{Jo02,FR02}.  In Section

262: \ref{part} we describe connections between moments of

263: characteristic polynomials and enumeration of certain classes of

264: plane partitions.  Finally, in Section \ref{herm}, we revisit the

265: question of the combinatorial meaning  of the expected value of

266: characteristic polynomials of random complex Hermitian Wigner

267: matrices, and take up a similar study in relation to Wishart

268: matrices.

269: 

270: \section{Further symmetrizations of the square}\label{s2}

271: \setcounter{equation}{0}

272: The RSK correspondence gives a bijection between weighted $n \times n$

273: non-negative integer matrices, entries $x_{i j}$ weighted by

274: $(\alpha_i \beta_j)^{x_{ij}}$, and pairs of weighted semi-standard

275: tableaux of content $n$. In the latter one member of the pair is

276: weighted by

277: \begin{equation}\label{4.1}

278: \alpha_1^{\# 1's} \alpha_2^{\# 2's} \cdots \alpha_n^{\# n's},

279: \end{equation}

280: while the other member is weighted by (\ref{4.1}) but with the

281: $\alpha$'s replaced by the $\beta$'s (the exponents in (\ref{4.1}) are

282: determined by the entries of the matrix). Summing (\ref{4.1}) over all

283: allowed semi-standard tableaux of a given shape $\kappa$ gives the

284: combinatorial definition of the Schur polynomial, and this way one

285: obtains for the generating function of the weighted matrices the

286: identity

287: \begin{equation}\label{4.2}

288: {1 \over \prod_{i,j = 1}^n (1 - \alpha_i \beta_j) } =

289: \sum_\kappa s_\kappa(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n)

290: s_\kappa(\beta_1,\dots,\beta_n).

291: \end{equation}

292: This is well known in the theory of the Schur polynomial, and is called the

293: Cauchy formula (see e.g.~\cite{Mac}). We remark that

294: the case of $m \times n$ matrices ($m < n$ say for definiteness) follows

295: by simply setting $\alpha_{m+1}=\cdots =\alpha_n=0$.

296: 

297: The fact that the entries $x_{ij}$ are weighted by

298: $(\alpha_i \beta_j)^{x_{ij}}$ tells us

299: the coefficient of $$\alpha_1^{\eta_1} \cdots \alpha_n^{\eta_n}

300: \beta_1^{\rho_1} \cdots \beta_n^{\rho_n}$$ in (\ref{4.2}) counts

301: the number of matrices for which the sum of the elements in row

302: $i$ equals $\eta_i$, while the sum of the elements in row $j$

303: equals $\rho_j$. Because (\ref{4.2}) is symmetric in the

304: $\alpha_i$'s and the $\beta_j$'s, without loss of generality we

305: can restrict attention to the case that $\eta_1 \ge \cdots \ge

306: \eta_n$, $\rho_1 \ge \cdots \ge \rho_n$ and thus $\eta$ and $\rho$

307: form partitions, to be denoted $\mu$ and $\tilde{\mu}$

308: respectively say. The task is then to extract the coefficient of

309: $\alpha^\mu \beta^{\tilde{\mu}}$ (in an obvious multivariable

310: shorthand notation).

311: 

312: Only terms on the RHS of (\ref{4.2}) with $|\kappa| = |\mu| =

313: |\tilde{\mu}|$ can contribute to the coefficient of $\alpha^\mu

314: \beta^{\tilde{\mu}}$. Because of this, we can use a result of Baik and

315: Rains \cite{BR02} expressing the RHS of (\ref{4.2}) with the largest part

316: of $\kappa$ restricted to be no greater than $N$ as an average over

317: $U(N)$,

318: \begin{equation}\label{5.1}

319: \sum_{\kappa: \kappa_1 \le N}

320: s_\kappa(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n) s_\kappa(\beta_1,\dots,\beta_n)

321: = {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)}

322: \prod_{j=1}^n \det(I_N + \alpha_j \bar{U})

323: \det(I_N + \beta_j U) .

324: \end{equation}

325: In particular with $\mu$, $\tilde{\mu}$ specified as in

326: (\ref{0.1}), (\ref{5.1}) agrees with (\ref{4.2}) at the required

327: order provided

328: \begin{equation}\label{2.4}

329: N \ge |\mu| = \sum_{j=1}^l j a_j = \sum_{j=1}^l j b_j.

330: \end{equation}

331: The extraction of the sought coefficient from (\ref{5.1}) is immediate,

332: and we reclaim (\ref{1}), provided $N$ obeys the inequality (\ref{2.4}).

333: 

334: We remark in passing, that  since we have \cite{CFKRS2, DiGa}

335: \beq \label{e:charmom1} {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)} \prod_{j=1}^m

336: \det(I_N + \alpha_j U) \prod_{j=1}^n \det(I_N + \overline{U}/\beta_j)

337: =\frac{1}{(\beta_1 \dots \beta_n)^N} s_{N^n}(\alpha_1, \dots,

338: \alpha_m; \beta_1, \dots, \beta_n), \eeq

339: (in fact this equation will be of independent interest below)

340: where ${N^n}$ denotes the partition with

341: $n$ parts all equal to $N$, it is also true that $N_{\mu \tilde{\mu}}$

342: is equal to the coefficient of $\alpha^\mu \beta^{N - \tilde{\mu}}$ in

343: the Schur function $S_{N^n}(\{\alpha_j,\beta_j\}_{j=1,\dots,n})$,

344: provided $N$ is large enough as required by (\ref{2.4}).

345: 

346: 

347: 

348: {}From the present perspective, to extend the enumeration formula

349: (\ref{1}) to classes of symmetrized non-negative matrices we

350: require a formula analogous to (\ref{5.1}) for the corresponding

351: partial generating function. Indeed such a formula (due to

352: Littlewood \cite{Li}) is known for symmetric matrices with all

353: elements zero on the diagonal,

354: \beq \label{lit1} \sum_{\lambda' \,

355: \text{even}} s_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots ,\alpha_n)= \prod_{1 \le i

356: < j \le n}\frac{1}{1-\alpha_i \alpha_j}, \eeq

357: and  for symmetric

358: matrices with all elements even on the diagonal,

359: \beq \label{lit2}

360: \sum_{\lambda \, \text{even}} s_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots ,

361: \alpha_n)= \prod_{1 \le i \le j \le n}\frac{1}{1-\alpha_i

362: \alpha_j}.\eeq

363: Combining \eqref{lit1} with

364: \beq \label{lo} {\mathbb E}_{M \in O(N)}

365: \prod_{j=1}^n \det (I_N + \alpha_j M) = \sum_{

366: \substack{l(\lambda) \le N \\ \lambda' \,

367: \text{even}}}s_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots ,\alpha_n)

368: \eeq

369: and \eqref{lit2} with

370: \beq \label{lsp}

371: {\mathbb E}_{M \in USp(2N)} \prod_{j=1}^n \det (I_{2N} + \alpha_j M) =

372: \sum_{ \substack{\lambda_1 \le 2N \\ \lambda \,

373: \text{even}}}s_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots , \alpha_n) \eeq

374: allows us

375: to reclaim (\ref{2}) and (\ref{3}) respectively. The finitizations

376: (\ref{lo}) and (\ref{lsp}) of Littlewood's formula are due to Rains

377: \cite{Ra98}.

378: 

379: 

380:  Formulas

381: analogous to (\ref{5.1}) are also known in the case of symmetric

382: matrices with no special constraint on the diagonal, matrices

383: symmetric about both the diagonal and anti-diagonal, and matrices

384: with a point reflection symmetry about the centre. Let us first

385: consider symmetric matrices with no special constraint on the

386: diagonal.

387: 

388: For a symmetric matrix, the row sum equals the column sum so we can take

389: for the weights

390: $\alpha_i \beta_j = \sqrt{q_i q_j}$ and extract the

391: coefficient of $q^\mu$ to read off the number of non-negative

392: integer matrices with

393: row sums equal to $\mu$. Since each off diagonal element in position

394: $ij$ of a

395: symmetric matrix is identical to the element in position

396: $ji$, we can equivalently

397: restrict attention to the lower triangular portion $i \le j$ of the matrix,

398: and weight the elements in

399: strictly lower triangular positions $i<j$ by $q_i q_j$, and

400: the diagonal elements by $q_i$. The generating function for weighted

401: symmetric matrices is thus seen to be

402: \begin{equation}\label{7.1}

403: {1 \over \prod_{i=1}^n (1 - q_i) \prod_{i < j} (1 - q_i q_j) }

404: \end{equation}

405: and we seek the coefficient of $q^\mu$ in this expression.

406: According to an identity of Littlewood \cite{Li} we have that

407: (\ref{7.1}) is equal to

408: \begin{equation}\label{7.1a}

409: \sum_{\kappa} s_\kappa(q_1,\dots,q_n).

410: \end{equation}

411: It has been shown by Baik and Rains \cite{BR02} that (\ref{7.1a})

412: constrained by the size of the largest part of $\kappa_1$ can be expressed

413: as a random matrix average,

414: \begin{equation}\label{7.1b}

415: \sum_{\kappa:\kappa_1 \le N } s_\kappa(q_1,\dots,q_n) =

416: {\mathbb E}_{U \in O(N)} \det(I_N + U)

417: \prod_{j=1}^n \det ( I_N + q_j U).

418: \end{equation}

419: With knowledge of the above results, we can now easily obtain an

420: enumeration formula for symmetric non-negative integer matrices with

421: prescribed row sums.

422: 

423: \begin{prop}\label{p1}

424: Consider the set of all symmetric $n \times n$ non-negative integer matrices.

425: Label the row sums (or equivalently column sums) by the partition

426: $$

427: \mu = (\mu_1,\dots,\mu_n) = \langle 1^{a_1} \cdots l^{a_l} \rangle.

428: $$

429: For $N \ge |\mu|$ the total number $N_\mu^{\symmO}$ of such matrices is

430: given as a random matrix average by

431: \begin{equation}\label{8.1}

432: N_\mu^{\symmO} = {\mathbb E}_{M \in O(N)} \det (I_N + M)

433: \prod_{j=1}^l ({\rm Sc}_j(M))^{a_j}

434: \end{equation}

435: (cf.~(\ref{2})).

436: \end{prop}

437: 

438: \noindent

439: Proof. \quad Only terms in (\ref{7.1a}) with $|\kappa| = |\mu|$ can contribute

440: to the coefficient of $q^\mu$ in (\ref{7.1}), so for $N \ge |\mu|$ the

441: latter is the same as the coefficient of $q^\mu$ in (\ref{7.1b}).

442: Extracting the coefficient gives (\ref{8.1}).

443: \hfill $\square$

444: 

445: 

446: We remark that since $\det(I_N+M)=0$ for $M \in O^-(N)$ (because

447: $\lambda = -1$ is an eigenvalue) we can restrict the matrices $M$ in

448: (\ref{8.1}) to $M \in O^+(N)$ (the matrices $U$ in (\ref{7.1b}) can similarly

449: be restricted).

450: 

451: 

452: 

453: \medskip

454: Next, we note that the results of Baik and Rains in fact allow the

455: diagonal sum to be prescribed. The relevant generating function is

456: \cite{BR02}

457: \begin{equation}

458: {1 \over \prod_{i=1}^n(1 - \alpha q_i) \prod_{i<j}(1 - q_i q_j) }

459: = \sum_{\kappa} \alpha^{\sum_{j=1}^n(-1)^{j-1} \kappa_j}

460: s_\kappa(q_1,\dots,q_n)

461: \end{equation}

462: and for $\kappa_1 \le N$ this sum can be written as the random matrix

463: average

464: \begin{equation}\label{2.16}

465: {\mathbb E}_{U \in O(N)} \det(I_N + \alpha U)

466: \prod_{j=1}^n \det ( I_N + q_j U).

467: \end{equation}

468: Hence, with the diagonal sum prescribed to be equal to $p$ say and

469: the total number of symmetric non-negative matrices now denoted

470: $N_{\mu,p}^\symmO$, the enumeration formula (\ref{8.1}) should be

471: modified to read

472: \begin{equation}

473: N_{\mu,p}^\symmO =

474: {\mathbb E}_{M \in O(N)} {\rm Sc}_p(M))

475: \prod_{j=1}^l ({\rm Sc}_j(M))^{a_j}.

476: \end{equation}

477: 

478: We now turn our attention to the task of enumerating according to row

479: sums $2n \times 2n$ non-negative integer matrices $[x_{i,j}]_{i,j=1,\dots,

480: 2n}$ with a reflection symmetry about the diagonal, $x_{i,j} =

481: x_{j,i}$ $(i>j)$, and about the anti-diagonal,

482: $x_{i,j} = x_{i,2n+1-j}$ $(i>2n+1-j)$. The generating function for

483: weighted symmetric matrices of this type is

484: \begin{equation}\label{8.2}

485: \prod_{i=1}^n {(1+\chi_1 q_i) \over (1-\chi_0 q_i) }

486: {1 \over \prod_{i,j=1}^n(1 - q_i q_j) }

487: \end{equation}

488: where $\chi_0=1$ ($\chi_1=1$) in the case that the elements on the

489: diagonal (anti-diagonal) are unrestricted, while $\chi_0=0$

490: ($\chi_1=0$) in the case the elements on the diagonal are restricted to be

491: zero (anti-diagonal are restricted to be even). We know from

492: \cite{BR02} that the random matrix average

493: \begin{equation}\label{8.3}

494: {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)}

495: {\det( 1 + \chi_0 U) \over \det( I_N - \chi_1 U) }

496: \prod_{j=1}^n \det (I_N + q_j U) \det(I_N + q_j \bar{U})

497: \end{equation}

498: correctly reproduces (\ref{8.2}) up to and including terms

499: $O(q_j^{2N+1})$ in the $q_j$. (In the case $\chi_1=1$, (\ref{8.3}) is

500: to be interpreted as the limiting value for $\chi_1 \to 1^-$.)

501: The following enumeration result is now evident.

502: 

503: \begin{prop}

504: Consider the set of all symmetric $2n \times 2n$ non-negative integer matrices

505: which have the further constraint of being symmetric about the anti-diagonal.

506: Introduce possible constraints on the diagonal and

507: anti-diagonal elements according to the values of

508: $\chi_0$ and $\chi_1$ noted below (\ref{8.2}). With the row sums labelled

509: by $\mu$, we have that for $N \ge {1 \over 2} |\mu|$ the number of

510: matrices in the set, $N_\mu^\symmu$ say, is given by the coefficient

511: of $q^\mu$ in the random matrix average (\ref{8.3}).

512: \end{prop}

513: 

514: As our next example of a symmetry constraint, we turn our

515: attention to the case of $2n \times 2n$ matrices invariant with

516: respect to reflections in the point $(n+1/2,n+1/2)$ (here we are

517: thinking of the matrix as labelled by a grid of $2n \times 2n$

518: lattice points $\{(i,j): 1 \le i,j \le 2n \}$). For such matrices

519: $x_{i,j} = x_{2n+1-i, 2n+1-j}$. The generating function for this

520: class of matrices is

521: \begin{equation}\label{9.1}

522: {1 \over \prod_{i,j=1}^n (1 - q_i q_j)^2 }.

523: \end{equation}

524: It follows from (\ref{4.2}) and (\ref{5.1}) that up and including terms

525: $O(q_i^{N})$ (\ref{9.1}) is equal to

526: \begin{equation}\label{10.1}

527: \Big ( {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)}

528: \prod_{j=1}^n \det (I_N + q_j \bar{U}) \det (I_N + q_j U) \Big )^2.

529: \end{equation}

530: We thus have the following enumeration result.

531: 

532: \begin{prop}

533: Consider the set of all $2n \times 2n$ non-negative integer matrices with

534: the point reflection symmetry $x_{i,j} = x_{2n+1-i, 2n+1-j}$. With the

535: row sums labelled by $\mu$, we have that for $N \ge

536: |\mu|$, the number of matrices in the set $N_\mu^\symmUU$ say is given

537: by the coefficient of $q^\mu$ in the random matrix average

538: (\ref{10.1}).

539: \end{prop}

540: 

541: As another extension of (\ref{1}) we consider not a symmetry

542: constraint on the matrix, but rather a restriction on the entries

543: of the matrix. These we take to be either $0$ or 1. For $m \times

544: n$ matrices of this type, weighted by $(\alpha_i

545: \beta_j)^{x_{ij}}$, the generating function is

546: \begin{equation}\label{2.21a}

547: \prod_{i=1}^m \prod_{j=1}^n (1 + \alpha_i \beta_j).

548: \end{equation}

549: According to the dual Cauchy identity,

550: \begin{equation}\label{dC}

551: \prod_{i,j=1}^n(1+\alpha_i \beta_j) =

552: \sum_\mu s_{\mu'}(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n) s_\mu(\beta_1,\dots,\beta_n),

553: \end{equation}

554: where $\mu'$ denotes the partition conjugate to $\mu$ (see

555: e.g.~\cite{Mac}). Analogous to (\ref{5.1}), we have that this sum

556: restricted by the size of the largest part of $\mu$ can be written

557: as a random matrix average

558: \begin{equation}\label{dC1}

559: \sum_{\mu: \mu_1 \le N}

560: s_{\mu'}(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_n) s_\mu(\beta_1,\dots,\beta_n)

561: =

562:  {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)}

563: \prod_{j=1}^n {\det (I_N + \alpha_j {U}) \over

564: \det (I_N - \beta_j \bar{U}) }.

565: \end{equation}

566: Because of the occurrence  of the dual partition in (\ref{dC}),

567: $\mu_1$ cannot exceed $n$ for a non-zero contribution and so

568: (\ref{dC1}) is independent of $N$ for $N \ge n$.

569: 

570: We want to extract from this the coefficient of $\alpha^\mu

571: \beta^{\tilde{\mu}}$. For this purpose we introduce

572: inve{r}se secular coefficients $\Rc_p(U)$ according to

573: $$

574: {1 \over \det (I_N - xU) } = \sum_{p=0}^\infty x^p \Rc_p(U).

575: $$

576: In terms of the eigenvalues $e^{i\theta_j}$ $(j=1,\dots,N)$ of $U$ we have

577: that

578: $$

579: \Rc_p(U) = h_p(e^{i\theta_1},\dots,e^{i\theta_N})

580: $$

581: where $h_p$ denotes the $p$th complete symmetric function (see

582: \cite{Mac}). Making use too of (\ref{1.1}) we obtain for the

583: sought enumeration the following result.

584: 

585: \begin{prop}

586: Consider the set of all $m \times n$ matrices in which the entries

587: take on the values  0  or 1. Prescribe the row sums and column

588: sums by the partitions $\mu$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ respectively, which

589: are to be written in terms of the frequency of their parts by

590: (\ref{0.1}). For $N \ge {\rm min}(m,n,\sum_{j=1}^l j a_j,

591: \sum_{j=1}^l j b_j)$ the total number $N_{\mu\tilde{\mu}}^{0,1}$

592: of such matrices is given in terms of a random matrix average by

593: \begin{equation}\label{sr}

594: N_{\mu\tilde{\mu}}^{0,1} = {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)} \prod_{j=1}^l

595: ({\rm Sc}_j(U))^{a_j}( \Rc_j(\bar{U}))^{b_j}.

596: \end{equation}

597: \end{prop}

598: 

599: \noindent

600: We remark that for (\ref{sr}) to be non-zero we require $\mu_1 \le m$,

601: $\tilde{\mu}_1 \le n$ and $|\mu| = |\tilde{\mu}|$.

602: 

603: 

604: \section{Block matrix structures and

605: ratios of characteristic polynomials} \label{ratio}

606: \setcounter{equation}{0}

607: 

608: We have seen in the previous section how generating functions

609: for non-negative integer matrices, and 0-1 matrices, are related

610: to Schur function identities which in turn are related to averages

611: over the classical groups. Results obtained in \cite{BR85,BR02}

612: tell us this strategy can also be carried through for classes of

613: block matrices which relate to averages over the unitary, symplectic

614: and orthogonal groups.

615: 

616: In relation to the unitary group, let the block structured

617: $(k_1+l_1) \times (k_2 + l_2)$ non-negative integer matrix

618: \begin{equation}\label{abcd}

619: \begin{bmatrix} A & B \\ C & D \end{bmatrix}

620: \end{equation}

621: be such that $A$ is a $k_1 \times k_2$ non-negative integer matrix;

622: $D$ is a $l_1 \times l_2$ non-negative integer matrix; $B$ is a

623: $k_1 \times l_2$ 0-1 matrix; and $C$ is a $l_1 \times k_2$ 0-1

624: matrix. Suppose the entries of the block $X = [x_{ij}]$ are weighted by

625: $g_{ij}^{x_{ij}}$ with

626: \begin{equation}\label{g}

627: g_{ij} = \left \{ \begin{array}{ll} \alpha_i \gamma_j & {\rm for}

628: \quad X = A \\

629: \beta_i \delta_j & {\rm for} \quad X = D \\

630: \alpha_i \delta_j & {\rm for} \quad X = B \\

631: \beta_i \gamma_j & {\rm for} \quad X = C.

632: \end{array} \right.

633: \end{equation}

634: Such matrices have for their generating function

635: $$

636: \prod_{i=1}^{k_1}\prod_{j=1}^{k_2}\frac{1}{1-\alpha_i \gamma_j}

637: \prod_{i=1}^{l_1}\prod_{j=1}^{l_2}\frac{1}{1-\beta_i \delta_j}

638: \prod_{i=1}^{k_1}\prod_{j=1}^{l_2}(1+\alpha_i \delta_j)

639: \prod_{i=1}^{l_1}\prod_{j=1}^{k_2}(1+\beta_i \gamma_j),

640: $$

641: thus containing as special cases both the LHS of (\ref{4.2}) and

642: (\ref{2.21a}). The coefficient of $\alpha^{\mu} \beta^{\tilde{\mu}}

643: \gamma^\nu \delta^{\tilde{\nu}}$ tells us the number of matrices

644: (\ref{abcd}) with prescribed row and column sums.

645: Moreover generalizations of both the Cauchy identities

646: (\ref{4.2}), (\ref{dC}), and their finitizations (\ref{5.1}),

647: (\ref{dC1}) are known \cite{BR85,BR02}, allowing for the

648: counting function to be expressed as a random matrix average.

649: 

650: To state these generalizations requires introducing the functions

651: \cite{Mac}

652: \beq

653: \HS_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots, \alpha_{k};\beta_1,

654: \dots \beta_{l}) =\det(a_{\lambda_{i}+j-1})_{1\le i, j \le

655: l(\lambda)},

656: \eeq

657: where $a_k$ denotes the coefficient of $x^k$ in

658: $$

659: { \prod_{j=1}^{l}(1+\beta_j

660: x) \over \prod_{i=1}^{k}(1-\alpha_i x) }.

661: $$

662: The HS${}_\lambda$ are referred to as the hook Schur functions. In terms of

663: this the generalization of the Cauchy identities is

664: \begin{eqnarray}\label{e:hs2}

665: &&\sum_{\lambda}\HS_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots,

666: \alpha_{k_1};\beta_1, \dots \beta_{l_1}) \HS_{\lambda}(\gamma_1,

667: \dots, \gamma_{k_2};\delta_1, \dots \delta_{l_2})\nonumber \\&&

668:  \qquad = \prod_{i=1}^{k_1}\prod_{j=1}^{k_2}\frac{1}{1-\alpha_i \gamma_j}

669: \prod_{i=1}^{l_1}\prod_{j=1}^{l_2}\frac{1}{1-\beta_i \delta_j}

670: \prod_{i=1}^{k_1}\prod_{j=1}^{l_2}(1+\alpha_i \delta_j)

671: \prod_{i=1}^{l_1}\prod_{j=1}^{k_2}(1+\beta_i \gamma_j)

672: \end{eqnarray}

673: while the generalizations of their finitizations is

674: \begin{eqnarray} \label{e:hs1}

675: &&{\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)} \frac {\prod_{i=1}^{k_1}

676: \det (I_N + \alpha_i U) \prod_{j=1}^{k_2} \det (I_N +\gamma_j

677: \bar{U})} {\prod_{m=1}^{l_1} \det (I_N -\beta_m U)

678: \prod_{n=1}^{l_2} \det (I_N -\delta_n \bar{U})} \nonumber \\&&

679: \qquad = \sum_{\lambda_1 \le N}\HS_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots,

680: \alpha_{k_1};\beta_1, \dots \beta_{l_1}) \HS_{\lambda}(\gamma_1,

681: \dots, \gamma_{k_2};\delta_1, \dots \delta_{l_2}).

682: \end{eqnarray}

683: 

684: Arguing as in the derivation of the counting formula (\ref{1})

685: given in the first three paragraphs of Section \ref{s2}, the

686: following generalization of (\ref{1}) and (\ref{sr}) is immediate.

687: 

688: 

689: \begin{prop}

690: Let $\mathbf{a}=(a_1, \dots, a_{k_1})$ , $\mathbf{b}=(b_1,

691: \dots, b_{l_1})$,  $\mathbf{c}=(c_1, \dots, c_{k_2})$ ,

692: $\mathbf{d}=(d_1, \dots, d_{l_2})$,  where  the $a_j$, $b_j$, $c_j$,

693: $d_j$ are nonnegative integers.

694: {}From these arrays form partitions

695: $$

696: \mu=\langle 1^{a_1}\cdots

697: k_1^{a_{k_1}}\rangle , \: \: \tilde{\mu}=\langle 1^{b_1}\cdots

698: l_1^{b_{l_1}}\rangle, \: \:

699: \nu=\langle 1^{c_1}\cdots k_2^{c_{k_2}}\rangle, \: \:

700: \tilde{\nu}=\langle 1^{d_1}\cdots l_2^{d_{l_2}}\rangle.

701: $$

702: Let $N_{\mu \tilde{\mu} \nu \tilde{\nu}}$ denote the number of

703: matrices (\ref{abcd}) with

704: $$

705: {\rm row}(A,B) = \mu, \: \: {\rm row}(C,D) = \nu, \: \:

706: {\rm col}(A,C) = \tilde{\mu}, \: \: {\rm col}(B,D) = \tilde{\nu}

707: $$

708: where the notation row$(X,Y)$ refers to the row sums across $X$

709: and $Y$ given they are horizontal neighbors in a block matrix, and

710: col$(X,Y)$ refers to the column sums down $X$ and $Y$ given they

711: vertical neighbors in a block matrix.

712: 

713: For

714: $$

715: N \geq

716: \max\left(\sum_1^{k_1} ja_j, \sum_1^{l_1} j b_j, \sum_1^{k_2}

717: jac_j, \sum_1^{l_2} j d_j, \right)

718: $$

719: we have

720: \beq

721: \label{e:mixedmom} \Eu \prod_{i=1}^{k_1} (\Sc_i(M))^{a_i}

722: \prod_{j=1}^{l_1}\overline{(\Sc_j(M))} ^{b_j} \prod_{m=1}^{k_2}

723: (\Rc_m(M))^{c_m} \prod_{n=1}^{l_2}\overline{(\Rc_n(M))} ^{d_n} =

724: N_{\mu \tilde{\mu} \nu \tilde{\nu}}.

725: \eeq

726: \end{prop}

727: 

728: As reviewed in the Introduction, a relationship with averages over

729: the orthogonal and symplectic groups comes about when the matrix

730: is constrained to be symmetric. Thus in (\ref{abcd}) we must take

731: \begin{equation}\label{CB}

732: k_1 = k_2 = k, \quad l_1 = l_2 = l, \quad

733: A = A^T, \quad D = D^T, \quad C = B^T.

734: \end{equation}

735: Correspondingly, for $i \ne j$, the weights (\ref{g}) are to be

736: replaced by

737: \begin{equation}\label{gg}

738: g_{ij} = \left \{ \begin{array}{ll} \sqrt{ \alpha_i \alpha_j} & {\rm for}

739: \quad X = A \\

740: \sqrt{\beta_i \beta_j} & {\rm for} \quad X = D \\

741: \sqrt{\alpha_i \beta_j} & {\rm for} \quad X = B \\

742: \sqrt{\beta_i \alpha_j} & {\rm for} \quad X = C.

743: \end{array} \right.

744: \end{equation}

745: As in the meaning of (\ref{2}) and (\ref{3}), the constraint on

746: the diagonal elements will determine whether the relationship is

747: with an average over the symplectic group, or an average over the

748: orthogonal group. It turns out that the constraint relevant to the

749: symplectic (orthogonal) group is that all elements on the diagonal

750: of $A$ be even (zero), while those on $D$ be zero (even). The

751: corresponding generating functions are therefore given by

752: \begin{eqnarray*}

753: G^{\rm Sp}(\{\alpha_i\},\{\beta_j\}) & = &

754: \prod_{1 \le i \le j \le k}\frac{1}{1-\alpha_i \alpha_j}

755:  \prod_{1 \le i < j \le l}\frac{1}{1-\beta_i \beta_j}

756: \prod_{i=1}^{k}\prod_{j=i}^{l} (1+\alpha_i \beta_j) \\

757: G^{\rm O}(\{\alpha_i\},\{\beta_j\}) & = &

758: \prod_{1 \le i < j \le k}\frac{1}{1-\alpha_i \alpha_j}

759:  \prod_{1 \le i \le j \le l}\frac{1}{1-\beta_i \beta_j}

760: \prod_{i=1}^{k}\prod_{j=i}^{l} (1+\alpha_i \beta_j)

761: \end{eqnarray*}

762: 

763: In relation to these generating functions, one has as generalizations

764: of the Littlewood identities (\ref{lit1}) and (\ref{lit2})

765: \cite{BR85}

766: \begin{eqnarray*}

767: \sum_{\lambda \, \text{even}}

768: \HS_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots \alpha_k; \beta_1, \dots, \beta_l)

769: & = & G^{\rm Sp}(\{\alpha_i\},\{\beta_j\}) \nonumber \\

770: \sum_{\lambda' \, \text{even}}

771: \HS_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots \alpha_k; \beta_1, \dots, \beta_l)

772: & = & G^{\rm O}(\{\alpha_i\},\{\beta_j\}).

773: \end{eqnarray*}

774: And with the largest part of the partitions in the sum restricted, the

775: LHS's have the finitizations \cite{BR02}

776: \begin{eqnarray}  \label{e:hsp1} {\mathbb E}_{U \in USp(2N)} \frac

777: {\prod_{i=1}^{k} \det (I_{2N} + \alpha_i U)} {\prod_{j=1}^{l}

778: \det (I_{2N} -\beta_j U)} & = & \sum_{ \substack{\lambda_1 \le 2N \\

779: \lambda \, \text{even}}} \HS_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots \alpha_k;

780: \beta_1, \dots, \beta_l) \\

781: \label{e:hso1} {\mathbb E}_{U \in O(N)} \frac

782: {\prod_{i=1}^{k} \det (I_N + \alpha_i U)} {\prod_{j=1}^{l}

783: \det (I_N -\beta_j U)} & = & \sum_{ \substack{l(\lambda) \le N \\

784: \lambda' \, \text{even}}} \HS_{\lambda}(\alpha_1, \dots \alpha_k;

785: \beta_1, \dots, \beta_l).

786: \end{eqnarray}

787: As a consequence, the following enumeration results hold.

788: 

789: 

790: 

791: \begin{prop}

792: Let $\mathbf{a}=(a_1, \dots, a_{k})$ , $\mathbf{b}=(b_1,

793: \dots, b_{l})$, where $a_j$, $b_j$  are  non-negative integers,

794: and from these arrays form partitions

795: $$

796: \mu=\langle 1^{a_1}\cdots k^{a_{k}}\rangle, \qquad

797: \nu=\langle 1^{b_1}\cdots

798: l^{b_l}\rangle

799: $$

800: Consider block matrices (\ref{abcd}) with constraints (\ref{CB})

801: and the further constraint that all diagonal entries of $A$ are

802: even (zero) while all those of $D$ are zero (even). Let

803: $N_{\mu \nu}^{\rm Sp}$ $(N_{\mu \nu}^{\rm O})$  denote the number of

804: such matrices with

805: $$

806: {\rm row}(A,B) = {\rm col}(A,C) = \mu, \qquad

807: {\rm row}(C,D) = {\rm col}(B,D) = \nu.

808: $$

809: We have

810: \begin{eqnarray*}

811: N_{\mu \nu}^{\rm Sp} & = & {\mathbb E}_{M \in

812: USp(2N)} \prod_{i=1}^{k} (\Sc_i(M))^{a_i}

813:  \prod_{j=1}^{l}

814: (\Rc_j(M))^{c_j} \\

815: N_{\mu \nu}^{\rm O} & = & {\mathbb E}_{M \in

816: O(N)} \prod_{i=1}^{k} (\Sc_i(M))^{a_i}

817:  \prod_{j=1}^{l}

818: (\Rc_j(M))^{c_j}.

819: \end{eqnarray*}

820: \end{prop}

821: 

822: 

823: 

824: \section{Relationship to non-intersecting paths} \label{path}

825: \setcounter{equation}{0}

826: The purpose of this section is to relate the random unitary matrix average

827: in (\ref{5.1}) and the unitary symplectic average in (\ref{lsp})

828: to configurations of weighted non-intersecting lattice paths. This then

829: allows us to give combinatorial interpretations to (\ref{1}) and (\ref{3})

830: relating to non-intersecting lattice paths rather than integer matrices.

831: That such interpretation are possible can be anticipated from the

832: RSK correspondence: the semi-standard tableaux therein have a well

833: known interpretation in terms of weighted non-intersecting lattice

834: paths (see e.g.~\cite{Sa}). However neither in the case of (\ref{5.1})

835: nor (\ref{lsp}) will our non-intersecting paths correspond to the

836: conventional ones related to semi-standard tableaux, and so a separate

837: discussion is warranted.

838: 

839: In relation to (\ref{5.1}), mark points on the $x$-axis at

840: $x=1,\dots,N$. Move each point to the line $y=1$ according to the rule

841: that each $x$ coordinate must either stay the same (weight unity) or

842: increase by one (weight $\alpha_1$), with the proviso that all $x$

843: coordinates must remain distinct. Connect the points between $y=0$ and

844: $y=1$ by segments, which must either be vertical (weight unity),

845: or right diagonal (weight $\alpha_1$). Repeat this procedure a total of

846: $n$ times, with each right diagonal segment at step $j$ weighted by

847: $\alpha_j$.

848: 

849: \begin{figure}[t]

850: \epsfxsize=7cm

851: \centerline{\epsfbox{F1.eps}}

852: \caption{\label{F1} Example of non-intersecting lattice paths

853: corresponding to returning lock step vicious walkers. For the

854: first (last) $n$ steps the walkers must move to the right (left)

855: or stay stationary. The weight of the configuration shown here is

856: $\alpha_1^2 \alpha_2^2\alpha_3^2\alpha_4\beta_1^3\beta_2\beta_3\beta_4^2$.}

857: \end{figure}

858: 

859: After step $n$, perform another $n$ steps, but now with the segments

860: either vertical (weight unity) or left diagonal (weight $\beta_{2n+1-j}$

861: in step $n+j$). The segments again must not intersect, and are further

862: conditioned to return along $y=2n$ to the same $x$ coordinates

863: $(x=1,\dots,N)$ as they began (see Figure \ref{F1} for an example).

864: The resulting non-intersecting lattice paths are equivalent to a special

865: case of the lock-step model of vicious random walkers \cite{Fi84,Fo89}.

866: For general initial positions along $y=0$ $(l_1^{(0)},\dots, l_N^{(0)}$

867: say), and final positions along $y=2n$ $(l_1,\dots,l_N$ say), the

868: generating function $G_{2n}$ for the weighted paths can be written

869: as an $N \times N$ determinant according to

870: \begin{equation}

871: G_{2n}(l_1^{(0)},\dots,l_N^{(0)};l_1,\dots,l_N) =

872: \det \Big [ g_{2n}(l_j^{(0)};l_k) \Big ]_{j,k=1,\dots,N}

873: \end{equation}

874: where

875: \begin{equation}

876: g_{2n}(l^{(0)};l) = {1 \over 2 \pi} \int_{-\pi}^\pi

877: \prod_{j=1}^n(1 + \alpha_j e^{-i \theta_j})

878: (1 + \beta_j e^{i \theta_j}) e^{-i(l-l^{(0)})\theta} \, d \theta.

879: \end{equation}

880: 

881: {}From the well known identity

882: \begin{equation}

883: \det \Big [ {1 \over 2 \pi} \int_{-\pi}^\pi h(\theta) e^{-i(j-k) \theta}

884: \, d\theta \Big ]_{j,k=1,\dots,N} =

885: \Big \langle \prod_{j=1}^N h(\theta_j) \Big \rangle_{U(N)}

886: \end{equation}

887: we see that in the case of interest (initial positions $=$ final positions,

888: all one unit apart), we have

889: \begin{equation}

890: G_{2n}(l_1^{(0)},\dots,l_N^{(0)};l_1,\dots,l_N)

891: \Big |_{l_j^{(0)}=l_j=j \atop (j=1,\dots,N)}

892: = {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)} \prod_{j=1}^n \det (I_N + \alpha_j \bar{U})

893: \det (I_N + \beta_j U).

894: \end{equation}

895: The following interpretation of the average over $U(N)$ in (\ref{1}) is

896: now evident.

897: 

898: 

899: 

900: \begin{figure}[t]

901: \epsfxsize=7cm

902: \centerline{\epsfbox{F2.eps}}

903: \caption{\label{F2} Example of non-intersecting lattice paths

904: with initial (final) spacings along $y=0$ $(y=2n)$ one unit apart

905: starting at $x=1$. All paths are restricted to $x\ge 1$, and segments

906: can be vertical or right diagonal for odd steps, and vertical or

907: left diagonal for even steps.

908: The weight of the configuration shown here is

909: $\alpha_1^3 \alpha_2^4\alpha_3^2\alpha_4^3$.}

910: \end{figure}

911: 

912: \begin{prop}\label{pt}

913: Consider the set of all non-intersecting paths of the type depicted in

914: Figure \ref{F1}. Impose the further constraint that the number of right

915: diagonal segments between $y=j-1$ and $y=j$ $(j=1,\dots,n)$ is equal to

916: $\mu_j$, and the total number of left diagonal segments between

917: $y=2n-j$ and $y=2n-j+1$ $(j=1,\dots,n)$ is equal to $\tilde{\mu}_j$.

918: The total number of such lattice paths is given by the RHS of

919: (\ref{1}).

920: \end{prop}

921: 

922: We note that in the setting of  Proposition \ref{pt} at most

923: $|\mu| = \sum_{j=1}^n \mu_j$ (which must equal $|\tilde{\mu}|$)

924: different walkers, counted to the left from $x=N$, can move.

925: Thus we see immediately that (\ref{1}) must be independent of $N$ for

926: $N \ge |\mu|$.

927: 

928: 

929: Let us now turn our attention to the non-intersecting lattice path

930: interpretation of (\ref{lsp}). For this mark points on the $x$-axis

931: at $x=1,\dots,N$. Also count steps $j=1,\dots,2n$ as the points

932: are moved to the lines $y=1,\dots,2n$ in order, and the corresponding

933: segments are drawn to connect the points. Let this process proceed by the

934: rule that the lattice paths must not intersect, and that at odd numbered

935: steps the segments must be either vertical or right diagonal, while at

936: even numbered steps the segments must either be vertical or left

937: diagonal. Weight the diagonal segments in steps $2j-1,2j$ by

938: $a_j, b_j$ respectively. It is further required that all points remain

939: to the right of the $y$-axis, which can be thought of as a wall

940: (see Figure \ref{F2} for an example). For general initial positions along

941: $y=0$ $(l_1^{(0)},\dots,l_N^{(0)})$ and finishing positions along

942: $y=2n$ $(l_1,\dots,l_N)$, all to the right of the wall, the generating

943: function $G_{2n}^{\rm wall}$ for the weighted paths has a

944: determinant form \cite{Fo89}. In the special case that

945: $\{a_i\} = \{b_i\}=\{\alpha_i\}$ (in any order), and that the initial

946: and final positions are spaced one unit apart starting at $x=1$,

947: this determinant can be expressed as the random matrix average

948: (\ref{lsp}) \cite{Fo01b}, thus providing the following interpretation of the

949: latter in terms of non-intersecting paths.

950: 

951: \begin{prop}

952: Consider the set of all non-intersecting lattice paths of the type depicted

953: in Figure \ref{F2}. Impose the further constraint that the sum of the

954: number of right diagonal segments at step $2j-1$ and the number of left

955: diagonal segments at step $2j$ is equal to $\mu_j$. The total number of

956: such paths is given by the RHS of (\ref{3}).

957: \end{prop}

958: 

959: 

960: \section{Relationship to plane partitions}\label{part}

961: \setcounter{equation}{0}

962: In this section

963: the random unitary matrix

964: average (\ref{e:charmom1}), the random unitary symplectic average

965: \eqref{lsp}, and the random orthogonal average

966: (\ref{2.16}) will be related

967: to the enumeration of certain classes of plane partitions

968: \cite{Mac, stanleyv2}.

969: A plane partition $\cal{P}$ is a finite

970: set of lattice points $\{(i, j,

971: k)\} \subseteq \natls^{3}$ with the property that if $(a, b, c)

972: \in \cal{P}$ and $1 \le i \le a$, $1 \le j \le b$, $1 \le k \le

973: c$, then $(i, j, k) \in \cal{P}$.  A plane partition is symmetric

974: if $(i, j, k) \in \cal{P}$ if and only if $(j, i, k) \in \cal{P}$.

975: The height of stack $(i, j)$ is the largest value of $k$ for which

976: there exists a point $(i, j, k)$ in the plane partition.

977: 

978: 

979: The study of plane partitions was initiated by MacMahon \cite{mm}

980: who proved that the generating function for plane partitions

981: fitting in the box \beq \label{mm1} \mathcal{B}(a, b, c) =\{(i, j,

982: k) | 1 \le i \le a, 1 \le j \le b, 1 \le k \le c \} \eeq is given by

983: \beq \label{mm2}

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

985: \frac{1-q^{i+j+k-1}}{1-q^{i+j+k-2}}.\eeq

986: Taking the limit $q \to 1$ gives for

987: the total

988: number of plane partitions fitting inside $\B(a, b, c)$, $\# {\cal P}(a,b,c)$

989: say, the evaluation

990: \begin{equation}\label{6.3}

991: \# {\cal P}(a,b,c) = \prod_{i=1}^{a}

992: \prod_{j=1}^{b} \prod_{k=1}^{c} \frac{i+j+k-1}{i+j+k-2}.

993: \end{equation}

994: 

995: We can express the generating function (\ref{mm2}) for plane partitions

996: in terms of Schur functions.  Thus from the

997: combinatorial definition of  Schur functions $s_\lambda(x_1,\dots,x_n)$

998: as a sum over weighted semi-standard

999: tableaux of shape $\lambda$ and content

1000: $\{1,\dots,n\}$, it follows that

1001: $$

1002: s_{b^a}(q^{a+c}, q^{a+c-1}, \dots, q)

1003: $$

1004: where

1005: $b^a$ denotes a partition with $a$ parts all of which are equal to

1006: $b$, is the generating function for plane partitions strictly

1007: decreasing down columns with exactly $a$ rows each of length $b$

1008: and with the largest stack of height less than or equal to $a+c$.

1009: The strictly decreasing constraint can be eased by

1010: removing $a-i+1$ from the boxes in row $i$ to bijectively obtain a plane

1011: partition which is a subset of $\mathcal{B}(a, b, c)$.

1012: Consequently an alternative expression for \eqref{mm2} is given by

1013: \beq \label{mm3} q^{-ba(a+1)/2} s_{b^a}(q^{a+c}, q^{a+c-1}, \dots,

1014: q).\eeq

1015: Making use of (\ref{e:charmom1}) shows that for

1016: $a=n$, $c=m$ and

1017: $b=N$, \eqref{mm3} can be expressed as

1018: $$

1019: {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(N)}

1020: \prod_{j=1}^m \det(I_N + \alpha_j U) \prod_{j=1}^n

1021: \det(I_N + \overline{

1022: U}/\beta_j

1023: )

1024: $$

1025: with $\alpha_i=q^{n+i}$ and $\beta_i=q^{i}$.  Taking the limit $q \to 1$ gives

1026: the sought relationship between (\ref{6.3}) and a random matrix average.

1027: 

1028: 

1029: \begin{prop}

1030: Denote by $P_M^*(z)$ the (reciprocal) characteristic polynomial of

1031: $M \in  U(N)$, so that $P_M(z) = \det (I_N - z M)$.

1032: For $|z|=1$ we have

1033: \begin{equation}\label{mz}

1034: \# {\cal P}(a,b,c)

1035: =  {\mathbb E}_{U \in U(c)} \Big ( P_M^*(z) \Big )^b

1036: \Big ( \overline{P_M^*(z)} \Big )^a.

1037: \end{equation}

1038: \end{prop}

1039: 

1040: \noindent

1041: We remark that in \cite{St01}, the case $a=b$ of the RHS of

1042: (\ref{mz}) has been given a combinatorial interpretation involving

1043: two-rowed lexicographic arrays.

1044: 

1045: The random matrix average (\ref{mz}) is an example of a class

1046: of multi-dimensional integrals possessing gamma function

1047: evaluations (see e.g.~\cite{Fo02}). This implies

1048: \begin{eqnarray}\label{bG}

1049: \# {\cal P}(a,b,c) & = &

1050: \prod_{j=0}^{c-1} {\Gamma(a+b+1+j) \Gamma(2+j) \over

1051: \Gamma(a+1+j) \Gamma(b+1+j) } \nonumber \\

1052: & = &

1053: {G(1+a+b+c) \over G(1+a+b)}

1054: {G(1+a) \over G(1+a+c)} {G(1+b) \over G(1+b+c)} G(c+2)

1055: \end{eqnarray}

1056: where $G(z)$ is the Barnes $G$-function, related to the gamma function

1057: by the functional equation $G(z+1) = \Gamma(z) G(z)$, $G(1)=1$.

1058: In contrast to the formula (\ref{6.3}), the latter formula is

1059: well suited for asymptotic analysis.

1060: 

1061: 

1062: Consider now symmetric plane partitions fitting inside the box

1063: (\ref{mm1}) with $b=a$. The generating function for such plane

1064: partitions, with the additional constraint that the heights of all

1065: stacks on the diagonal are even and bounded by $2c$, has the

1066: product form \cite{stanleyv2}

1067: \begin{equation}\label{qs}

1068: \prod_{1 \le i \le j \le a} {1 - q^{i+j+2c} \over 1 - q^{i + j} }.

1069: \end{equation}

1070: Here only points on and above the diagonal are weighted.

1071: Denoting their total number by $\# {\cal P}^{\rm sym}_{\rm e}(a,2c)$, we see by

1072: taking the limit $q \to 1$ that \cite{dsv}

1073: \begin{equation}\label{qs1}

1074: \# {\cal P}^{\rm sym}_{\rm e}(a,2c) = \prod_{1 \le i \le j \le a}

1075: {i+j+2c \over i + j}.

1076: \end{equation}

1077: 

1078: The generating function (\ref{qs}) and thus counting formula (\ref{qs1}) can

1079: be expressed in terms of Schur functions by making use of a bijection

1080: between tableaux and symmetrical plane partitions. Consider then

1081: semi-standard tableaux of content $\{1,\dots,a\}$. Suppose furthermore

1082: that each

1083: row is of even length, and the first row is constrained to be less than

1084: or equal to $2c$. From this construct the diagonal and upper triangular

1085: portion of a symmetrical plane partition by associating with

1086: grid points $(i,j)$, $i \le j$,

1087: stacks of height

1088: $$

1089: h_{i,j} = \#i{\rm '}s + \#(i+1){\rm '}s + \cdots +

1090: \#(a+i-j){\rm '}s \: \: {\rm in} \: \:

1091: {\rm row} \: \: i \: \: {\rm of} \: \: {\rm the} \: \:

1092: {\rm tableaux}.

1093: $$

1094: By weighting each square labelled $j$ in the

1095: tableaux by $q^j$, we see that each stack at grid point $(i,j)$ is weighted

1096: $q^{h_{i,j}}$, and furthermore on the diagonal this weight is $q^{\lambda_i}$

1097: where $\lambda_i$ is the length of row $i$ of the tableau. It follows

1098: that (\ref{qs}) can be expressed in terms of Schur functions according to

1099: \begin{equation}\label{5.8a}

1100: \sum_{ \substack{\lambda \subseteq (2c )^a \\ \lambda \,

1101: \text{even}}} s_{\lambda}(q^a, q^{a-1},\dots,q) .

1102: \end{equation}

1103: Recalling (\ref{lsp}) gives the sought relationship with an

1104: average over the unitary symplectic group.

1105: 

1106: 

1107: \begin{prop}

1108: Denote by $P_M^{\rm Sp}(z)$ the characteristic polynomial of

1109: $M \in USp(2c)$ so that $P_M^{\rm Sp}(z) = \det (\lambda I_{2c} -

1110: M)$. We have

1111: $$

1112: \# {\cal P}^{\rm sym}_{\rm e}(a,2c) = {\mathbb E}_{M \in

1113: USp(2c)}\Big (P_M^{\rm Sp}(-1) \Big )^a.

1114: $$

1115: \end{prop}

1116: 

1117: Analogous to (\ref{bG}), the above average is of a type which

1118: admits a gamma function evaluation (see e.g.~\cite{Fo02}). This allows

1119: (\ref{qs1}) to be written

1120: \begin{eqnarray*}

1121: \# {\cal P}^{\rm sym}_{\rm e}(a,2c) & = &

1122: 2^{2ca}\prod_{j=1}^{c}\frac{\Gamma(1+c+j)

1123: \Gamma(\frac{1}{2}+a+j)}{\Gamma(1+c+a+j) \Gamma(\frac{1}{2}+j)} \\

1124:  & = &

1125: 2^{2ca} {G(2+2c) \over G(2+c)}

1126: {G(2+c+a) \over G(2+2c+a)} {G({3 \over 2} + a + c) \over

1127: G({3 \over 2} + a) } {G({3 \over 2}) \over G({3 \over 2}+c)}.

1128: \end{eqnarray*}

1129: 

1130: Finally, consider the same weighted symmetric plane partitions as

1131: described in the paragraph below (\ref{qs1}), but with stacks now

1132: restricted to heights $\le c$ and without the constraint that the

1133: stacks on the diagonal be even. The generating function is

1134: $$

1135: \sum_{\lambda \subseteq c^a} s_\lambda(q^a, q^{a-1},\dots,q).

1136: $$

1137: In an obvious notation, after taking the limit $q \to 1$ and recalling

1138: (\ref{7.1b}) we obtain

1139: $$

1140: \# {\cal P}^{\rm sym}(a,c) = {\mathbb E}_{M \in O(c)}\Big

1141: (P_M^{\rm O * }(-1) \Big )^{a+1}.

1142: $$

1143: 

1144: 

1145: 

1146: 

1147: 

1148: \section{Counting formulas associated with the

1149: characteristic polynomials  of random

1150: Hermitian and Wishart matrices} \label{herm}

1151: 

1152: \setcounter{equation}{0} Let $X$ be an $n \times n$ Hermitian

1153: matrix. Let the diagonal elements $x_{ii}$ be chosen independently

1154: according to a probability distribution ${\mathcal D}_1$, with the

1155: property that

1156: \begin{equation}\label{a5.1}

1157: {\mathbb E}_{{\mathcal D}_1} x_{ii} = 0.

1158: \end{equation}

1159: Let the upper triangular elements $x_{ij}$, $i < j$, (which may be

1160: complex) be chosen independently according to a probability

1161: distribution ${\mathcal D}_2$, with the properties that

1162: \begin{equation}\label{a5.2}

1163: {\mathbb E}_{{\mathcal D}_2} x_{ij} = 0, \qquad {\mathbb

1164: E}_{{\mathcal D}_2} |x_{ij}|^2 = \sigma_2^2.

1165: \end{equation}

1166: The following result, generalizing a number of results presented

1167: in \cite{DiGa}\footnote{We take this opportunity to correct the

1168: statement of Theorem 15 in \cite{DiGa}.  It should read:

1169: $\E_{\mu_N}(P_M^{2k}(x))= h_N^{(k)}(x), $ where $h_N^{(k)}$ are

1170: orthogonal polynomials with respect to the weight

1171: $(t-x)^{2k}e^{-t^2}$.}, gives the expected value of the

1172: characteristic polynomial of $X$ in terms of the classical Hermite

1173: polynomial $H_n(x)$.

1174: 

1175: \begin{prop}\label{p6}

1176: Let $X$ be Hermitian and specified in terms of ${\mathcal D}_1$

1177: and ${\mathcal D}_2$ as above. With the monic rescaled Hermite

1178: polynomial specified in terms of the classical Hermite polynomial

1179: by

1180: $$

1181: h_n(x) = 2^{-n/2} H_n \Big ( {x \over \sqrt{2} } \Big )

1182: $$

1183: we have

1184: \begin{equation}

1185: {\mathbb E}_{{\mathcal D}_1,{\mathcal D}_2} \det ( \lambda I_N -

1186: X) = \sigma_2^N h_N \Big ( {\lambda \over \sigma_2} \Big ).

1187: \end{equation}

1188: \end{prop}

1189: 

1190: \noindent

1191: Proof. \quad By definition

1192: \begin{equation}\label{a6.1}

1193: \det ( \lambda I_N - X) = \sum_{P \in S_N} \varepsilon(P)

1194: \prod_{l=1}^N ( \lambda_{l,P(l)} - x_{l,P(l)} ),

1195: \end{equation}

1196: where $\varepsilon(P)$ denotes the parity of $P$ and

1197: $$\lambda_{i, j}=\begin{cases}

1198: \lambda  &\text{if $i=j$;}\\

1199: 0, &\text{if $i \ne j$}.

1200: \end{cases}$$

1201: 

1202: The specifications (\ref{a5.1}), (\ref{a5.2}) tell us that the

1203: only non-zero terms in (\ref{a6.1}) after averaging over

1204: ${\mathcal D}_1,{\mathcal D}_2$ are those for which $P$ consists

1205: entirely of fixed points $(P(j)=j)$ and 2-cycles $(P(j_1) = j_2$

1206: and $P(j_2) = j_1$, $j_1 \ne j_2$). Let there then be $N - 2j$

1207: fixed points and $j$ 2-cycles. Such permutations have parity

1208: $(-1)^j$. Each fixed point contributes a factor $\lambda$, while

1209: each 2-cycle contributes $\sigma_2^2$. As the number of ways of

1210: choosing the $(N-2j)$ fixed points and the $j$ 2-cycles is

1211: $$

1212: \Big ( {N \atop 2j} \Big ) {(2j)! \over 2^j j!}

1213: $$

1214: we see that

1215: $$

1216: {\mathbb E}_{{\mathcal D}_1,{\mathcal D}_2} \det ( \lambda I_N -

1217: X) = \sum_{j=0}^{[N/2]} (-1)^j \Big ( {N \atop 2j} \Big ) {(2j)!

1218: \over 2^j j!}

1219:  \lambda^{N-2j} \sigma_2^{2j}.

1220: $$

1221: But this is precisely the power series expansion of the polynomial

1222: in question.

1223: \hfill $\square$

1224: 

1225: \medskip

1226: Next we turn our attention to the mean characteristic polynomial

1227: of so called chiral matrices, that is matrices of the form

1228: \begin{equation}\label{K}

1229: K := \left [ \begin{array}{cc} 0_{n \times n} & X_{n \times p}

1230: \\ (X^\dagger)_{p \times n} & 0_{p \times p} \end{array}

1231: \right ],

1232: \end{equation}

1233: where we require that $n \ge p$. These matrices have exactly $n-p$

1234: zero eigenvalues, with the remaining $2p$ eigenvalues given by

1235: $\pm$ the positive square roots of the eigenvalues of the

1236: non-negative matrix $X^\dagger X$. We specify that the elements of

1237: $X$ be chosen independently according to a probability

1238: distribution ${\mathcal D}$ with the properties

1239: \begin{equation}\label{f1}

1240: {\mathbb E}_{\mathcal D} x_{ij} = 0, \qquad {\mathbb E}_{\mathcal

1241: D} |x_{ij} |^2 = \sigma^2.

1242: \end{equation}

1243: The analogue of Proposition \ref{p6} can readily be deduced.

1244: 

1245: \begin{prop}

1246: Let $K$ be a random chiral matrix as specified above. We have

1247: \begin{equation}\label{f2}

1248: {\mathbb E}_{\mathcal D} \det (\lambda I_{n+p} - K) = p!

1249: \sigma^{2p} \lambda^{n-p} L_p^{n-p}((\lambda/\sigma)^2),

1250: \end{equation}

1251: where $L_m^a(x)$ denotes the classical Laguerre polynomial.

1252: \end{prop}

1253: 

1254: \noindent

1255: Proof. \quad Because of the first specification in (\ref{f1}), we see that

1256: in the analogue of (\ref{a6.1}) for $\det (\lambda I_{n+p} - K)$, the

1257: only terms after averaging will again result entirely from fixed points

1258: and 2-cycles. The fact that $K$ has $n-p$ zero eigenvalues implies we

1259: require there be a minimum of $n-p$ fixed points. Thus we must consider

1260: the cases that the number of fixed points is equal to $n+p-2j$ and

1261: the number of 2-cycles is equal to $j$ for each $j=0,\dots,p$.

1262: 

1263: Not all permutations with these specifications give a non-zero

1264: contribution. For the latter, because of the zero blocks in

1265: (\ref{K}), in relation to the 2-cycles $(j_1 j_2)$

1266: we require

1267: $$

1268: j_1 \in \{1,\dots,n\}, \qquad j_2 \in \{n+1,\dots,n+p\}.

1269: $$

1270: Hence we must choose $(n-p)+(p-j)$ fixed points from the first of these

1271: sets and $(p-j)$ from the second. The number of distinct ways to do this

1272: is

1273: $$

1274: \Big ( {n \atop n-j} \Big ) \Big ( {p \atop p-j} \Big ).

1275: $$

1276: The $j$ 2-cycles can then be chosen in $j!$ different ways. Since again

1277: each fixed point contributes a factor $\lambda$, while each 2-cycle contributes

1278: a factor $\sigma^2$, we see that

1279: \begin{eqnarray*}

1280: {\mathbb E}_{\mathcal D} \det (\lambda I_{n+p} - K) & = &

1281: \sigma^{2p} \lambda^{n-p} \sum_{j=0}^p \Big ( {n \atop n-j} \Big )

1282: \Big ( {p \atop p-j} \Big ) j!

1283: \Big ( {\lambda \over \sigma} \Big )^{2(p-j)} \nonumber \\

1284: & = &

1285: p! \sigma^{2p} \lambda^{n-p} \sum_{j=0}^p

1286: \Big ( {n \atop p-j} \Big ) {1 \over j!}

1287: \Big ( {\lambda \over \sigma} \Big )^{2j}.

1288: \end{eqnarray*}

1289: The sum in this expression is precisely $L_p^{n-p}((\lambda/\sigma)^2)$.

1290: \hfill $\square$

1291: 

1292: \medskip

1293: Due to the relationship between the chiral matrices $X^\dagger X$ as noted

1294: below (\ref{K}), we have the following result for the expected value

1295: of the characteristic polynomial for Wishart matrices.

1296: \begin{cor}

1297: Let $X$ be a $n \times p$ matrix with elements independently

1298: chosen according to the distribution ${\mathcal D}$ with the

1299: properties (\ref{f1}). We have

1300: \begin{equation}

1301: {\mathbb E}_{\mathcal D} \det (\lambda I_p - X^\dagger X) = p!

1302: \sigma^p L_p^{n-p}(\lambda/\sigma).

1303: \end{equation}

1304: \end{cor}

1305: 

1306: 

1307: 

1308: 

1309: 

1310: 

1311: \section*{Acknowledgements}

1312: We thank the organizers of the program `Random matrix methods in

1313: number theory', held at the Newton Institute during the first half

1314: of 2004, for inviting us to participate and so facilitating our

1315: collaboration. The work of PJF was supported by the Australian

1316: Research Council.  The work of AG was supported in part by NSF

1317: Postdoctoral Fellowship.

1318: 

1319: 

1320: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

1321: 

1322: 

1323: \bibitem{AD99}

1324: D. Aldous, P. Diaconis, \emph{Longest

1325:  increasing subsequences: from patience sorting to the

1326: Baik-Deift-Johansson\ theorem}, BAMS, \textbf{36}, 1999, 413-432.

1327: 

1328: 

1329: \bibitem{BR02} %CHECK

1330: J. Baik and E. M. Rains, {\em Algebraic aspects of increasing

1331: subsequences,} Duke Mathematical Journal, \textbf{109}, 2001,

1332: 1-65.

1333: 

1334: \bibitem{BF97}

1335: T. H. Baker and P. J. Forrester, \emph{Finite-$N$ fluctuation

1336: formulas for random matrices}, J. Stat. Phys., \textbf{88}, 1997,

1337: 1371-1386.

1338: 

1339: 

1340: 

1341: 

1342: \bibitem{BR85}

1343: A. Berele and J. B. Remmel, \emph{Hook flag characters and their

1344: combinatorics,} J. Pure Appl. Algebra, \textbf{35}, 1985, 225-245.

1345: 

1346: 

1347: \bibitem{CFKRS2}

1348: J. B. Conrey, D. W. Farmer, J. P. Keating, M. O. Rubinstein, and

1349: N. C. Snaith, \emph{Autocorrelation of random matrix polynomials},

1350: Communications in Mathematical  Physics, \textbf{237}, 2003,

1351: 365-395.

1352: 

1353: 

1354: \bibitem{BCAG}

1355: B. Conrey and A. Gamburd, \emph{Pseudomoments of the Riemann

1356: zeta-function and pseudomagic squares}, to appear in Journal of

1357: Number Theory.

1358: 

1359: \bibitem{dsv}

1360: M. De Sainte-Catherine and G. Viennot, \emph{Enumeration of

1361: certain Young tableaux with bounded heights}, Lecture Notes in

1362: Mathematics, \textbf{1234}, 1986, 58-67.

1363: 

1364: \bibitem{DiGa}

1365:  P. Diaconis and A. Gamburd, {\em Random matrices, magic squares

1366: and matching polynomials,} Electronic Journal of Combinatorics,

1367: \textbf{11}(2), 2004, $\#$R2.

1368: 

1369: 

1370: \bibitem{Fi84}

1371: M. E. Fisher, \emph{Walks, walls, welting and melting,} J. Stat.

1372: Phys., \textbf{34}, 1984, 667-729.

1373: 

1374: \bibitem{Fo89}

1375: P. J. Forrester, \emph{Probability of survival of vicious walkers

1376: near a cliff,} J. Phys. A., \textbf{22}, 1989, L609-L613.

1377: 

1378: \bibitem{Fo01b} 

1379: P. J. Forrester, \emph{Random walks and random permutations,} J.

1380: Phys. A., \textbf{34}, 2001, L417-L423.

1381: 

1382: \bibitem{Fo02}

1383: P. J. Forrester, \emph{Log-gases and Random Matrices},

1384: www.ms.unimelb.edu.au/\~matpjf/matpjf.html

1385: 

1386: \bibitem{Fo03}

1387: P. J. Forrester, {\em Growth models, random matrices and

1388: Painlev\'{e} transcendents,} Nonlinearity, \textbf{16}, 2003, R27--R49

1389: 

1390: \bibitem{FR02} %CHECK

1391: P. J.  Forrester and E. M. Rains, \emph{Interpretations of some

1392: parameter dependent generalizations of classical matrix

1393: ensembles,} Probab. Theory Relat. Fields, \textbf{131}, 2005, 1--61

1394: 

1395: \bibitem{Fu97}

1396: W. Fulton, \emph{Young Tableaux,} London Mathematical Society,

1397: Student Texts \textbf{35}, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997.

1398: 

1399: \bibitem{Gr}  %CHECK

1400: J. Gravner, C. A. Tracy, H. Widom, \emph{Limit theorems for height

1401: fluctuations in a class of discrete space and time growth models,}

1402: J. Stat. Phys., \textbf{102}, 2001, 1085-1132.

1403: 

1404: \bibitem{Jo02}

1405: K. Johansson, {\em Non-intersecting paths, random tilings and

1406: random matrices,} Probab. Theory Relat. Fields, \textbf{123},

1407: 2002, 225-280.

1408: 

1409: 

1410: \bibitem{KS00a}

1411: J. P. Keating and N. C. Snaith, \emph{Random matrix theory and

1412: $\zeta(\frac{1}{2}+it)$}, Commun. Math. Phys.,

1413:  \textbf{214}, 2000, 57-89.

1414: 

1415: \bibitem{KS00}

1416:  J. P. Keating and N. C. Snaith, \emph{Random matrix theory and

1417:  L-functions at $s=\frac{1}{2}$}, Commun. Math. Phys.,

1418:  \textbf{214}, 2000, 91-110.

1419: 

1420: \bibitem{knuth}

1421: D. E.E.  Knuth, \emph{Permutations, matrices, and generalized Young

1422: tableaux}, Pacific J. Math., \textbf{34}, 1970, 709-727.

1423: 

1424: \bibitem{Li}

1425: D. E. Littlewood, \emph{The theory of group characters and matrix

1426: representations of groups,} Oxford at the Clarendon Press, 1940.

1427: 

1428: \bibitem{Mac}

1429: I. G. Macdonald,

1430:  {\em Symmetric functions and Hall polynomials}, Second

1431: edition, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995.

1432: 

1433: 

1434: \bibitem{mm}

1435: P. A. MacMahon, \emph{Combinatory Analysis,} Cambridge University

1436: Press, 1915.

1437: 

1438: 

1439: \bibitem{Ra98}

1440: E. M. Rains, {\em Increasing subsequences and the classical groups,}

1441: Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, \textbf{5}, 1998, $\#$R12.

1442: 

1443: \bibitem{Sa}

1444: B. E. Sagan, {\em The Symmetric Group}, 2nd edition, Springer, 2000.

1445: 

1446: \bibitem{stanleyv2}

1447: R. P.~Stanley. {\em Enumerative Combinatorics, Vol. 2}. Cambridge

1448: University Press, 1999.

1449: 

1450: \bibitem{St01}

1451: E. Strahov. {\em Moments of characteristic polynomials enumerate

1452: two-rowed lexicographic arrays},

1453: Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, \textbf{10}, 2003, $\#$R24.

1454: 

1455: 

1456: \end{thebibliography}

1457: 

1458: \end{document}

1459: 

1460: 

1461: 

1462: 

1463: 

1464: 

1465: \end{equation}

1466: