Orthogonal polynomials
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In mathematics, an orthogonal polynomial sequence is an infinite sequence of real polynomials
of one variable x, in which each pn has degree n, and such that any two different polynomials in the sequence are orthogonal to each other under a particular version of the L2 inner product.
The field of orthogonal polynomials developed in the late 19th century from a study of continued fractions by P. L. Chebyshev and was kept on by A.A. Markov and T.J. Stieltjes and by a few other mathematicians. Since then, applications have been developed in many areas of mathematics and physics.
[edit] Definition
The definition of orthogonal polynomials hinges on an inner product, defined as follows. Let [x1,x2] be an interval in the real line (where
and
are allowed). This is called the interval of orthogonality. Let
be a function on the interval, that is strictly positive on the interior (x1,x2), but which may be zero or go to infinity at the end points. Additionally, W must satisfy the requirement that, for any polynomial f, the integral
is finite. Such a W is called a weight function.
Given any x1, x2, and W as above, define an operation on pairs of polynomials f and g by
This operation is an inner product on the vector space of all polynomials. It induces a notion of orthogonality in the usual way, namely that two polynomials are orthogonal if their inner product is zero.
A sequence of orthogonal polynomials, then, is a sequence of polynomials
such that pn has degree n and all members of the sequence are orthogonal to each other — for all
,
In other words, a sequence of orthogonal polynomials is an orthogonal basis for the (infinite-dimensional) vector space of all polynomials, with the extra requirement that pn has degree n.
[edit] Standardization
The chosen inner product induces a norm on polynomials in the usual way:
When making an orthogonal basis, one may be tempted to make an orthonormal basis, that is, one in which all basis elements have norm 1. For polynomials, this would often result in ugly square roots in the coefficients. Instead, polynomials are often scaled in a way that mathematicians agree on, that makes the coefficients and other formulas simpler. This is called standardization. The "classical" polynomials listed below have been standardized, typically by setting their leading coefficients to some specific quantity, or by setting a specific value for the polynomial. This standardization has no mathematical significance; it is just a convention. Standardization also involves scaling the weight function in an agreed-upon way.
Denote by hn the square of the norm of pn:
The values of hn for the standardized classical polynomials are listed in the table below. In this notation,
where δmn is the Kronecker delta.
[edit] Example: Legendre polynomials
The simplest orthogonal polynomials are the Legendre polynomials, for which the interval of orthogonality is [−1, 1] and the weight function is simply 1:
These are all orthogonal over [−1, 1]; whenever
,
The Legendre polynomials are standardized so that Pn(1) = 1 for all n.
[edit] General properties of orthogonal polynomial sequences
All orthogonal polynomial sequences have a number of elegant and fascinating properties. Before proceeding with them:
Lemma 1: Given an orthogonal polynomial sequence
, any nth-degree polynomial S(x) can be expanded in terms of
. That is, there are coefficients
such that
Proof by mathematical induction. Choose
so that the
term of S(x) matches that of
. Then
is an (n − 1)th-degree polynomial. Continue downward.
Lemma 2: Given an orthogonal polynomial sequence, each of its polynomials is orthogonal to any polynomial of strictly lower degree.
Proof: Given n, any polynomial of degree n − 1 or lower can be expanded in terms of
.
is orthogonal to each of them.
[edit] Recurrence relations
Any orthogonal sequence has a recurrence formula relating any three consecutive polynomials in the sequence:
The coefficients a, b, and c depend on n, as well as the standardization.
We will prove this for fixed n, and omit the subscripts on a, b, and c.
First, choose a so that the xn + 1 terms match, so we have
a polynomial of degree n.
Next, choose b so that the xn terms match, so we have
a polynomial of degree n − 1
Expand the right-hand-side in terms of polynomials in the sequence
Now if
, then
But
and 
so
Since the inner product is just an integral involving the product:
we have
If
, then
has degree
, so it is orthogonal to
; hence
, which implies
for
.
Therefore, only λn − 1 can be nonzero, so
Letting
, we have
The values of an, bn and cn can be worked out directly. Let kj and kj' be the first and second coefficients of pj:
and hj be the inner product of pj with itself:
We have
[edit] Existence of real roots
Each polynomial in an orthogonal sequence has all n of its roots real, distinct, and strictly inside the interval of orthogonality.
Let m be the number of places where the sign of Pn changes inside the interval of orthogonality, and let
be those points. Each of those points is a root of Pn. By the fundamental theorem of algebra, m ≤ n. Now m might be strictly less than n if some roots of Pn are complex, or not inside the interval of orthogonality, or not distinct. We will show that m = n.
Let 
This is an mth-degree polynomial that changes sign at each of the xj, the same way that Pn(x) does. S(x)Pn(x) is therefore strictly positive, or strictly negative, everywhere except at the xj. S(x)Pn(x)W(x) is also strictly positive or strictly negative except at the xj and possibly the end points.
Therefore,
, the integral of this, is nonzero. But, by Lemma 2, Pn is orthogonal to any polynomial of lower degree, so the degree of S must be n.
[edit] Interlacing of roots
The roots of each polynomial lie strictly between the roots of the next higher polynomial in the sequence.
First, standardize all of the polynomials so that their leading terms are positive. This will not affect the roots.
Next, a lemma: For all n and all x,
Proof by induction. For n = 0,
,
, and
.
Otherwise, the recurrence formula has
with
and
.
So
So
But
by the induction step.
Now if x is a root of Pn+1, the lemma tells us that
So
and
have the same sign. But
must change sign from any root of Pn+1 to the next. Therefore, Pn must change sign also, so Pn must have a root in that interval.
[edit] Differential equations leading to orthogonal polynomials
A very important class of orthogonal polynomials arises from a differential equation of the form
where Q is a given quadratic (at most) polynomial, and L is a given linear polynomial. The function f, and the constant λ, are to be found.
- (Note that it makes sense for such an equation to have a polynomial solution.
- Each term in the equation is a polynomial, and the degrees are consistent.)
This is a Sturm-Liouville type of equation. Such equations generally have singularities in their solution functions f except for particular values of λ. They can be thought of a eigenvector/eigenvalue problems: Letting D be the differential operator,
, and changing the sign of λ, the problem is to find the eigenvectors (eigenfunctions) f, and the corresponding eigenvalues λ, such that f does not have singularities and D(f) = λf.
The solutions of this differential equation have singularities unless λ takes on specific values. There is a series of numbers
that lead to a series of polynomial solutions
if one of the following sets of conditions are met:
- Q is actually quadratic, L is linear, Q has two distinct real roots, the root of L lies strictly between the roots of Q, and the leading terms of Q and L have the same sign.
- Q is not actually quadratic, but is linear, L is linear, the roots of Q and L are different, and the leading terms of Q and L have the same sign if the root of L is less than the root of Q, or vice-versa.
- Q is just a nonzero constant, L is linear, and the leading term of L has the opposite sign of Q.
These three cases lead to the Jacobi-like, Laguerre-like, and Hermite-like polynomials, respectively.
In each of these three cases, we have the following:
- The solutions are a series of polynomials
, each
having degree n, and corresponding to a number
. - The interval of orthogonality is bounded by whatever roots Q has.
- The root of L is inside the interval of orthogonality.
- Letting
, the polynomials are orthogonal under the weight function 
- W(x) has no zeros or infinities inside the interval, though it may have zeros or infinities at the end points.
- W(x) gives a finite inner product to any polynomials.
- W(x) can be made to be greater than 0 in the interval. (Negate the entire differential equation if necessary so that Q(x) > 0 inside the interval.)
Because of the constant of integration, the quantity R(x) is determined only up to an arbitrary positive multiplicative constant. It will be used only in homogeneous differential equations (where this doesn't matter) and in the definition of the weight function (which can also be indeterminate.) The tables below will give the "official" values of R(x) and W(x).
[edit] Rodrigues' formula
Under the assumptions of the preceding section, Pn(x) is proportional to ![\frac{1}{W(x)} \ \frac{d^n}{dx^n}\left(W(x)[Q(x)]^n\right).](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/b/4/4/b448d8a0d17c7a845cc6f390072dfe95.png)
This is known as Rodrigues' formula, after Olinde Rodrigues. It is often written
where the numbers en depend on the standardization. The standard values of en will be given in the tables below.
[edit] The numbers λn
Under the assumptions of the preceding section, we have
(Since Q is quadratic and L is linear, Q'' and L' are constants, so these are just numbers.)
[edit] Second form for the differential equation
Let
.
Then
Now multiply the differential equation
by R/Q, getting
or
This is the standard Sturm-Liouville form for the equation.
[edit] Third form for the differential equation
Let
.
Then
Now multiply the differential equation
by S/Q, getting
or
But
, so
or, letting u = Sy,
[edit] Formulas involving derivatives
Under the assumptions of the preceding section, let
denote the rth derivative of Pn. (We put the "r" in brackets to avoid confusion with an exponent.)
is a polynomial of degree n − r. Then we have the following:
- (orthogonality) For fixed r, the polynomial sequence
are orthogonal, weighted by
. - (generalized Rodrigues' formula)
is proportional to
. - (differential equation)
is a solution of
, where
is the same function as
, that is, 
- (differential equation, second form)
is a solution of ![(RQ^{r}y')' + [{\lambda}_n-{\lambda}_r]RQ^{r-1}\,y = 0\,](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/e/1/9/e19d69eaf0b2f0d0fdcd62956e609810.png)
There are also some mixed recurrences. In each of these, the numbers a, b, and c depend on n and r, and are unrelated in the various formulas.
There are an enormous number of other formulas involving orthogonal polynomials in various ways. Here is a tiny sample of them, relating to the Chebyshev, associated Laguerre, and Hermite polynomials:
[edit] Orthogonality
The differential equation for a particular λ may be written (omitting explicit dependence on x)
multiplying by (R / Q)fm yields
and reversing the subscripts yields
subtracting and integrating:
but it can be seen that
so that:
If the polynomials f are such that the term on the left is zero, and
for
, then the orthogonality relationship will hold:
for
.
[edit] The classical orthogonal polynomials
The class of polynomials arising from the differential equation described above have many important applications in such areas as mathematical physics, interpolation theory, the theory of random matrices, computer approximations, and many others. All of these polynomial sequences are equivalent, under scaling and/or shifting of the domain, and standardizing of the polynomials, to more restricted classes. Those restricted classes are the "classical orthogonal polynomials".
- Every Jacobi-like polynomial sequence can have its domain shifted and/or scaled so that its interval of orthogonality is [−1, 1], and has Q = 1 − x2. They can then be standardized into the Jacobi polynomials
. There are several important subclasses of these: Gegenbauer, Legendre, and two types of Chebyshev. - Every Laguerre-like polynomial sequence can have its domain shifted, scaled, and/or reflected so that its interval of orthogonality is
, and has Q = x. They can then be standardized into the Associated Laguerre polynomials
. The plain Laguerre polynomials
are a subclass of these. - Every Hermite-like polynomial sequence can have its domain shifted and/or scaled so that its interval of orthogonality is
, and has Q = 1 and L(0) = 0. They can then be standardized into the Hermite polynomials
.
Because all polynomial sequences arising from a differential equation in the manner described above are trivially equivalent to the classical polynomials, the actual classical polynomials are always used.
[edit] Jacobi polynomials
The Jacobi-like polynomials, once they have had their domain shifted and scaled so that the interval of orthogonality is [−1, 1], still have two parameters to be determined. They are α and β in the Jacobi polynomials, written
. We have
and
. Both α and β are required to be greater than −1. (This puts the root of L inside the interval of orthogonality.)
When α and β are not equal, these polynomials are not symmetrical about x = 0.
The differential equation
is Jacobi's equation.
For further details, see Jacobi polynomials.
[edit] Gegenbauer polynomials
When one sets the parameters α and β in the Jacobi polynomials equal to each other, one obtains the Gegenbauer or ultraspherical polynomials. They are written
, and defined as
We have
and
.
is required to be greater than −1/2.
(Incidentally, the standardization given in the table below would make no sense for α = 0 and n ≠ 0, because it would set the polynomials to zero. In that case, the accepted standardization sets
instead of the value given in the table.)
Ignoring the above considerations, the parameter α is closely related to the derivatives of
:
or, more generally:
All the other classical Jacobi-like polynomials (Legendre, etc.) are special cases of the Gegenbauer polynomials, obtained by choosing a value of α and choosing a standardization.
For further details, see Gegenbauer polynomials.
[edit] Legendre polynomials
The differential equation is
This is Legendre's equation.
The second form of the differential equation is
The recurrence relation is
A mixed recurrence is
Rodrigues' formula is
For further details, see Legendre polynomials.
[edit] Associated Legendre polynomials
The Associated Legendre polynomials, denoted
where
and m are integers with
, are defined as
The m in parentheses (to avoid confusion with an exponent) is a parameter. The m in brackets denotes the mth derivative of the Legendre polynomial.
These "polynomials" are misnamed -- they are not polynomials when m is odd.
They have a recurrence relation:
For fixed m, the sequence
are orthogonal over [−1, 1], with weight 1.
For given m,
are the solutions of
[edit] Chebyshev polynomials
The differential equation is
This is Chebyshev's equation.
The recurrence relation is
Rodrigues' formula is
These polynomials have the property that, in the interval of orthogonality,
(To prove it, use the recurrence formula.)
This means that all their local minima and maxima have values of −1 and +1, that is, the polynomials are "level". Because of this, expansion of functions in terms of Chebyshev polynomials is sometimes used for polynomial approximations in computer math libraries.
Some authors use versions of these polynomials that have been shifted so that the interval of orthogonality is [0, 1] or [−2, 2].
There are also Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind, denoted 
We have:
For further details, including the expressions for the first few polynomials, see Chebyshev polynomials.
[edit] Laguerre polynomials
The most general Laguerre-like polynomials, after the domain has been shifted and scaled, are the Associated Laguerre polynomials (also called Generalized Laguerre polynomials), denoted
. There is a parameter α, which can be any real number strictly greater than −1. The parameter is put in parentheses to avoid confusion with an exponent. The plain Laguerre polynomials are simply the α = 0 version of these:
The differential equation is
This is Laguerre's equation.
The second form of the differential equation is
The recurrence relation is
Rodrigues' formula is
The parameter α is closely related to the derivatives of
:
or, more generally:
Laguerre's equation can be manipulated into a form that is more useful in applications:
is a solution of
This can be further manipulated. When
is an integer, and
:
is a solution of
The solution is often expressed in terms of derivatives instead of associated Laguerre polynomials:
This equation arises in quantum mechanics, in the radial part of the solution of the Schrödinger equation for a one-electron atom.
Physicists often use a definition for the Laguerre polynomials that is larger, by a factor of (n!), than the definition used here.
For further details, including the expressions for the first few polynomials, see Laguerre polynomials.
[edit] Hermite polynomials
The differential equation is
This is Hermite's equation.
The second form of the differential equation is
The third form is
The recurrence relation is
Rodrigues' formula is
The first few Hermite polynomials are
One can define the associated Hermite functions
Because the multiplier is proportional to the square root of the weight function, these functions are orthogonal over
with no weight function.
The third form of the differential equation above, for the associated Hermite functions, is
The associated Hermite functions arise in many areas of mathematics and physics. In quantum mechanics, they are the solutions of Schrödinger's equation for the harmonic oscillator. They are also eigenfunctions (with eigenvalue (−i)n) of the continuous Fourier transform.
Many authors, particularly probabilists, use an alternate definition of the Hermite polynomials, with a weight function of
instead of
. If the notation He is used for these Hermite polynomials, and H for those above, then these may be characterized by
For further details, see Hermite polynomials.
[edit] Constructing orthogonal polynomials by the Gram–Schmidt process
The Gram–Schmidt process is an algorithm originally taken from linear algebra which removes linear dependency from a set of given vectors in an inner product space. The inner product as defined on all polynomials allows us to apply the Gram–Schmidt process to an arbitrary set of polynomials. The process removes linear dependencies from the polynomials, yielding sets of orthogonal polynomials. Given various initial polynomial sequences and weighting functions, different orthogonal polynomial sequences can be produced.
We define a projection operator on the polynomials as:
To apply the algorithm, we define our set of original polynomials
and generate a sequence of orthogonal polynomials
using:
If an orthonormal sequence is required, a polynomial normalization operation can be defined as:
Care must be taken if the process is implemented on computer as the Gram–Schmidt process is numerically unstable. However, as many computational platforms implement rational numbers with arbitrary-precision arithmetic the problem can often be easily avoided.
[edit] Constructing orthogonal polynomials by using moments
Let
be the moments of a measure μ. Then the polynomial sequence defined by
is a sequence of orthogonal polynomials with respect to the measure μ. To see this, consider the inner product of pn(x) with xk for any k < n. We will see that the value of this inner product is zero[1].
(The entry-by-entry integration merely says the integral of a linear combination of functions is the same linear combination of the separate integrals. It is a linear combination because only one row contains non-scalar entries.)
Thus pn(x) is orthogonal to xk for all k < n. That means this is a sequence of orthogonal polynomials for the measure μ.
[edit] Table of classical orthogonal polynomials
| Name, and conventional symbol | Chebyshev, ![]() |
Chebyshev (second kind), ![]() |
Legendre, ![]() |
Hermite, ![]() |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Limits of orthogonality | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Weight, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Standardization | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Lead term = ![]() |
Square of norm, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Leading term, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Second term, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Constant in diff. equation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Constant in Rodrigues' formula, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Name, and conventional symbol | Associated Laguerre, ![]() |
Laguerre, ![]() |
|---|---|---|
| Limits of orthogonality | ![]() |
![]() |
Weight, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Standardization | Lead term = ![]() |
Lead term = ![]() |
Square of norm, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Leading term, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Second term, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Constant in diff. equation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Constant in Rodrigues' formula, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Name, and conventional symbol | Gegenbauer, ![]() |
Jacobi, ![]() |
|---|---|---|
| Limits of orthogonality | ![]() |
![]() |
Weight, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Standardization | if ![]() |
![]() |
Square of norm, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Leading term, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Second term, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Constant in diff. equation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Constant in Rodrigues' formula, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Recurrence relation, ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[edit] See also
- Polynomial sequences of binomial type
- Generalized Fourier series
- Sheffer sequence
- Appell sequence
- Umbral calculus
- Secondary measure
[edit] Notes
- ^ J. J. Foncannon, Review of Classical and Quantum Orthogonal Polynomials in One Variable by Mourad Ismail, Mathematical Intelligencer, volume 30, number 1, Winter 2008, pages 54–60.
[edit] References
- Abramowitz, Milton; Stegun, Irene A., eds. (1965), "Chapter 22", Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables, New York: Dover, ISBN 0-486-61272-4.
- Gabor Szego (1939). Orthogonal Polynomials. Colloquium Publications - American Mathematical Society. ISBN 0-8218-1023-5.
- Dunham Jackson (1941, 2004). Fourier Series and Orthogonal Polynomials. New York: Dover. ISBN 0-486-43808-2.
- Refaat El Attar (2006). Special Functions and Orthogonal Polynomials. Lulu Press, Morrisville NC 27560. ISBN 1-4116-6690-9.
- Theodore Seio Chihara (1978). An Introduction to Orthogonal Polynomials. Gordon and Breach, New York. ISBN 0-677-04150-0.
[edit] Further reading
- Ismail, Mourad E. H. (2005). Classical and Quantum Orthogonal Polynomials in One Variable. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. ISBN 0-521-78201-5. http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521782012.
- Vilmos Totik (2005). "Orthogonal Polynomials". Surveys in Approximation Theory 1: 70–125. http://arxiv.org/abs/math.CA/0512424.

![W : [x_1, x_2] \to \mathbb{R}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/4/9/8/498f89621f7dcdd7cd6af528ddfc1bdc.png)




























![\begin{align}
& {} \quad P_{n+1}'\ P_n - P_{n+1}\ P_n' = [a P_n + (ax + b) P_n' - c P_{n-1}'] P_n - [(ax + b) P_n - c P_{n-1}] P_n' \\
& {} = [a P_n - c P_{n-1}'] P_n + c P_{n-1}\ P_n' \\
& {} = a P_n^{ 2} + c (P_n'\ P_{n-1} - P_n\ P_{n-1}') \\
& {} \ge c (P_n'\ P_{n-1} - P_n\ P_{n-1}')
\end{align}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/e/c/5/ec555f7af0c3a34d8ca0dc6fa930d65b.png)


![P_n(x) = \frac{1}{{e_n}W(x)} \ \frac{d^n}{dx^n}\left(W(x)[Q(x)]^n\right)](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/0/5/3/053c6bdce2a23cedd8699f20a10268e3.png)










![P_n^{[r]} = aP_{n+1}^{[r+1]} + bP_n^{[r+1]} + cP_{n-1}^{[r+1]}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/9/f/e/9fedaa3a5585fc72cde284cae54bb210.png)
![P_n^{[r]} = (ax+b)P_n^{[r+1]} + cP_{n-1}^{[r+1]}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/6/f/c/6fc0ca2e6a38af7ca5f0bc4b10b573ea.png)
![QP_n^{[r+1]} = (ax+b)P_n^{[r]} + cP_{n-1}^{[r]}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/0/f/a0fd3dcf751f82f073dbd67b39202e6d.png)






![\int_a^b \left[R(f_m\ddot{f}_n-f_n\ddot{f}_m)+
\textstyle\frac{R}{Q}L(f_m\dot{f}_n-f_n\dot{f}_m)\right] dx
+(\lambda_n-\lambda_m)\int_a^b \textstyle\frac{R}{Q}f_mf_n dx=0](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/d/7/9/d796efeccab16fcec70e281d1697fcec.png)
![\frac{d}{dx}\left[R(f_m\dot{f}_n-f_n\dot{f}_m)\right]=
R(f_m\ddot{f}_n-f_n\ddot{f}_m)\,\,+\,\,R\textstyle\frac{L}{Q}(f_m\dot{f}_n-f_n\dot{f}_m)](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/4/3/3/4331ea50a455245c6864c0a8ca5ea9f5.png)
![\left[R(f_m\dot{f}_n-f_n\dot{f}_m)\right]_a^b\,\,+\,\,(\lambda_n-\lambda_m)\int_a^b \textstyle\frac{R}{Q}f_mf_n dx=0](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/7/d/3/7d30cdbee9a95fb5050e5320abeb6a31.png)

![(1-x^2)\,y'' + (\beta-\alpha-[\alpha+\beta+2]\,x)\,y' + {\lambda}\,y = 0\qquad \mathrm{with}\qquad\lambda = n(n+1+\alpha+\beta)\,](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/3/2/1321503a05a3b104841ee23b3c85dd81.png)


![C_n^{(\alpha+m)}(x) = \frac{\Gamma(\alpha)}{2^m\Gamma(\alpha+m)}\! \ C_{n+m}^{(\alpha)[m]}(x).](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/5/3/3/5336d7784487eaada600bd1a550671a1.png)

![([1-x^2]\,y')' + \lambda\,y = 0.\,](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/3/4/9/349c71aefe5ded586765655fc86f2080.png)

![P_{n+1}^{[r+1]}(x) = P_{n-1}^{[r+1]}(x) + (2n+1)\,P_n^{[r]}(x).\,](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/d/6/3/d630f38abc3781bb57729ae8c4bce3de.png)
![P_n(x) = \,\frac{1}{2^n\,n!} \ \frac{d^n}{dx^n}\left([x^2-1]^n\right).](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/d/a/4/da4878df654aff2cf0de4842e93b27ab.png)
![P_\ell^{(m)}(x) = (-1)^m\,(1-x^2)^{m/2}\ P_\ell^{[m]}(x).\,](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/e/9/f/e9fd5a2e6ea03cb2beb863b02a69ba74.png)

![(1-x^2)\,y'' -2xy' + [\lambda - \frac{m^2}{1-x^2}]\,y = 0\qquad \mathrm{with}\qquad\lambda = \ell(\ell+1).\,](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/1/6/e/16eacc96bf76b809162b5454d72f08ee.png)


![T_n(x) = \frac{\Gamma(1/2)\sqrt{1-x^2}}{(-2)^n\,\Gamma(n+1/2)} \ \frac{d^n}{dx^n}\left([1-x^2]^{n-1/2}\right).](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/9/e/1/9e12b85879596322a888ca2562cf9d43.png)








![L_n^{(\alpha+m)}(x) = (-1)^m L_{n+m}^{(\alpha)[m]}(x).](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/7/c/f/7cfc4e6e0c5850b0130370b7f22f20ee.png)

![u'' + \frac{2}{x}\,u' + \left[\frac{\lambda}{x} - \frac{1}{4} - \frac{\alpha^2-1}{4x^2}\right]\,u = 0\qquad \mathrm{with}\qquad\lambda = n+\frac{\alpha+1}{2}.\,](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/b/9/c/b9c721c43b29ce67936da4069b68f806.png)

![u'' + \frac{2}{x}\,u' + \left[\frac{\lambda}{x} - \frac{1}{4} - \frac{\ell(\ell+1)}{x^2}\right]\,u = 0\qquad \mathrm{with}\qquad\lambda = n.\,](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/7/a/f7a512f2e505fa50326eac8506cf4ac7.png)
![u = x^{\ell}e^{-x/2}L_{n+\ell}^{[2\ell+1]}(x).](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/2/b/5/2b599d0ea83a7779385e5da70029ce04.png)

















![p_n(x) = \det\left[
\begin{matrix}
\mu_0 & \mu_1 & \mu_2 & \cdots & \mu_n \\
\mu_1 & \mu_2 & \mu_3 & \cdots & \mu_{n+1} \\
\mu_2 & \mu_3 & \mu_4 & \cdots & \mu_{n+2} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & & \vdots \\
\mu_{n-1} & \mu_n & \mu_{n+1} & \cdots & \mu_{2n-1} \\
1 & x & x^2 & \cdots & x^n
\end{matrix}
\right]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/0/1/8/0186d9076b55a62ce10c57dde7c024f3.png)
![\begin{align}
\int_\mathbb{R} x^k p_n(x)\,d\mu
& {} = \int_\mathbb{R} x^k \det\left[
\begin{matrix}
\mu_0 & \mu_1 & \mu_2 & \cdots & \mu_n \\
\mu_1 & \mu_2 & \mu_3 & \cdots & \mu_{n+1} \\
\mu_2 & \mu_3 & \mu_4 & \cdots & \mu_{n+2} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & & \vdots \\
\mu_{n-1} & \mu_n & \mu_{n+1} & \cdots & \mu_{2n-1} \\
1 & x & x^2 & \cdots & x^n
\end{matrix} \right]
\,d\mu \\ \\
& {} = \int_\mathbb{R} \det\left[
\begin{matrix}
\mu_0 & \mu_1 & \mu_2 & \cdots & \mu_n \\
\mu_1 & \mu_2 & \mu_3 & \cdots & \mu_{n+1} \\
\mu_2 & \mu_3 & \mu_4 & \cdots & \mu_{n+2} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & & \vdots \\
\mu_{n-1} & \mu_n & \mu_{n+1} & \cdots & \mu_{2n-1} \\
x^k & x^{k+1} & x^{k+2} & \cdots & x^{k+n}
\end{matrix} \right]
\,d\mu \\ \\
& {} = \det\left[
\begin{matrix}
\mu_0 & \mu_1 & \mu_2 & \cdots & \mu_n \\
\mu_1 & \mu_2 & \mu_3 & \cdots & \mu_{n+1} \\
\mu_2 & \mu_3 & \mu_4 & \cdots & \mu_{n+2} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & & \vdots \\
\mu_{n-1} & \mu_n & \mu_{n+1} & \cdots & \mu_{2n-1} \\
\displaystyle \int_\mathbb{R} x^k \, d\mu & \displaystyle \int_\mathbb{R} x^{k+1} \, d\mu & \displaystyle \int_\mathbb{R} x^{k+2} \, d\mu & \cdots & \displaystyle \int_\mathbb{R} x^{k+n} \, d\mu
\end{matrix} \right] \\ \\
& {} = \det \left[
\begin{matrix}
\mu_0 & \mu_1 & \mu_2 & \cdots & \mu_n \\
\mu_1 & \mu_2 & \mu_3 & \cdots & \mu_{n+1} \\
\mu_2 & \mu_3 & \mu_4 & \cdots & \mu_{n+2} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & & \vdots \\
\mu_{n-1} & \mu_n & \mu_{n+1} & \cdots & \mu_{2n-1} \\
\mu_k & \mu_{k+1} & \mu_{k+2} & \cdots & \mu_{k+n}
\end{matrix} \right] \\ \\
& {} = 0\text{ if } k < n,\text{ since the matrix has two identical rows}.
\end{align}](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/8/2/2/8226237a06b7af660fa3e6ef6ad2f74f.png)



































































if 



















