----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 9:10 AM Subject: RE: hput BP-sr.tex -> 0911.2935.gz (0911.2935, 7kb) > To verify abstract and postscript, use http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.2935 > Article-id: 0911.2935, Article password: zk2qy (access still password restricted) > Abstract will appear in mailing scheduled to begin at 20:00 Monday > US Eastern time (i.e., Tue 17 Nov 09 01:00:00 GMT). > > Your title and abstract will appear in the next mailing exactly as below. > (Except possibly for the NUMBER which IS NOT OFFICIAL until the next mailing > of abstracts [20:00 US Eastern time (EDT/EST) Sun - Thu] -- it cannot be used > to cross-list to other archives [e.g., from cs to math or physics] until after > that time.) To correct any problems, you MUST replace NOW. > Replacements on the same day (until the 16:00 US Eastern time deadline Mon-Fri) > do not generate a revised date line, so do not hesitate to replace submission > until everything is perfect (including removal of any extraneous files). > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > \\ > arXiv:0911.2935 > From: William Y. C. Chen > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 01:10:48 GMT (7kb) > > Title: Balanced Properties of the q-Derangement Numbers and the q-Catalan > Numbers > Authors: William Y.C. Chen, David G.L. Wang, and Larry X.W. Wang > Categories: math.CO > Comments: 9 pages > License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/ > \\ > Based on Bona's condition for the balanced property of the number of of > cycles of permutations, we give a general criterion for the balanced property > in terms of the generating function of a statistic. We show that the > q-derangement numbers and the q-Catalan numbers satisfy the balanced property. > \\ > > Contains: > BP-sr.tex: 23061 bytes > > Stored as: 0911.2935.gz (7kb) > > Warnings: > > Author 1: William Y.C. Chen > Author 2: David G.L. Wang > Author 3: Larry X.W. Wang > -> Number of authors = 3 > > > PS files: > 0911.2935.ps.gz (66kb) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Successful submission to the archives can be a significant source of pride > and accomplishment. It entails many serious responsibilities: if you cannot > check off on all of the items below, then you should replace your submission. > (Note: *do not* resubmit, instead *replace*) > > ___ The Title/Author fields above are correct. > ___ The abstract is complete, correct, and wrapped correctly. > ___ Capitalization in title correct (we automatically lower case titles > with excessive use of upper case, but we get some acronyms incorrect > -- replace with uppercase letters only where they should be). > ___ The authors are listed in `Firstname Lastname' order. > ___ any anonymous ftp or http pointers to additional files are given in > standard url format (e.g. ftp://myhost.domain/path/filename.ext > or http://mywwwhost.domain/path/filename.html) > ___ Periods are separated by a space from the end of any URL's > ___ Any Journal-ref is a complete bibliographic reference to an already > published version (includes volume and page number info in the case > of a print journal). > ___ All files including any figures were included. > ___ This paper has not been submitted to any other arXiv.org e-print archives. > ___ The full text of the paper itself is available directly from the archive. > ___ The submission can be retrieved uncorrupted (TRY IT). > > Submitters who repeatedly leave errors uncorrected may lose submission > privilege to the archives. (Replace using the current tentative paper number > unless notified otherwise.) > > If your abstract is improperly wrapped, note that abstract linefill stops at > whitespace indentation (e.g. a blank line or a line indented with space(s) > denotes a new paragraph,and won't be wrapped). > > For further hints, keep reading or see http://arXiv.org/help/ . Guidelines > for a proper title and abstract preparation are given at > http://arXiv.org/help/prep . If you have not already read this, please read > it now to ensure that you have followed the guidelines. It is an abuse of > valuable archive admin time to edit abstracts by hand. > > If you need to replace this paper, then use the `replace' facility at > http://arxiv.org/replace. Your entry will not officially appear in the > listings until the next mailing goes out (and thus cannot yet be accessed > via the search or the daily listings), and your paper number may be changed > until that time, so it is necessary to wait a day before cross-listing, etc. > > DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES MAKE A DUPLICATE SUBMISSION OF THIS PAPER. > A resubmission is treated as a separate submission, and given a new number, > which will have to be removed by hand (and could result in loss of future > submission privileges). Instead use the replace facility (see > http://arxiv.org/help/replace). > > DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES MAKE A DUPLICATE SUBMISSION TO LIST THIS > PAPER TO ANOTHER ARCHIVE within the arXiv system, since the system needs > to know that it is one submission and not multiple. Instead use the > cross-list facility (see http://arXiv.org/help/cross) to generate a > cross-listing for it. > > ***NOTES*** > 1) Avoid excessive cross-listings: cross-listings of a paper on archive-x to > archive-y are intended for subjects of *direct* interest to subscribers of > archive-y. Those subscribers of archive-y who have peripheral or direct > interest in the subjects of archive-x are already subscribed to archive-x and > neither need nor desire multiple receipt of the same abstract. (In particular, > it is exceedingly unlikely that you could decide what is of direct interest to > readers of archive-y if you yourself are not an active reader of archive-y.) > > 2) Common sense suggests that `replaced' papers are not immediately > re-requested so if your intent is to communicate correct research > it is in your interest to submit a final version in the first place, > i.e. *avoid premature submissions*. > If you later need to replace the submission, it would be helpful to indicate > in the Comments: field (i.e. below Authors: ) how serious is the revision > (e.g. v2: major conceptual changes, v3: minor grammatical changes, etc.), > and include as a commented header in the revised version of the paper a guide > to the changes for posterity. >