Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published bySybil Hodges Modified over 9 years ago
1
Start with a puzzle… There are four occurrences of the pattern = 132 in the sequence = 13254: 1 3 2 5 4 1 3 2 5 4 1 3 2 5 4 1 3 2 5 4 Can you find a different sequence (a different rearrangment of the digits 12345) with more than four occurrences of the pattern = 132 ?
2
Packing Densities of Permutations Walter Stromquist Bryn Mawr College / Swarthmore College Graph Theory With Altitude Denver, May 17, 2005
3
Outline History Example: = 132 Definitions Layered patterns Reid Barton’s proof Results for in S 3 and S 4 — and open problems Connection to partially ordered sets — and more open problems
4
History 1992: Wilf’s address to SIAM Many results about permutations with no occurrences of 1993-1996: Settle case of 132 (Kleitman, Galvin, WRS) (others?) Packing densities exist (Galvin) Layered permutations 1997: Alkes Price’s thesis 2002-2005: Many ( 5) papers in Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 2004: Reid Barton’s Morgan Prize paper (EJC 11)
5
Example: = 132 Let = 132 and = 13254. An occurrence of in is a subsequence of that has the same ordering as = 132 — that is, low / high / middle. There are 4 such occurrences: 1 3 2 5 4 1 3 2 5 4 1 3 2 5 4 1 3 2 5 4
6
Definitions Two sequences and are called order-isomorphic if For example,1 3 2 5 4and 1 2001 2000 5001 5000 are order-isomorphic. We’re concerned only with finite sequences of distinct terms. We may as well represent them as permutations of integers 1, …, n. The set of permutations of length n is called S n.
8
Definitions A pattern is a permutation in S m. An occurrence of in is a subsequence of that is order- isomorphic to . Let Clearly,
9
Definitions In this talk, the pattern is always called and always has length m. The permutation always has length n. We’ll always assume that n > m.
10
Example: = 132 We can do better: If = 12543, then has 6 occurrences of the 132 pattern. So: Since there are 10 three-element subsequences of , we say that the packing density of 132 in is …and since that’s the largest packing density for any of length 5, we also say that
11
Definitions The packing density of in is Clearly, We’re concerned with permutations S n that maximize the packing density ( , ). So, define: Any permutation * that achieves this maximum (for a given size n) is called an optimizer for .
12
Definitions The packing density of is the limiting value, if it exists. Our problems in this talk are, given , (1) What are the optimizers for ? (2) What is the packing density of ?
13
Example: = 132 What can we do with longer sequences ? For n = 9, try = 123 987654… = 123 987654… In fact, 9 ( 132 ) = 46 / 84.
14
Example: = 132 In general, here’s the best we can do for large n: Now So the packing density of = 132 is
15
Another Example: 123 Now let = 123. If = 1234…n, then every 3-term subsequence of is order-isomorphic to . So, The optimizers for 123 are of the form 1234..n, and the packing density of 123 is 1.
16
Outline History Example: = 132 Definitions Packing densities exist Layered patterns Results for in S 3 and S 4 — and open problems Connection to partially ordered sets — and more open problems
17
Theorem and Proof Theorem (Galvin): The limit always exists.
18
Theorem and Proof Theorem (Galvin): The limit always exists. Proof: Let S n be an optimizer for size n, so that Now consider its one-point-deleted subsequences 1, 2, …, n. Every occurrence of in also appears in exactly (n–m) of the i ’s. 1432 1432 1243 1243 1243
19
Theorem and Proof Theorem (Galvin): The limit always exists. Proof: Let S n be an optimizer for size n, so that Now consider its one-point-deleted subsequences 1, 2, …, n. Every occurrence of in also appears in exactly (n–m) of the i ’s. 1432 1432 1243 1243 1243
20
Theorem and Proof Theorem (Galvin): The limit always exists. Proof: Let S n be an optimizer for size n, so that Now consider its one-point-deleted subsequences 1, 2, …, n. Every occurrence of in also appears in exactly (n–m) of the i ’s.
21
Theorem and Proof Theorem (Galvin): The limit always exists. Proof: Let S n be an optimizer for size n, so that Now consider its one-point-deleted subsequences 1, 2, …, n. Every occurrence of in also appears in exactly (n–m) of the i ’s. It follows (with a bit of algebra) that So ( , ) can’t exceed the largest of the ( , i )’s.
22
Theorem and Proof... So ( , ) can’t exceed the largest of the ( , i )’s. So: So the sequence { n ( ) } is non-increasing. Since it is bounded below by zero, it must have a limit. //
23
Layered Permutations A permutation is layered if it consists of one or more blocks, such that the symbols are increasing between blocks and decreasing within blocks. Examples: The following are layered: 132 123 1432 2143 but the following are not layered: 312 1342.
24
Layered Permutations Theorem: If is layered, then its optimizers are layered. More precisely: For every n, This means that to find the packing density of a layered pattern , we need only consider layered permutations .
25
Permutations in S 3 Here are the permutations in S 3 : 123132 213 231 312 321 ( )=1 ( )=.464 ( )=1 The rest of these cases can be resolved by symmetry.
26
Permutations in S 3 — Symmetry Symmetry:
27
Permutations in S 3 — Symmetry Reversal:
28
Permutations in S 4 Permutations in S 4 : Layered permutations, by symmetry class: 1234 (two variations) - packing density 1 1432 (four variations) - packing density 0.4236 (Price) 1243 (four variations) - packing density 3/8 2143 (two variations) - packing density 3/8 1324 (two variations) - approximately 0.244 (Price) Unlayered permutations: 1342 (eight variations) - unknown ( lower bound 0.1966 ) 2413 (two variations) - unknown ( bounds 51/511, 2/9 )
29
1324 Let = 1324. Price: Optimal ratios are….39.19.07… and (1324) 0.244.
30
1342 Let = 1342. This optimizer gives a lower bound. If you think it’s the best you can do, then (1342) 0.1966.
31
1342 If the lower bound holds… (1342) 0.1966... (Batayev) (1342) = (1432) (132)
32
Partially Ordered Sets A (finite) partially ordered set is a finite set together with a relation < such that (a) It is never true that x < x; (b) It is never true that both x < y and y < x; and (c) If x < y and y < z, then x < z (transitivity). A partially ordered set is also called a poset. We use the terms “above” and “below” to describe the relation (that is, read x < y as “x is below y” ). Diagrams:
33
Partially Ordered Sets Example: Consider a finite set of vectors (x, y) in R 2. Say that (x 1, y 1 ) < (x 2, y 2 ) if x 1 < x 2 and y 1 < y 2. This construction can also be done in R 3, or in R n. Fact: Every finite partially ordered set is isomorphic to a poset constructed in this way. The smallest n for which R n suffices is called the dimension of the poset.
34
Partially Ordered Sets Posets that can be represented in R 2 have graphs like those of permutations: Match each such poset with the permutation that has the same graph. This matching is not 1-to-1, nor does it cover all posets. But, it is a bijection for layered posets — that is, the ones that correspond to layered permutations.
35
Partially Ordered Sets Packing densities of posets: Theorem: Layered posets have layered optimizers. The theory for layered posets is exactly like that for layered permutations.
36
Posets aren’t exactly like permutations Example: = = These are the same poset, but different permutations. So, = 0 (as permutations) but = 1 (if we think of them as posets). If is layered, then is the same in both worlds.
37
Reid Barton’s Proof of the Layered Poset Theorem Theorem: If P is a layered poset, and n |P|, then P has an optimizer Q’ of size n such that Q’ is a layered poset. Proof: Let Q be any optimizer of size n for P, and let u and v be any two incomparable elements of Q. Form Q 1 by replacing v with an incomparable copy u’ of u. Form Q 2 by replacing u with an incomparable copy v’ of v.
38
Proof, continued… Then every occurrence of P in Q appears… once each in Q 1, Q 2 if it omits both u and v twice in Q 1 if it includes u but not v twice in Q 2 if it inlcudes v but not u once each in Q 1, Q 2 if it includes both u and v (in the last case, because P is layered). So, But Q is an optimizer, so and Q 1 and Q 2 are both optimizers.
39
Pattern: Actually, in this example Q isn’t an optimizer. As a result, there’s an extra occurrence of the pattern in Q 2. If Q were an optimizer, the theorem would force (P,Q)= (P,Q 1 )= (P,Q 2 ). Q u v (P,Q)=2 Q1Q1 u u’ (P,Q 1 )=2 v’ Q2Q2 v (P,Q 2 )=3 Every occurrence of P in Q recurs once each in Q 1 and Q 2, or twice in Q 1, or twice in Q 2.
40
Proof, concluded So in general, we can freely modifiy any modifier by replacing elements incomparable to u with incomparable copies of u… that is, by moving them into a layer with u. Ultimately, any optimizer can be altered until it becomes a layered optimizer. //
41
Open Problems 1.Find a better way to compute ( 1324 ). 2.What is ( 1342 ) ? More generally, can you say anything useful about recursively layered permutations ? 3.What is ( 2413 ) ? 4.Find any general way of attacking non-layered permutations. 5.Can you say anything about packing densities of posets that isn’t just a statement about permutations, in disguise ? 6.What’s the packing density of this poset ?
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.