-
Extending Zeckendorf's Theorem to a Non-constant Recurrence and the Zeckendorf Game on this Non-constant Recurrence Relation
Authors:
Elżbieta Bołdyriew,
Anna Cusenza,
Linglong Dai,
Pei Ding,
Aidan Dunkelberg,
John Haviland,
Kate Huffman,
Dianhui Ke,
Daniel Kleber,
Jason Kuretski,
John Lentfer,
Tianhao Luo,
Steven J. Miller,
Clayton Mizgerd,
Vashisth Tiwari,
Jingkai Ye,
Yunhao Zhang,
Xiaoyan Zheng,
Weiduo Zhu
Abstract:
Zeckendorf's Theorem states that every positive integer can be uniquely represented as a sum of non-adjacent Fibonacci numbers, indexed from $1, 2, 3, 5,\ldots$. This has been generalized by many authors, in particular to constant coefficient fixed depth linear recurrences with positive (or in some cases non-negative) coefficients. In this work we extend this result to a recurrence with non-consta…
▽ More
Zeckendorf's Theorem states that every positive integer can be uniquely represented as a sum of non-adjacent Fibonacci numbers, indexed from $1, 2, 3, 5,\ldots$. This has been generalized by many authors, in particular to constant coefficient fixed depth linear recurrences with positive (or in some cases non-negative) coefficients. In this work we extend this result to a recurrence with non-constant coefficients, $a_{n+1} = n a_{n} + a_{n-1}$. The decomposition law becomes every $m$ has a unique decomposition as $\sum s_i a_i$ with $s_i \le i$, where if $s_i = i$ then $s_{i-1} = 0$. Similar to Zeckendorf's original proof, we use the greedy algorithm. We show that almost all the gaps between summands, as $n$ approaches infinity, are of length zero, and give a heuristic that the distribution of the number of summands tends to a Gaussian. Furthermore, we build a game based upon this recurrence relation, generalizing a game on the Fibonacci numbers. Given a fixed integer $n$ and an initial decomposition of $n= na_1$, the players alternate by using moves related to the recurrence relation, and whoever moves last wins. We show that the game is finite and ends at the unique decomposition of $n$, and that either player can win in a two-player game. We find the strategy to attain the shortest game possible, and the length of this shortest game. Then we show that in this generalized game when there are more than three players, no player has the winning strategy. Lastly, we demonstrate how one player in the two-player game can force the game to progress to their advantage.
△ Less
Submitted 25 September, 2020;
originally announced September 2020.
-
Bounds on Zeckendorf Games
Authors:
Anna Cusenza,
Aiden Dunkelberg,
Kate Huffman,
Dianhui Ke,
Micah McClatchey,
Steven J. Miller,
Clayton Mizgerd,
Vashisth Tiwari,
Jingkai Ye,
Xiaoyan Zheng
Abstract:
Zeckendorf proved that every positive integer $n$ can be written uniquely as the sum of non-adjacent Fibonacci numbers. We use this decomposition to construct a two-player game. Given a fixed integer $n$ and an initial decomposition of $n=n F_1$, the two players alternate by using moves related to the recurrence relation $F_{n+1}=F_n+F_{n-1}$, and whoever moves last wins. The game always terminate…
▽ More
Zeckendorf proved that every positive integer $n$ can be written uniquely as the sum of non-adjacent Fibonacci numbers. We use this decomposition to construct a two-player game. Given a fixed integer $n$ and an initial decomposition of $n=n F_1$, the two players alternate by using moves related to the recurrence relation $F_{n+1}=F_n+F_{n-1}$, and whoever moves last wins. The game always terminates in the Zeckendorf decomposition; depending on the choice of moves the length of the game and the winner can vary, though for $n\ge 2$ there is a non-constructive proof that Player 2 has a winning strategy.
Initially the lower bound of the length of a game was order $n$ (and known to be sharp) while the upper bound was of size $n \log n$. Recent work decreased the upper bound to of size $n$, but with a larger constant than was conjectured. We improve the upper bound and obtain the sharp bound of $\frac{\sqrt{5}+3}{2}\ n - IZ(n) - \frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2}Z(n)$, which is of order $n$ as $Z(n)$ is the number of terms in the Zeckendorf decomposition of $n$ and $IZ(n)$ is the sum of indices in the Zeckendorf decomposition of $n$ (which are at most of sizes $\log n$ and $\log^2 n$ respectively). We also introduce a greedy algorithm that realizes the upper bound, and show that the longest game on any $n$ is achieved by applying splitting moves whenever possible.
△ Less
Submitted 20 September, 2020;
originally announced September 2020.
-
Winning Strategy for the Multiplayer and Multialliance Zeckendorf Games
Authors:
Anna Cusenza,
Aidan Dunkelberg,
Kate Huffman,
Dianhui Ke,
Daniel Kleber,
Steven J. Miller,
Clayton Mizgerd,
Vashisth Tiwari,
Jingkai Ye,
Xiaoyan Zheng
Abstract:
Edouard Zeckendorf proved that every positive integer $n$ can be uniquely written \cite{Ze} as the sum of non-adjacent Fibonacci numbers, known as the Zeckendorf decomposition. Based on Zeckendorf's decomposition, we have the Zeckendorf game for multiple players. We show that when the Zeckendorf game has at least $3$ players, none of the players have a winning strategy for $n\geq 5$. Then we exten…
▽ More
Edouard Zeckendorf proved that every positive integer $n$ can be uniquely written \cite{Ze} as the sum of non-adjacent Fibonacci numbers, known as the Zeckendorf decomposition. Based on Zeckendorf's decomposition, we have the Zeckendorf game for multiple players. We show that when the Zeckendorf game has at least $3$ players, none of the players have a winning strategy for $n\geq 5$. Then we extend the multi-player game to the multi-alliance game, finding some interesting situations in which no alliance has a winning strategy. This includes the two-alliance game, and some cases in which one alliance always has a winning strategy.
%We examine what alliances, or combinations of players, can win, and what size they have to be in order to do so. We also find necessary structural constraints on what alliances our method of proof can show to be winning. Furthermore, we find some alliance structures which must have winning strategies.
%We also extend the Generalized Zeckendorf game from $2$-players to multiple players. We find that when the game has $3$ players, player $2$ never has a winning strategy for any significantly large $n$. We also find that when the game has at least $4$ players, no player has a winning strategy for any significantly large $n$.
△ Less
Submitted 20 October, 2020; v1 submitted 8 September, 2020;
originally announced September 2020.
