Robbins and Ardila meet Berstel

07/29/2020
by   Jeffrey Shallit, et al.
0

In 1996, Neville Robbins proved the amazing fact that the coefficient of X^n in the Fibonacci infinite product ∏_n ≥ 2 (1-X^F_n) = (1-X)(1-X^2)(1-X^3)(1-X^5)(1-X^8) ⋯ = 1-X-X^2+X^4 + ⋯ is always either -1, 0, or 1. The same result was proved later by Federico Ardila using a different method. Meanwhile, in 2001, Jean Berstel gave a simple 4-state transducer that converts an "illegal" Fibonacci representation into a "legal" one. We show how to obtain the Robbins-Ardila result from Berstel's with almost no work at all, using purely computational techniques that can be performed by existing software.

READ FULL TEXT

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

research
11/23/2022

A note on graphs with purely imaginary per-spectrum

In 1983, Borowiecki and Jóźwiak posed an open problem of characterizing ...
research
11/27/2019

Words With Few Palindromes, Revisited

In 2013, Fici and Zamboni proved a number of theorems about finite and i...
research
11/06/2022

Computing and Exploiting Document Structure to Improve Unsupervised Extractive Summarization of Legal Case Decisions

Though many algorithms can be used to automatically summarize legal case...
research
05/25/2023

Expansion of generalized Stieltjes constants in terms of derivatives of Hurwitz zeta-functions

Generalized Stieltjes constants γ n (a) are the coecients in the Laurent...
research
12/19/2021

On the Erdős-Purdy problem and the Zarankiewitz problem for semialgebraic graphs

Erdős and Purdy, and later Agarwal and Sharir, conjectured that any set ...
research
08/04/2023

Legal Summarisation through LLMs: The PRODIGIT Project

We present some initial results of a large-scale Italian project called ...
research
07/27/2017

Reconciling Bayesian Epistemology and Narration-based Approaches to Judiciary Fact-finding

Legal probabilism (LP) claims the degrees of conviction in juridical fac...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset