Hw7 - 4 a P(18 is true because we can form 18 cents of postage with one 4—cent stamp and two 7—cent stamps P(19 is true because we can form 19

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 4. a) P(18) is true, because we can form 18 cents of postage with one 4—cent stamp and two 7—cent stamps. P(19) is true, because we can form 19 cents of postage with three 4—cent stamps and one 7—cent stamp. P(20) is true, because we can form 20 cents of postage with five 4-cent stamps. P(21) is true, because we can form 20 cents of postage with three 7—cent stamps. b) The inductive hypothesis is the statement that using just 4—cent and 7—cent stamps we can form j cents postage for all j with 18 g j S k, where we assume that k 2 21. c) In the inductive step we must show, assuming the inductive hypothesis, that we can form k + 1 cents postage using just 4—cent and 7—cent stamps. ' d) We want to form k + 1 cents of postage. Since k 2 21, we know that P(k — 3) is true, that is, that we can form It — 3 cents of postage. Put one more 4—cent stamp on the envelope, and we have formed k + 1 cents of postage, as desired. 6) We have completed both the basis step and the inductive step, so by the principle of strong induction, the , statement is true for every integer n greater than or equal to 18. .8. Since both 25 and 40 are multiples of 5, we cannot form any amount that is not a multiple of 5. So let’s determine for which values of n we can form 571 dollars using these gift certificates, the first of which provides 5 copies of $5, and the second of which provides 8 copies. We can achieve the following values of n: 5 = 5, 8 = 8,10 = 5+5,13 = 8+5,15 = 5+5+5, 16 = 8+8,18 = 8+5+5, 20 = 5+5+5+5+5, 21 = 8+8+5, 23=8+5+5+5, 24=8+8+8, 25: 5+5+5+5+5, 26=8+8+5+5, 28=8+5+5+5+5, 29 = 8+8+8+5, 30 - 5 : 5+5 I 5+5 I 5, 31 — 8+8+5+5+5, 32=8+8+8+8. By having considered all the combinations, we know that the gaps in this list cannot be filled. We claim that we can form total amounts of the form 571 for all n 2 28 using these gift certificates. (In other words, $135 is the largest multiple of $5 that we cannot achieve.) To prove this by strong induction, let P(n) be the statement that we can form 5n dollars in gift certificates usmg Just 25-dollar and 40—dollar certificates. We want to prove that P(n) is true for all n 2 28. From our work above, we know that P(n) is true for n z 28, 29, 30, 31, 32. Assume the inductive hypothesis, that P(j) is true for all j with 28 S j S k, where k is a fixed integer greater than or equal to 32. We want to show that P09 + 1) is true. Because k — 4 Z 28, we know that P(k — 4) is true, that is, that we can form 5(k — 4) dollars. Add one more $25-dollar certificate, and we have formed 5(k + 1) dollars, as desired. 14. We prove this using strong induction. It is clearly true for n = 1, because no splits are performed, so the sum uted is 0, which equals n(n — 1) / 2 when n = 1. Assume the strong inductive hypothesis, and suppose u u . - —i stones, where i is a posrtlve Integer less than n. ThlS that our first splitting is into piles of 2' stones and n . gives a product — The rest of the products will be obtained from splitting the plles thus formed, and so by the inductive hypothesis, the sum of the products will be — 1) / 2 + (n — (n —— i — 1) / 2. So we must showthat‘ H— 71—1. _i— n —1 i(n—i)+z(121)+‘L_17}2__L): (n2 ) no matter what 2' is. This follows by elementary algebra, and our proof is complete. 26. 30. 32. a) Clearly these conditions tell us that P01) is true for the even values of n, namely, 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, Also, it is clear that there is no way to be sure that P(n) is true for other values of n. b) Clearly these conditions tell us that P(n) is true for the values of n that are multiples of 3, namely, 0 3, 6, 9, 12, . . .. Also, it is clear that there is no way to be sure that P(n) is true for other values of n. 3 c) These conditions are sufficient to prove by induction that P(n) is true for all nonnegative integers n. d) We immediately know that P(O), P(2), and P(3) are true, and clearly there is no way to be sure that P(l) is true. Once we have P(2) and P(3), the inductive step P(n) —+, P(n + 2) gives us the truth of P(n) for all n 2 2. ’ The flaw comes, in the inductive step, where we are implicitly assuming that k 2 1 in order to talk about a,“1 in the denominator (otherwise the exponent is not a nonnegative integer, so we cannot apply the inductive hypothesis). Our basis step was n = 0, so we are not justified in assuming that [C 2 1 when we try to prove the statement for k + 1 in the inductive step. Indeed, it is precisely at n : 1 that the proposition breaks down. The proof is invalid for k = 4. We cannot increase the postage from 4 cents to 5 cents by either of the replacements indicated, because there is no 3-cent stamp present and there is only one 4-cent stamp present. There is also a minor flaw in the inductive step, because the condition that j 2 3 is not mentioned. 9 4. a) f(2)=f(1)—f(0)=1—1:0,f(3):f(2)—f(1)'=0_1=_17f(4):f(3)_f(2):_1_0=-1, f(5):f(4)—f(3)=—1s1=0 b) Clearly H”) = 1 for all n, since 1.1: 1. W6. a) This is valid, since we are provided with the value at n = 0, and each subsequent value is determined by the previous one. Since all that changes from one value to the next is the Sign, we conjecture that f = (—1)". This is true for n 2 0, since (—1)0 = 1. If it is true for n = k, then we have f(k +1) 2 —f(k +1 — 1): —f(k) = —(—1)k by the inductive hypothesis, whence f(k —|— 1) = (—1)k+1. b) This is valid, since we are provided with the values at n = 0, 1, and 2, and each subsequent value is determined by the value that occurred three steps previously. We compute the first several terms of the sequence: 1, 0, 2, 2, O, 4, 4, 0, 8, We conjecture the formula = 2"/3 when n E 0 (mod 3), = 0 when n E 1 (mod 3), f(n) = 2("+1)/3 when n E 2 (mod 3). To prove this, first note that in the base cases we have f(0) % 1 = 20/3, f(1) = 0, and f(2) = 2 : 2(2+1)/3. Assume the inductive hypothesis that the formula is valid for smaller inputs. Then for n E 0 (mod 3) we have f(n) = 2f(n —3) = 2-2("_3)/3 = 2 ~ 271/3 - 2‘1 = 2W3, as desired. For n E 1 (mod 3) we have = 2f(n — 3) = 2-0 = 0, as desired. And for n E 2 (mod 3) we have f(n) = 2f(n — 3) = 2 - 2("‘3+1)/3 = 2 - 2("+1)/3 - 2“1 = 2("+1)/3, as desired. c) This is invalid. We are told that f (2) is defined in terms of f (3), but f (3) has not been defined. 10. The base case is that Sm(0) = m. The recursive part is that Sm(n + 1) is the successor of 3mm) (i.e., the integer that follows Sm(n), namely Sm(n) + 1). 22. 32. 38. 58. 26. a) If we apply each of the recursive step rules to Clearly only positive integers can be in S, since 1 is a positive integer, and the sum of two positive integers is again a positive integer. To see that all positive integers are in S, we proceed by induction. Obviously 1 E S. Assuming that n E S, we get that n + 1 is in S by applying the recursive part of the definition with s = n and t = 1. Thus S is precisely the set of positive integers. the only element given in the basis step, we see that (2, 3) and (3, 2) are in S. If we apply the recursive step to these we add (4,6), (5, 5), and (6, 4). The next round gives us (6,9), (7,8), (8,7), and (9,6). A fourth set of applications adds (8,12), (9,11), (10,10), (11,9), and (12,8); and a fifth set of applications adds (10,15), (11,14), (12, 13), (13,12), (14, 11), and (15,10). b) Let P(n) be the statement that 5 I a+b whenever (a, b) E S is obtained by n applications of the recursive step. For the basis step, P(O) is true, since the only element of S obtained with no applications of the recursive step is (0,0), and indeed 5 I 0 + 0. Assume the strong inductive hypothesis that 5 I a + b whenever (a, b) 6 S is obtained by k or fewer applications of the recursive step, and consider an element obtained with k + 1 applications of the recursive step. Since the final application of the recursive step to an element (a, b) must be applied to an element obtained with fewer applications of the recursive step, we know that 5 I a + b. So we just need to check that this inequality implies 5 I a + 2 + b + 3 and 5 I a + 3 + b + 2. But this is clear, since each is equivalent to 5 I a + b + 5, and 5 divides both a + b and 5. c) This holds for the basis step, since 5 I 0 + 0. If this holds for (a, b), then it also holds for the elements obtained from (a, b) in the recursive step by the same argument as in part a) 0nes()\) = O and 0nes(wx) = x + 0nes(w), where w is a bit string and m is a bit (viewed as an integer when being added) , b) The basis step is when t = A, in which case we have ones(s)\) = ones(s) = ones(s)+0 ——— ones(s)+ones()\). For the inductive step, write 25 2 war, where w is a bit string and a: is a bit. Then we have ones(s(wx)) = ones((sw)m) = m + ones(sw) by the recursive definition, which is x + 0nes(s) + 0nes(w) by the inductive hypothesis, Which is ones(5) + (a: + ones by commutativity and associativity of addition, which finally equals 0nes(s) + ones(w;r;) by the recursive definition. There are two types of palindromes, so we need two base cases, namely A is a palindrome, and x is a palindrome for every symbol .73. The recursive step is that if oz is a palindrome and a; is a symbol, then mom: is a palindrome. I a) This would be a proper definition if the recursive part were stated to hold for n 2 2. As it stands however F(1) IS ambiguous, and F (0) is undefined. 7 ’ b) This definition makes no sense as it stands; F (3) is not defined, since F (0) isn’t. Also, F (2) is ambiguous. c) For n = ,3, the recursive part makes no sense, since we would have to know F (3/ 2). Also F (2) is‘ ambiguous. ’ d) The definition is ambiguous about n = 1, since both the second clause and the third clause seem to apply. Thls would be a valid definition if the third clause applied only to odd n > 3. 10. The recursive algorithm works by comparing the last element with the maximum of all but the last. We l assume that the input is given as a sequence. procedure macr(a1,a2, . . . ,an : integers) if n :1 then ma$(a1,a2, . . .,a,,) := (11 else begin m 2: max(a1,a2, . . . ,an_1) if m > an then ma$(a1,a2,...,an) := m else maa:(a1,a2, . . . ,an) := an end The largest in a list of one integer is that one integer, and that is the answer the recursive algorithm gives when n = 1, so the basis step is correct. Now assume that the algorithm works correctly for n :- k. If n = k + 1, then the else clause of the algorithm is executed. First, by the inductive hypothesis, the algorithm correctly sets m to be the largest among the first It integers in the list. Next it returns as the answer either that value or the (k + 1)st element, whichever is larger. This is clearly the largest element in the entire list. Thus the algorithm correctly finds the maximum of a given list of integers. We use the hint. procedure twopower(n : positive integer, a : real number) if n = 1 then twopower(n,a) := (12 else twopower(n, a) := twopower(n — 1,a)2 . We use the idea in Exercise 24, together with the fact that a" = (an/2)2 if n is even, and a" = a- (am—1V2)2 if n is odd, to obtain the following recursive algorithm. In essence we are using the binary expansion of n implicitly. procedure fastpower(n : positive integer, a : real number) if n = 1 then fastpower(n,a) := (1 else if n is even then fastpower(n,a) :2 fastpawer(71/2,a)2 else fastpower(n, a) := a ‘ fastpower((n —- 1)/2, a)2 44. The procedure is the same as that given in the solution to Example 9. We will show the tree and inverted tree that indicate how the sequence is taken apart and put back together. / \ K \. /‘“\ /5\5 ‘/ \8 7/ \6 v x; v \ 45/ \m/ 12345675 2. There are two cases. If x Z 0 initially, then nothing is executed, so as _>_ 0 at the end. If at < 0 initlauy, tnen m is set equal to 0, so a: = 0 at the end; hence again a: Z 0 at the end. 12. Suppose that the initial assertion is true before the prOgram begins, so that a and d are positive integers. : Consider the following loop invariant p: “a = dq + r and 7" Z 0 .” This is true before the loop starts, since the equation then states a = d - 0 + a, and we are told that a (which equals 7" at this point) is a positive integer, , hence greater than or equal to 0. Now we must Show that if p is true and 'r 2 d before some pass through the loop, then it remains true after the pass. Certainly we still have T Z 0, since all that happened to 'r was the subtraction of d, and r 2 d to begin this pass. Furthermore, let q’ denote the new value of q and 7" the new value of r. Then dq’ + r’ = d(q + 1) + (r — d) = dq + d+ r —' d = dq +7" = a, as desired. Furthermore, the loop terminates eventually, since one cannot repeated subtract the positive integer d from the pesitive integer 7" without 7' eventually becoming less than d. When the loop terminates, the loop invariant p must still be true, and the condition 7“ 2 d must be false——i.e., r < d must be true. But this is precisely the desired final assertion. ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/28/2011 for the course ECS 12 taught by Professor Khoel during the Spring '09 term at UC Davis.

Page1 / 5

Hw7 - 4 a P(18 is true because we can form 18 cents of postage with one 4—cent stamp and two 7—cent stamps P(19 is true because we can form 19

This preview shows document pages 1 - 5. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online