Generator-offset property: Difference between revisions

Inthar (talk | contribs)
Inthar (talk | contribs)
Line 116: Line 116:
Let S(a,b,c) be a scale word in three '''Z'''-linearly independent step sizes a, b, c. Suppose S is PWF. Then S is SV3 and has an odd number of notes. Moreover, S is either GO or equivalent to the scale word abacaba.
Let S(a,b,c) be a scale word in three '''Z'''-linearly independent step sizes a, b, c. Suppose S is PWF. Then S is SV3 and has an odd number of notes. Moreover, S is either GO or equivalent to the scale word abacaba.
==== Proof ====
==== Proof ====
===== Preliminaries =====
Suppose S has n notes (after dealing with small cases, we may assume n ≥ 7) and S projects to single-period mosses S<sub>1</sub> (via identifying b ~ c), S<sub>2</sub> (via identifying a ~ c) and S<sub>3</sub> (via identifying a ~ b). Suppose S<sub>1</sub>'s generator is a k-step, which comes in two sizes: P, the perfect k-step, and I, the imperfect k-step. By stacking k-steps, we get two words of length n of k-steps of S<sub>2</sub> and S<sub>3</sub>, respectively. These two-"step-size" words, which we call Σ<sub>2</sub> and Σ<sub>3</sub>, must be mosses, since m-steps in the new words correspond to mk-steps in the mos words S<sub>1</sub> and S<sub>2</sub>, which come in at most two sizes. Since S<sub>1</sub> is a single-period mos, gcd(k, n) = 1. Hence when 0 < m < n, km is ''not'' divisible by n and km-steps come in ''exactly'' two sizes; hence both Σ<sub>2</sub> and Σ<sub>3</sub> are single-period mosses.  
Suppose S has n notes (after dealing with small cases, we may assume n ≥ 7) and S projects to single-period mosses S<sub>1</sub> (via identifying b ~ c), S<sub>2</sub> (via identifying a ~ c) and S<sub>3</sub> (via identifying a ~ b). Suppose S<sub>1</sub>'s generator is a k-step, which comes in two sizes: P, the perfect k-step, and I, the imperfect k-step. By stacking k-steps, we get two words of length n of k-steps of S<sub>2</sub> and S<sub>3</sub>, respectively. These two-"step-size" words, which we call Σ<sub>2</sub> and Σ<sub>3</sub>, must be mosses, since m-steps in the new words correspond to mk-steps in the mos words S<sub>1</sub> and S<sub>2</sub>, which come in at most two sizes. Since S<sub>1</sub> is a single-period mos, gcd(k, n) = 1. Hence when 0 < m < n, km is ''not'' divisible by n and km-steps come in ''exactly'' two sizes; hence both Σ<sub>2</sub> and Σ<sub>3</sub> are single-period mosses.  


Line 125: Line 126:
(Note: We say “assume” as shorthand for either “assume without loss of generality” or “assume after excluding other possibilities”.)
(Note: We say “assume” as shorthand for either “assume without loss of generality” or “assume after excluding other possibilities”.)


===== Two sizes of k-steps in S project to S<sub>1</sub>'s perfect generator =====
We can write sizes of intervals in S as vectors (p, q, r) using the basis (a, b, c).  
We can write sizes of intervals in S as vectors (p, q, r) using the basis (a, b, c).  


Line 131: Line 133:
Only two sizes of k-steps of S can project to P in S<sub>1</sub>, for if there are three sizes of k-steps (α, β, γ), (α, β’, γ’), (α, β’’, γ’’) in S that project to P, then β, β’ and β’’ are three distinct values. Thus these would project to three different k-steps in S<sub>3</sub>, contradicting the mos property of S<sub>3</sub>.
Only two sizes of k-steps of S can project to P in S<sub>1</sub>, for if there are three sizes of k-steps (α, β, γ), (α, β’, γ’), (α, β’’, γ’’) in S that project to P, then β, β’ and β’’ are three distinct values. Thus these would project to three different k-steps in S<sub>3</sub>, contradicting the mos property of S<sub>3</sub>.


So suppose Q = (α, β, γ) ≠ R = (α, β’, γ’) are the two k-steps in S that project to P. Then T = (α’, β’’, γ’’) projects to I. Here the values in each component differ by at most 1, and α ≠ α’. Either β’’ = β or β’’ = β’. Assume β’’ = β’. Then γ’’ = γ. The cyclic words Λ<sub>1</sub> = the pattern of α and α’, Λ<sub>2</sub> = the pattern of β and β’, and Λ<sub>3</sub> = the pattern of γ and γ must form mosses. By way of illustration, the chain of k-steps might look like this in S:
===== Some implications of the above =====
Suppose Q = (α, β, γ) ≠ R = (α, β’, γ’) are the two k-steps in S that project to P. Then T = (α’, β’’, γ’’) projects to I. Here the values in each component differ by at most 1, and α ≠ α’. Either β’’ = β or β’’ = β’. Assume β’’ = β’. Then γ’’ = γ. The cyclic words Λ<sub>1</sub> = the pattern of α and α’, Λ<sub>2</sub> = the pattern of β and β’, and Λ<sub>3</sub> = the pattern of γ and γ must form mosses. By way of illustration, the chain of k-steps might look like this in S:


       1 2 3 4  5 6 7 8 9
       1 2 3 4  5 6 7 8 9
Line 156: Line 159:
Since, by our assumption, Λ<sub>3</sub> has two γ’s in a row, Λ<sub>3</sub> must have more γ than γ’, so μ &minus; 1 < n/2. Since Λ<sub>3</sub> is a mos, μ &minus; 1 ≥ 1. So we have 2 ≤ μ ≤ ceil(n/2).
Since, by our assumption, Λ<sub>3</sub> has two γ’s in a row, Λ<sub>3</sub> must have more γ than γ’, so μ &minus; 1 < n/2. Since Λ<sub>3</sub> is a mos, μ &minus; 1 ≥ 1. So we have 2 ≤ μ ≤ ceil(n/2).


===== Final case analysis =====
We have three cases to consider:
We have three cases to consider:


===== Case 1 =====
'''Case 1''': μ = 2, i.e. Λ<sub>2</sub> is the mos (n &minus; 2)β 2β’.
μ = 2, i.e. Λ<sub>2</sub> is the mos (n &minus; 2)β 2β’.


For Λ<sub>2</sub> to be a mos, the first, and only, occurrence of R must be at either f = floor(n/2) or ceil(n/2). We may assume that it is at f; otherwise flip the chain and reindex the words to start at 2f.
For Λ<sub>2</sub> to be a mos, the first, and only, occurrence of R must be at either f = floor(n/2) or ceil(n/2). We may assume that it is at f; otherwise flip the chain and reindex the words to start at 2f.
Line 176: Line 179:
In this case S has two chains of Qs, one with floor(n/2) notes and and one with ceil(n/2) notes. Every instance of Q must be a k-step, since by '''Z'''-linear independence Q = αa + βb + γc is the only way to write Q in the basis (a, b, c); so S is well-formed with respect to Q. Thus S also satisfies the generator-offset property with generator Q.
In this case S has two chains of Qs, one with floor(n/2) notes and and one with ceil(n/2) notes. Every instance of Q must be a k-step, since by '''Z'''-linear independence Q = αa + βb + γc is the only way to write Q in the basis (a, b, c); so S is well-formed with respect to Q. Thus S also satisfies the generator-offset property with generator Q.


===== Case 2 =====
'''Case 2:''' μ ≥ ceil(n/2), i.e. Λ<sub>2</sub> has fewer β than β’.
μ ≥ ceil(n/2), i.e. Λ<sub>2</sub> has fewer β than β’.


Since Λ<sub>3</sub> has more β than β’, Λ<sub>2</sub> is floor(n/2)β ceil(n/2)β’, and Λ<sub>3</sub> is ceil(n/2)γ floor(n/2)γ’. There is a unique mode of ceil(n/2)γ floor(n/2)γ’ that both begins and ends with γ, namely γγ’γγ’…γγ’γ. Thus Λ<sub>2</sub> is ββ’ββ’…ββ’β’. It is now easy to see that if the number of k-steps stacked is odd, then there are two sizes that do not contain T and one size that contains T; if the number of k-steps stacked is even, then there is one size that does not contain T and two sizes that contain T. Hence S is SV3.
Since Λ<sub>3</sub> has more β than β’, Λ<sub>2</sub> is floor(n/2)β ceil(n/2)β’, and Λ<sub>3</sub> is ceil(n/2)γ floor(n/2)γ’. There is a unique mode of ceil(n/2)γ floor(n/2)γ’ that both begins and ends with γ, namely γγ’γγ’…γγ’γ. Thus Λ<sub>2</sub> is ββ’ββ’…ββ’β’. It is now easy to see that if the number of k-steps stacked is odd, then there are two sizes that do not contain T and one size that contains T; if the number of k-steps stacked is even, then there is one size that does not contain T and two sizes that contain T. Hence S is SV3.
Line 183: Line 185:
In this case we have Σ = QRQR…QRT, thus S satisfies the generator-offset property.
In this case we have Σ = QRQR…QRT, thus S satisfies the generator-offset property.


===== Case 3 =====
'''Case 3:''' 3 ≤ μ ≤ floor(n/2).
3 ≤ μ ≤ floor(n/2).


Λ<sub>2</sub> has a chunk of βs (after the first β’) of size x = either floor(n/μ) (≥ floor(n/floor(n/2)) = 2) or ceil(n/μ) (= floor(n/μ) + 1). Hence Λ<sub>3</sub> has a chunk of γs of that same size. Λ<sub>3</sub> also has a chunk that goes over n and loops back around, which must be of size y = at least 2*(floor(n/μ) &minus; 1) + 1 (Λ<sub>3</sub> might have chunks of size floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 and floor(n/μ) instead) = 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1, and at most 2*(floor(n/μ) + 1) + 1 = 2*floor(n/μ) + 3 (if Λ<sub>3</sub> has chunks of size floor(n/μ) and ceil(n/μ)). The difference between the chunk sizes is y &minus; x, which must be 0 or 1, since Λ<sub>3</sub> is a mos. We thus have the following cases:
Λ<sub>2</sub> has a chunk of βs (after the first β’) of size x = either floor(n/μ) (≥ floor(n/floor(n/2)) = 2) or ceil(n/μ) (= floor(n/μ) + 1). Hence Λ<sub>3</sub> has a chunk of γs of that same size. Λ<sub>3</sub> also has a chunk that goes over n and loops back around, which must be of size y = at least 2*(floor(n/μ) &minus; 1) + 1 (Λ<sub>3</sub> might have chunks of size floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 and floor(n/μ) instead) = 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1, and at most 2*(floor(n/μ) + 1) + 1 = 2*floor(n/μ) + 3 (if Λ<sub>3</sub> has chunks of size floor(n/μ) and ceil(n/μ)). The difference between the chunk sizes is y &minus; x, which must be 0 or 1, since Λ<sub>3</sub> is a mos. We thus have the following subcases: (In the following, chunk of Λ<sub>2</sub> means chunk of β, and chunk of Λ<sub>3</sub> means chunk of γ.)


(In the following, chunk of Λ<sub>2</sub> means chunk of β, and chunk of Λ<sub>3</sub> means chunk of γ.)
'''Case 3.1:''' (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1).
====== Case 3.1 ======
(x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1).


Since y &minus; x = floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 and floor(n/μ) ≥ 2, we have: x = floor(n/μ) = 2 and y &minus; x = 1; hence y = 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 = 3. The chunk in Λ<sub>3</sub> whose size is 3 is made from two chunks in Λ<sub>2</sub> of size 1. (So Λ<sub>2</sub> has chunks of size 1 and 2, and Λ<sub>3</sub> has chunks of size 2 and 3.)
Since y &minus; x = floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 and floor(n/μ) ≥ 2, we have: x = floor(n/μ) = 2 and y &minus; x = 1; hence y = 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 = 3. The chunk in Λ<sub>3</sub> whose size is 3 is made from two chunks in Λ<sub>2</sub> of size 1. (So Λ<sub>2</sub> has chunks of size 1 and 2, and Λ<sub>3</sub> has chunks of size 2 and 3.)
Line 212: Line 211:
(This also implies S is SV3.)
(This also implies S is SV3.)


====== Remaining sub-cases ======
'''Case 3.2''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1) is impossible because  y = 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 can only occur if Λ<sub>3</sub> has chunks of size floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 and floor(n/μ), which contradicts the size of x.
* Case 3.2: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1) is impossible because  y = 2*floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 can only occur if Λ<sub>3</sub> has chunks of size floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 and floor(n/μ), which contradicts the size of x.
 
* Case 3.3: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ)) is impossible because y = 2*floor(n/μ) can only occur if Λ<sub>3</sub> has chunks of size floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 and floor(n/μ), which contradicts the size of x.
'''Case 3.3''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ)) is similarly impossible; y = 2*floor(n/μ) can only occur if Λ<sub>3</sub> has chunks of size floor(n/μ) &minus; 1 and floor(n/μ), which contradicts the size of x.
 
The remaining cases are all impossible because they imply y &minus; x ≥ 2:
The remaining cases are all impossible because they imply y &minus; x ≥ 2:


* Case 3.4: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ) + 1)
* '''Case 3.4''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ) + 1)
* Case 3.5: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ) + 2)
* '''Case 3.5''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ) + 2)
* Case 3.6: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ) + 3)
* '''Case 3.6''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ) + 1, 2*floor(n/μ) + 3)
* Case 3.7: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ))
* '''Case 3.7''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ))
* Case 3.8: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ) + 1)
* '''Case 3.8''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ) + 1)
* Case 3.9: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ) + 2)
* '''Case 3.9''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ) + 2)
* Case 3.10: (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ) + 3)
* '''Case 3.10''': (x, y) = (floor(n/μ), 2*floor(n/μ) + 3)


== Open conjectures ==
== Open conjectures ==