Sunday, February 9, 2025

Spinning squares and the balls that bounce in them

Suppose you have a unit square that’s rotating about its center at a constant angular speed, and there’s a moving ball inside. The ball has a constant linear speed, and there’s no friction or gravity. When the ball hits an edge of the square, it simply reflects as though the square is momentarily stationary during the briefest of moments they’re in contact. Also, the ball is not allowed to hit a corner of the square—it would get jammed in that corner, a situation we prefer to avoid.

Suppose the ball travels on a periodic (i.e., repeating) path, and that it only ever makes contact with a single point on the unit square. What is the shortest distance the ball could travel in one loop of this path?

Take a unit square that is rotating at a constant angular speed, $\omega,$ where, without loss of generality, we assume that the sides of square are perpendicular to the $x$- and $y$-axes at time zero. Further assume that that for any $n \geq 2,$ there is a ball traveling at some fixed velocity $v_n$ in a periodic path with $n$ bounces against the side of the spinning square. Since the point of contact is tracing out a circle of radius $\frac{1}{2}$ and the path of the ball is some $n$-gon inscribed in that half-unit circle. Since the ball and the point of contact are each traveling at constant speeds, the length of time between collisions and hence length of the sides of the $n$-gon must all be the same. Thus, a ball tracing a periodic path must trace out a regular $n$-gon inscribed in the half-unit circle centered at the center of the unit square.

The side length of a regular $n$-gon inscribed in a half-unit circle can be given by the law of cosines \begin{align*}s_n^2 &= \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^2 - 2 \left(\frac{1}{2}\right) \left(\frac{1}{2}\right) \cos \frac{2\pi}{n}\\ &=\frac{1 - \cos \frac{2\pi}{n}}{2}\\ &= \sin^2 \frac{\pi}{n}.\end{align*} Therefore the length of this periodic path is $$\ell_n = n s_n = n \sin \left( \frac{\pi}{n} \right).$$ We see that since $\sin x = x - \frac{x^3}{6} + O(x^5)$ that $$\ell_n = \pi - \frac{\pi^3}{6n^2} + O(n^{-4}),$$ so $\ell_n \uparrow \pi$ as $n \to \infty.$ So we can get that the smallest such path is $\ell_2 = 2,$ which represents the path that traces the line segment from the midpoints of the top and bottom sides of the square twice (down and back).

If we were to look for the next longest path, it would be the equilateral triangle of side length $\sin \frac{\pi}{3} = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}.$ The total travel distance of this equilateral triangular path is thus $$\ell_3 = \frac{3\sqrt{3}}{2} \equiv 2.598076211\dots.$$

Monday, February 3, 2025

Spinning surfaces and the vertical lines that test them

In a more advanced course, you’ve been asked to draw a 3D sketch of the function $z = |x| + |y|.$ As you’re about to do this, you are struck by another bout of dizziness, and your resulting graph is rotated about the origin in a random direction in 3D space. In other words, the central axis of your graph’s “funnel” is equally likely to point from the origin to any point on the surface of the unit sphere.

What is the probability that the resulting graph you produce is in fact a function (i.e., $z$ is a function of $x$ and $y$)?

At first glance, this looks like a harder problem. There is after all one more direction to dizzily rotate your surfaces. However, first we note that the orthonormal rotation that transforms the point unit $z$-vector, $e_3 = (0,0,1)^T$ to a random point on the unit sphere $$\hat{u} = ( \cos \theta \sin \vartheta, \sin \theta \sin \vartheta, \cos \vartheta)$$ is composed of a rotation about the $y$-axis through an angle $\vartheta \in ( 0^\circ, 180^\circ),$ followed by a rotation about the $z$-axis through an angle of $\theta \in (0^\circ, 360^\circ).$ Now if we are testing from a vertical line test perspective using a vertical line parallel to the $z$-axis, then any rotation about the $z$-axis will not affect its success at passing this test. So we only are really worried about the rotation about the $y$-axis through an angle of $\vartheta.$ This case then devolves into the two-dimensional case we saw before, though with only half of range. That is, the resulting parametric surface will pass the vertical line test whenever $\vartheta \in [0^\circ, 45^\circ) \cup (135^\circ, 180^\circ].$

The only thing that we have to be careful here of is assessing the probability. Here we want to measure the surface of the sphere that satisfies $$\Omega = \{ \vartheta \in [0^\circ, 45^\circ) \cup (135^\circ, 180^\circ], \theta \in [0^\circ, 360^\circ) \}.$$ We can calculate the surface area of the region $\Omega$ by converting to radians and then using the surface area of the shape bounded by the curve $r = \sin \vartheta$ for $\vartheta \in [0, \frac{\pi}{4}) \cup (\frac{3\pi}{4}, \pi],$ that is $$S = S(\Omega) = 2 \int_0^{\pi / 4} \pi \sin^2 \vartheta \,d\vartheta.$$ Therefore, since the total surface area of the unit sphere is $4\pi,$ the probability of the rotated parametric surface passing the vertical line test is \begin{align*}q = \frac{S}{4\pi} &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^{\pi/4} \sin^2 \vartheta \,d\vartheta \\ &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^{\pi/4} \frac{1 - \cos 2\vartheta}{2} \,d\vartheta \\ &= \left[\frac{\vartheta}{4} - \frac{\sin 2\vartheta}{8} \right]^{\vartheta = \pi/4}_{\vartheta=0} \\ &= \frac{\pi}{16} - \frac{1}{8} = \frac{\pi-2}{16} \approx 7.13495\dots \%.\end{align*}

Spinning graphs and the vertical lines that test them

You’re taking a math exam, and you’ve been asked to draw the graph of a function. That is, your graph must pass the vertical line test, so that no vertical line intersects your function’s graph more than once.

You decide you’re going to graph the absolute value function, $y = |x|,$ and ace the test.

There’s just one problem. You are dealing with a bout of dizziness, and can’t quite make out the $x$- and $y$-axes on the exam in front of you. As a result, your function will be rotated about the origin by a random angle that’s uniformly chosen between $0$ and $360$ degrees.

What is the probability that the resulting graph you produce is in fact a function (i.e., $y$ is a function of $x$)?

Let's assume that the map of $y = |x|$ is rotated about the origin by an angle of $\theta \sim U(0^\circ,360^\circ)$ degrees with respect to the positive $x$-axis. We can think of this situation as defining a new set of variables $$\begin{pmatrix} \tilde{x} \\ \tilde{y} \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} & -\sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180} \\ \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180} & \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} x \\ |x| \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} x \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} - |x| \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180} \\ x \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180} + |x| \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} \end{pmatrix}.$$ So we have $\tilde{x} = f(x)$ and $\tilde{y} = g(x)$ as parametric functions of our previous variable $x.$

Now we see that if $f$ is one-to-one, then the parametric curve $(f(x), g(x))$ will pass the vertical line test, since there is only one possible value of $x$ such that $\tilde{x} = f(x),$ then there can only be at most one intersection between any vertical line and the curve.

On the other hand, if $f$ is not one-to-one, then for some $x_1 \ne x_2,$ we have $f(x_1) = f(x_2).$ In this case, since $f(x_1) = f(x_2),$ we have equivalently $$(x_1 - x_2) \cos \frac{\pi \theta}{180} = ( |x_1| - |x_2| ) \sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180}.$$ Now let's look at the values of $g(x_1)$ and $g(x_2).$ If $\sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180} = 0,$ then $f(x) = x \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180},$ which is a one-to-one function, so if $f$ is not one-to-one then we can assume that $\sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180} \ne 0.$ Therefore, we have \begin{align*}g(x_1) - g(x_2) &= (x_1 - x_2) \sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180} + (|x_1| - |x_2| ) \cos \frac{\pi \theta}{180} \\ &= (x_1 - x_2) \sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180} + (|x_1| - |x_2|) \sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180} \frac{ \cos \frac{\pi \theta}{180}}{\sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180}} \\ & = (x_1 - x_2) \sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180} + (x_1 - x_2) \cos \frac{\pi \theta}{180} \frac{\cos \frac{\pi \theta}{180}}{\sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180}} \\ &= (x_1 - x_2) \left( \sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180} + \frac{ \cos^2 \frac{\pi \theta}{180}}{\sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180}} \right) \\ &= \frac{ x_1 - x_2}{\sin \frac{\pi \theta}{180}},\end{align*} so since $x_1 \ne x_2,$ we have $g(x_1) \ne g(x_2).$ Thus, the vertical line $\tilde{x} = f(x_1) = f(x_2)$ would intersect the curve at $\tilde{y}_1 = g(x_1)$ and $\tilde{y}_2 = g(x_2),$ with $\tilde{y}_1 \ne \tilde{y}_2.$ Thus, if $f$ is not one-to-one then the parametric curve will fail the vertical line test. Therefore, the parametric curve will pass the vertical line test if and only if $f$ is one-to-one.

So let's analyze the function $$f(x) = x \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} - |x| \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180}.$$ We see that $$f^\prime(x) = \begin{cases} \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} + \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180}, &\text{if $x \lt 0$;} \\ \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} - \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180}, & \text{if $x \gt 0.$} \end{cases}$$ If $f$ is monotonic, then it is obviously one-to-one, so we need only determine for what values of $\theta \in (0^\circ, 360^\circ)$ does $\cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} - \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180}$ and $\cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} + \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180}$ have the same signs, that is, when does $$0 \lt \left(\cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} - \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180}\right) \left( \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{180} + \sin \frac{\pi\theta}{180} \right) = \cos^2 \frac{\pi\theta}{180} - \sin^2 \frac{\pi\theta}{180} = \cos \frac{\pi\theta}{90}.$$ So since $\cos x \gt 0$ on $x \in [ 0, \frac{\pi}{2} ) \cup ( \frac{3\pi}{2}, 2\pi],$ we see that the resulting graph will pass the vertical line test whenever $\theta \in [ 0^\circ, 45^\circ ) \cup (135^\circ, 225^\circ) \cup ( 315^\circ, 360^\circ ],$ which means that the probability of passing the vertical line test if $\theta \sim U(0,360)$ is $$p = \frac{|45 - 0| + |225 - 135| + |360 - 315|}{360} = \frac{1}{2}.$$

Sunday, January 26, 2025

The Four Lily Pad Problem

You are a frog in a pond with four lily pads, marked “$1$” through “$4$.” You are currently on pad $2$, and your goal is to make it to pad $1$. From any given pad, there are specific probabilities that you’ll jump to another pad:

  • Once on pad $1$, you will happily stay there forever.
  • From pad $2$, there’s a $1$-in-$2$ chance you’ll hop to pad $1$, and a $1$-in-$2$ chance you’ll hop to pad $3$.
  • From pad $3$, there’s a $1$-in-$3$ chance you’ll hop to pad $2$, and a $2$-in-$3$ chance you’ll hop to pad $4$.
  • Once on pad $4$, you will unhappily stay there forever.

Given that you are starting on pad $2$, what is the probability that you will ultimately make it to pad $1$ (as opposed to pad $4$)?

Let's solve this in two different ways: (a) one directly from the probability distributions and some easy combinatorics; and (b) from the Markov chain properties that we will then expand in the Extra Credit portion.

The most straightforward way of solving this is by looking at all of the possible transitions from pad $2$ to pad $1.$ Obviously in the first jump you have a $1/2$ probability of everlasting happiness on pad $1.$ If not, then you will have to make your way back to pad $2$ and try again, at some future point. In order to end up back on pad $2$ we will need a jump to pad $3$ followed by a jump back from pad $3$ to pad $2.$ The probability of this round trip occuring is $\frac{1}{2} \times \frac{1}{3} = \frac{1}{6}.$ So we can only arrive on paradise pad $1$ as the result of an odd numbered jump from pad $2$ to pad $1$, with some number of round trips, say $k$, between pads $2$ and $3$ intervening. So the the probability of landing on lily pad $1$ on the $(2k+1)$th jump is $\frac{1}{2 \cdot 6^k},$ meaning that the total probability of ever landing on lily pad $1$ having started on lily pad $2$ is $$p = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{1}{2 \cdot 6^k} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{1 - \frac{1}{6}} = \frac{3}{5} = 60 \%.$$

Of course another way of looking at the situation is that your location on pads $1,$ $2,$ $3,$ or $4$ can be modeled by a Markov chain with transition matrix given by $$T = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 1/2 & 0 & 1/2 & 0 \\ 0 & 1/3 & 0 & 2/3 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} ,$$ where $T_{ij}$ is the probability of starting of pad $i$ and going to pad $j$. Obviously, pads $1$ and $4$ are absorbing, recurrent states of this Markov chain, while pads $2$ and $3$ are transient. We can then transform our transition matrix by reordering the states to put it into a canonical block form, so that now the rows and columns represent pads $3,$ $2,$ $1,$ and $4$, respectively: $$\hat{T} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1/3 & 0 & 2/3 \\ 1/2 & 0 & 1/2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} Q & R \\ 0 & I \end{pmatrix}.$$ The fundamental matrix of this Markov chain is $$N = (I - Q)^{-1} = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & -1/3 \\ -1/2 & 1 \end{pmatrix}^{-1} = \begin{pmatrix} \frac{6}{5} & \frac{2}{5} \\ \frac{3}{5} & \frac{6}{5} \end{pmatrix}.$$ The resulting absorption probabilities are given by $$P = NR = \begin{pmatrix} \frac{6}{5} & \frac{2}{5} \\ \frac{3}{5} & \frac{6}{5} \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} 0 & \frac{2}{3} \\ \frac{1}{2} & 0 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} \frac{1}{5} & \frac{4}{5} \\ \frac{3}{5} & \frac{2}{5} \end{pmatrix}$$ where $P_{ij}$ is the probability of starting on lily pad $4-i$ and ending up at lily pad $\frac{5 + (-1)^j 3}{2}$ for $i, j = 1, 2.$ So in particular, the probability of starting on pad $2$ and ending up living a life of happiness on pad $1$ forever is, again, $P_{21} = 60\%.$

The Infinite Lily Pad Problem

Once again, you are a frog in a pond. But this time, the pond has infinitely many lily pads, which are numbered “1,” “2,” “3,” etc. As before, you are currently on pad $2$, and your goal is to make it to pad $1$, which you would happily stay on forever.

Whenever you are on pad $k$, you will hop to pad $k−1$ with probability $1/k$, and you will hop to pad $k+1$ with probability $(k−1)/k.$ Now, what is the probability that you will ultimately make it to pad $1$?

Taking off where we landed from the Classic Fiddler, let's expand the $4$ lily pad Markov chain to an $n$ state Markov chain and then see what happens when $n \to \infty.$ Skipping right to the canonical form of the transition matrix we get \begin{align*}\hat{T}_n &= \begin{pmatrix} 0 & \frac{1}{n-1} & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac{n-2}{n-1}\\ \frac{n-3}{n-2} & 0 & \frac{1}{n-2} & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & \frac{n-4}{n-3} & 0 & \frac{1}{n-3} & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \cdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & \frac{2}{3} & 0 & \frac{1}{3} & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & \frac{1}{2} & 0 & \frac{1}{2} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \\ &= \begin{pmatrix} Q & R \\ 0 & I \end{pmatrix}.\end{align*} Again, we have the fundamental matrix $N = (I - Q)^{-1}$ and $P = NR,$ where here can focus of wanting $P_{n-2,1}.$ Instead of trying to code up an $(n-2) \times (n-2)$ matrix inversion, let's instead rewrite the matrix equation as a tridiagonal system of equations $$(I-Q) x = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & -\frac{1}{n-1} & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ -\frac{n-3}{n-2} & 1 & -\frac{1}{n-2} & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & -\frac{n-4}{n-3} & 1 & -\frac{1}{n-3} & \cdots & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \cdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & -\frac{2}{3} & 1 & -\frac{1}{3} & \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & -\frac{1}{2} & 1 \\ \end{pmatrix} x = \frac{1}{2} e_{n-2},$$ and use the Thomas algorithm to find the probability of ending up on pad $1$ forever in the case of $n$ lily pads as $p_{1,n} = x_{n-2} = P_{n-2,1}.$ In particular, the main diagonal entries are $b_i = 1, i = 1, 2, \dots, n-2.$ The upper diagonal is $c_i = -\frac{1}{n-i}, i = 1, 2, \dots, n-3$ and lower diagonal are $a_i = -\frac{n-i-1}{n-i}, i = 2, 3, \dots, n-2.$ The Thomas algorithm consists of two sweeps, first $c^\prime\in \mathbb{R}^{n-3}$ and $d^\prime \in \mathbb{R}^{n-2}$ and then another that starts with solving for $x_{n-2}$ and then sweeps backward from $i = n-1$ to $i=1.$ In particular, we define $c^\prime_1 = c_1 = -\frac{1}{n-1}$ and $$c^\prime_i = \frac{c_i}{1 - a_ic^\prime_{i-1}}, i = 2, \dots, n-3$$ and $d^\prime_1 = d_1,$ and $$d^\prime_i = \frac{d_i - a_id^\prime_{i-1}}{1 - a_ic^\prime_{i-1}}, i = 2, 3, \dots, n-2,$$ and finally $x_{n-2} = d^\prime_{n-2}$ and $$x_i = d^\prime_i - c^\prime_i x_{i+1}, i = n-1, n-2, \dots, 1.$$ Additionally, since $d_i = 0, i = 1, \dots, n-3,$ we have $d^\prime_i = 0, i = 1, \dots, n-3,$ with $$p_{1,n} = P_{n-2,1} = x_{n-2} = d^\prime_{n-2} = \frac{\frac{1}{2}}{1 - \left(-\frac{1}{2}\right) c^\prime_{n-3}} = \frac{1}{2 + c^\prime_{n-3}},$$ and since we only care about $x_{n-2},$ we don't have to do any of the backward sweep.

So we can simply code up one recursive function that sweeps through the $c^\prime_i$ variables for any $i = 1, \dots, n-3,$ for instance the following Python script:

def prob_zero(N):
    c = -1.0 / float(N - 1.)
    for i in range(2, N-2):
        c = (-1.0 / float(N - i)) / (1. - (-1. + 1.0 / float(N - i)) * c)
    return (0.5 / (1 + 0.5 * c))

We can just get the values of the probability of absorption at pad $1$ for many, many values of $n$ and emprically see that as $n$ gets large we get close (fairly quickly to $\lim_{n \to \infty} p_{1,n} = 63.21205588285577....\%,$ which is disturbingly close to $1 - e^{-1}.$ So much so, that if we wanted we could likely call it quits here and claim that the probability of ending up forever on pad $1$ in the inifinite lily pad case is $p_{1,\infty} = 1 - e^{-1}.$

# of Lily Pads Absorption Prob.
460%
562.5%
663.07692307692307%
763.19018404907976%
863.20899335717935%
963.21167883211679%
1063.21201448891889%
1163.21205178374104%
1263.21205551321910%
1363.21205585226252%
1463.21205588051614%
1563.21205588268949%
1663.21205588284473%
1763.21205588285508%
1863.21205588285572%
1963.21205588285577%
2063.21205588285577%

However, perhaps we can do better than just our anecdotal, experimental evidence. Let's start at $$p_{1,n} = \frac{1}{2+c^\prime_{n-3}(n)}.$$ Using the recursive formula, we get $$c^\prime_{n-3}(n) = \frac{c_{n-3}}{1 - a_{n-3} c^\prime_{n-4}(n)} = \frac{-\frac{1}{3}}{1 + \frac{2}{3} c^\prime_{n-4}(n)} = -\frac{1}{3 + 2 c^\prime_{n-4}(n)}.$$ Going a step further we get $$c^\prime_{n-4}(n) = \frac{ -\frac{1}{4} }{1 - \frac{3}{4} c^\prime_{n-5}(n)} = -\frac{1}{4 + 3c^\prime_{n-5}(n)},$$ which plugging back into the previous equation gives $$c^\prime_{n-3}(n) = - \frac{1}{3 + 2 \frac{ -1 }{4 + 3 c^\prime_{n-5}(n)} } = - \frac{4 + 3 c^\prime_{n-5}(n)}{10 + 9 c^\prime_{n-5}(n)}.$$ We see that we can define $c^\prime_{n-3}(n)$ as a rational function of $c^\prime_{n-k}(n),$ for each $k = 4, \dots, n-1.$ In particular, let's say that $$c^\prime_{n-3}(n) = -\frac{ \alpha_k + (\alpha_k - 1) c^\prime_{n-k}(n) }{\beta_k + (\beta_k - 1) c^\prime_{n-k}(n)},$$ where $\alpha_4 = 1$ and $\beta_4 = 3.$ From the recursion formula for $c^\prime$ we get that $$c^\prime_{n-3}(n) = - \frac{\alpha_k + (\alpha_k - 1) \frac{ - 1 }{k + (k-1) c^\prime_{n-k-1}(n)} }{ \beta_k + (\beta_k - 1) \frac{ -1}{ k + (k-1) c^\prime_{n-k-1}(n)}} = -\frac{ k \alpha_k - (\alpha_k - 1) + (k-1) \alpha_k c^\prime_{n-k-1}(n)} { k \beta_k - (\beta_k - 1) + (k-1) \beta_k c^\prime_{n-k-1}(n)},$$ so we can derive the recursion formulae for $\alpha_k$ and $\beta_k$ as \begin{align*}\alpha_{k+1} &= (k-1) \alpha_k + 1 \\ \beta_{k+1} &= (k-1) \beta_k + 1,\end{align*} for all $k \geq 4,$ with initial conditions $\alpha_4 = 1$ and $\beta_4 = 3.$

So, trying to organize the situation a bit, we notice that since $c_1^\prime(n) = -\frac{1}{n-1}$ we would then have to stop the recursion, we get $$c^\prime_{n-3}(n) = - \frac{ \alpha_{n-1} - \frac{\alpha_{n-1} - 1}{n-1} }{ \beta_{n-1} - \frac{\beta_{n-1} - 1}{n-1} } = \frac{ \alpha_{n-1} (n-2) + 1 }{\beta_{n-1} (n-2) + 1},$$ where $\alpha_{n-1}$ and $\beta_{n-1}$ can be read from the recursion formulae above. Plugging this back into the absorption probability, we see that \begin{align*}p_{1,n} &= \frac{1}{2 + c_{n-3}^\prime(n)} \\ &= \frac{1}{2 - \frac{ \alpha_{n-1} (n-2) + 1}{ \beta_{n-1} (n-2) + 1} } \\ & = \frac{ \beta_{n-1} (n-2) + 1 }{ (2 \beta_{n-1} - \alpha_{n-1}) (n-2) + 1 } \\ &= \frac{ \beta_{n-1} + O (n^{-1}) }{ (2 \beta_{n-1} - \alpha_{n-1}) + O(n^{-1}) }.\end{align*} Now, let's turn our attention to the growth of $\alpha_{n-1}$ and $\beta_{n-1}.$

Given the recursion formulae and initial conditions, we can show that in fact $$\alpha_k = \lfloor (e-2) (k-2)! \rfloor$$ and $$\beta_k = \lfloor (e-1) (k-2)! \rfloor$$ for all $k \geq 4.$ Clearly, the initial conditions hold since $\lfloor (e-2) \cdot (4-2)! \rfloor = \lfloor 1.436\dots \rfloor = 1$ and $\lfloor (e-1) \cdot (4-2)! \rfloor = \lfloor 3.436\dots \rfloor = 3.$ Assume that for some $j \geq 4$ that \begin{align*}\alpha_j &= \lfloor (e-2) (j-2)! \rfloor \\ \beta_j &= \lfloor (e-1) (j-2)! \rfloor.\end{align*} From the recursion formula, we get \begin{align*} \alpha_{j+1} &= (j-1) \alpha_j + 1 = (j-1) \lfloor (e-2) (j-2)! \rfloor + 1 \\ \beta_{j+1} &= (j-1) \beta_j + 1 = (j-1) \lfloor (e-1) (j-2)! \rfloor + 1.\end{align*} Now at this point we will rely on the following lemma (that can be proven using an application of the Taylor remainder theorem) that states that for any $\ell = 2, \dots, \infty,$ $$\sum_{k = \ell}^\infty \frac{1}{k!} \lt \frac{1}{(\ell - 1)!}.$$ So using this lemma we see that \begin{align*}\lfloor e (j-1)! \rfloor &= \left\lfloor \sum_{k=0}^{j-1} \frac{(j-1)!}{k!} + (j-1)! \sum_{k=j}^\infty \frac{1}{k!} \right\rfloor \\ &= (j-1)! \sum_{k=0}^{j-1} \frac{1}{k!} \\ &= (j-1)! \sum_{k=0}^{j-2} \frac{1}{k!} + 1 \\ &= (j-1) \left( (j-2)! \sum_{k=0}^{j-2} \frac{1}{k!} \right) + 1 \\ &= (j-1) \lfloor e (j-2)! \rfloor + 1.\end{align*} So plugging back into the recursion formulae above, since $j!$ and $2 \cdot j!$ are always integers for any $j,$ we confirm the induction step, since \begin{align*} \alpha_{j+1} &= (j-1) \lfloor (e-2) (j-2)! \rfloor + 1 = \lfloor (e-2) (j-1) ! \rfloor \\ \beta_{j+1} &= (j-1) \lfloor (e-1) (j-2)! \rfloor + 1 = \lfloor (e-1) (j-1)! \rfloor,\end{align*} thus proving the formulae $$ \alpha_k = \lfloor (e-2) (k-2)! \rfloor, \beta_k = \lfloor (e-1) (k-2)! \rfloor, \,\, \forall k \geq 4.$$

Finally, returning our attention to the formula for the absorption probability we get \begin{align*}p_{1,n} &= \frac{ \beta_{n-1} + O (n^{-1}) }{ (2 \beta_{n-1} - \alpha_{n-1}) + O(n^{-1})}\\ &= \frac{ \lfloor (e-1) (n-2)! \rfloor + O(n^{-1}) }{ ( 2 \lfloor (e-1) (n-2)! \rfloor - \lfloor (e-2) (n-2)! \rfloor + O(n^{-1}) } \\ &= \frac{ (n-2)! \sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} + O(n^{-1}) }{ (n-2)! \left( 2 \sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} - \sum_{k=2}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} \right) + O(n^{-1})} \\ &= \frac{ \sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} + O\left( \frac{1}{ (n-1)!}\right) }{ \left(2 \sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} - \sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} \right) + O \left(\frac{1}{(n-1)!}\right)},\end{align*} so we have that the probability of ending up on pad $1$ in the infinite lily pad problem is \begin{align*}p_{1,\infty} = \lim_{n \to \infty} p_{1,n} &= \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{ \sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} + O\left( \frac{1}{ (n-1)!}\right)}{ \left(2 \sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} - \sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \frac{1}{k!} \right) + O\left( \frac{1}{ (n-1)!}\right)}\\ &= \frac{\sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k!}}{ 2 \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k!} - \sum_{k=2}^\infty \frac{1}{k!}} \\ &= \frac{e-1}{2(e-1) - (e-2)} = 1 - e^{-1},\end{align*} as experimentally derived.

Monday, January 20, 2025

Big Trapezoidal Bean Machine

Suppose you have the board below, which starts with a row with six pins (and five slots), followed by a row with five pins (and six slots), and then back to six pins in an alternating pattern. Balls are only allowed to enter through the middle three slots on top.

Your goal is to create a trapezoidal distribution along one of the rows with six slots, which have been highlighted with dotted lines in the diagram above. More precisely, the frequency of balls passing through the six slots from left to right should be $x−y, x, x+y, x+y, x, x−y,$ for some values of $x$ and $y$ with $x \geq y.$

Suppose the ratio by which you drop balls into the top three middle slots, from left to right, is $a : b : c,$ with $a + b + c = 1.$ Find all ordered triples $(a, b, c)$ that result in a trapezoidal distribution in at least one row with six slots.

As opposed to the classic bean machine, let's go back to assuming that beans have an equal probability of going either to the left or the right. In this case, given that we want to end up with a symmetric probability distribution, we can reasonably deduce that $a = c.$ In this case, we then can reduce the dimensionality by also recognizing that $a + b + c = 2a + b = 1,$ that is, $b = 1 -2a.$

Let's define $\pi_i^{(k)}$ as the probability of a bean passing through $i$th slot from the left on the $k$th dotted line row from the top. We can set up a recurrence formula by going through the various routes from one row to the next. In particular, we get \begin{align*} \pi^{(k+1)}_1 &= \frac{1}{2} \pi_1^{(k)} +\frac{1}{4} \pi_2^{(k)}\\ \pi^{(k+1)}_2 &= \frac{1}{2} \pi_1^{(k)} +\frac{1}{2} \pi_2^{(k)} +\frac{1}{4} \pi_3^{(k)}\\ \pi^{(k+1)}_3 &= \frac{1}{4} \pi_2^{(k)} +\frac{1}{2} \pi_3^{(k)} +\frac{1}{4} \pi_4^{(k)}\\ \pi^{(k+1)}_4 &= \frac{1}{4} \pi_3^{(k)} +\frac{1}{2} \pi_4^{(k)} +\frac{1}{4} \pi_5^{(k)}\\ \pi^{(k+1)}_5 &= \frac{1}{4} \pi_4^{(k)} +\frac{1}{2} \pi_5^{(k)} +\frac{1}{2} \pi_6^{(k)}\\ \pi^{(k+1)}_6 &= \frac{1}{4} \pi_5^{(k)} +\frac{1}{2} \pi_6^{(k)} \end{align*} If we have a trapezoidal distribution with $\pi^{(k)}_2 = x,$ then since $\sum_{i=1}^6 \pi^{(k)}_i = 6x = 1,$ it must mean that we have $\pi^{(k)}_2 = \frac{1}{6}.$

For the first dotted line, given ordered triples of $(a, 1-2a, a),$ we have $$\pi^{(1)} = \left(0, \frac{a}{2}, \frac{1-a}{2}, \frac{1-a}{2}, \frac{a}{2}, 0\right).$$ Solving $\pi_2^{(1)} = \frac{a}{2} = \frac{1}{6},$ we get the ordered triple $(\frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{3}).$ For the second dotted line, we have $$\pi^{(2)} = \left( \frac{a}{8}, \frac{a+1}{8}, \frac{3-2a}{8}, \frac{3-2a}{8}, \frac{a+1}{8}, \frac{a}{8} \right).$$ Here again, solving $\pi^{(2)}_2 = \frac{a+1}{8} = \frac{1}{6},$ we get the ordered triple $(\frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{3}).$ For the third dotted line, we have $$\pi^{(3)} = \left( \frac{3a+1}{32}, \frac{2a+5}{32}, \frac{10-5a}{32}, \frac{10-5a}{32}, \frac{2a+5}{32}, \frac{3a+1}{32} \right).$$ Solving $\pi^{(3)}_2 = \frac{2a+5}{32} = \frac{1}{6},$ we get the ordered triple $(\frac{1}{6}, \frac{2}{3}, \frac{1}{6}).$

Going further, we get $$\pi^{(4)} = \left(\frac{8a+7}{128}, \frac{5a+22}{128}, \frac{35-13a}{128}, \frac{35-13a}{128}, \frac{5a+22}{128}, \frac{8a+7}{128}\right).$$ Here though, we come to the equation $\frac{5a+22}{128} = \frac{1}{6},$ which cannot be solved by an $a \geq 0,$ since $\frac{22}{128} \gt \frac{1}{6}.$ So there are no ordered triples that can provide a trapezoidal distribution on the fourth dotted line. Similarly, we get $$\pi^{(5)} = \left( \frac{21a+36}{512}, \frac{13a+93}{512}, \frac{127-34a}{512}, \frac{127-34a}{512}, \frac{13a+93}{512}, \frac{21a+36}{512}\right),$$ where $\frac{93}{512} \gt \frac{1}{6}$ so again no ordered triple can provide a trapezoidal distribution on the fifth dotted line. Finally, we have $$\pi^{(6)} = \left( \frac{55a+165}{2048}, \frac{34a+385}{2048}, \frac{474-89a}{2048}, \frac{474-89a}{2048}, \frac{34a+385}{2048}, \frac{55a+165}{2048}\right),$$ where $\frac{385}{2048} \gt \frac{1}{6}$ so again no ordered triple can provide a trapezoidal distribution on the sixth dotted line.

Therefore, the only possible ordered triples that result in a trapezoidal distribution are $(\frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{3})$ and $(\frac{1}{6}, \frac{2}{3}, \frac{1}{6}).$

Big Skewed Bean Machine

Suppose you have a board like the one shown below. The board’s topmost row has three pins (and two slots for a ball to pass through), while the bottommost row has two pins (and three slots for a ball to pass through). The remaining rows alternate between having three pins and two pins. But instead of the $12$ rows of pins in the illustrative diagram, suppose the board has many, many rows. And at the very bottom of the board, just below the two bottommost pins, are three buckets, labeled $A,$ $B,$ and $C$ from left to right.

Whenever a ball encounters one of the leftmost pins, it travels down the right side of it to the next row. And whenever a ball encounters one of the rightmost pins, it travels down the left side of it to the next row. But this isn’t your garden variety bean machine. Whenever a ball encounters any of the other pins, it has a $75$ percent chance of traveling down the right side of that pin, and a $25$ percent chance of traveling down the left side of that pin.

A single ball is about to be dropped into the left slot at the top of the board. What is the probability that the ball ultimately lands in bucket $A,$ the leftmost slot at the bottom?

Let's break down the many, many, many rows of this bean machine into repetitions of a two pin row followed by a three pin row. Let's zoom in on one of these blocks. Assume that the probability that bean will hit the left pin with probability $p$ (and hence the probability it hits the right pin is $1-p$). Let's further say that the probability that after it passes through the three pin row that it is leaving down the left slot is $q = q(p).$ Let's work out the relationship between $p$ and $q.$

As shown in the figure, there are three possible ways that it leaves down the left slot: (a) it hits the left pin in the upper row, goes to the left hitting the leftmost pin in the lower row, then leaves through down the left slot; (b) it hits the left pin in the upper row, goes to the right hitting the middle pin in the lower row, then goes to the left leaving through the left slot; or (c) it hits the right pin in the upper row, goes to the left hitting the middle pin in the lower row, then goes to the left, leaving through the left slot. The total probability of option (a) is $p \cdot \frac{1}{4} \cdot 1 = \frac{p}{4}$. The total probability of option (b) is $p \cdot \frac{3}{4} \cdot \frac{1}{4} = \frac{3p}{16}$. The total probability of option (c) is $(1-p) \cdot \frac{1}{4} \cdot \frac{1}{4} = \frac{1-p}{16}.$ Therefore, we see that $$q = q(p) = \frac{p}{4} + \frac{3p}{16} + \frac{1 - p}{16} = \frac{6p + 1}{16}.$$

Let's say that the probability of hitting the left pin in the $n$th repitition of these blocks of consecutive two and three pin rows is $p_n.$ Then, since the probability of leaving the $n$th block through the left slot is the same as the probability of hitting the left pin in the $(n+1)$th block, we have $$p_{n+1} = \frac{6p_n + 1}{16}.$$ If we have a total of $N$ of these blocks, then the probability of ending up in $A$ is given by $p_A = \frac{p_{N+1}}{4}.$ While it isn't entirely super impactful when $N$ is large, we should note that since we are dropping a ball in the left slot that we start with $p_0 = 1,$ from which we can derive the exact probability of getting ending up in $A$ for any $N.$

For this particular problem, though, where we assume that $N \gg 1$ we can just take $p_\infty = \lim_{n \to \infty} p_n$ which we can get by plugging $p_\infty$ into both sides of the recursion formula, that is, $$p_\infty = \frac{6 p_\infty + 1}{16},$$ or equivalently $p_\infty = \frac{1}{10}.$ Therefore, when the number of such blocks grows large, the probability of ending up in $A$ is $$p_A = \frac{p_\infty}{4} = \frac{1}{40} = 2.5\%.$$