Modelling a dynamic system of permutations

vdrn485
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Let us assume a dynamic system which has vector with 'n' components (which are non-negative integers from 1->n) at time t=1. In other words we have a permutation over 1->n at time t=1. Assuming time to be discrete, at any time time 't' , the system evolves such that there are 't' permutations with 'n' components in each. We do not know in advance which permutations in time 't' contributes to the birth of which permutation in time 't+1'. We can assume that each permutation in time 't+1' has a probabilty distribution over the permutation in time 't' for being its parent.
The only information available is the permutations at each time instance from 1 to T.

What kind of models can be used to represent such a system if we want to find out if the permutations attain a stable state with very less perturbations after certain time period?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
vdrn485 said:
We can assume that each permutation in time 't+1' has a probabilty distribution over the permutation in time 't' for being its parent.

If the probability distributions are independent of time then you have a Markov process.

You haven't been specific enough to make any particular model a good candidate. Lots of different real life problems match the generalities you presented. For example, pick n stocks and name them 1,2,..n. Let t be the time in days. Let the permutation at time t be this list of stocks ordered from lowest closing price to highest closing price on that day. If there are ties, then break them by giving the stock with the highest market capitalization the higher rank.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top