MHB Proving by Induction: Solving Recurrence Relation

evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)

I want to prove by induction, that the solution of the recurrence relation $T(n)=2T \left ( \frac{n}{2} \right )+n^2, n>1 \text{ and } T(1)=1$ is $n(2n-1)$.

We have to suppose that $n=2^k, k \geq 0$, right?

Do I have to prove the solution by induction with respect to $n$ or to $k$ ? (Thinking)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
Hello! (Wave)

I want to prove by induction, that the solution of the recurrence relation $T(n)=2T \left ( \frac{n}{2} \right )+n^2, n>1 \text{ and } T(1)=1$ is $n(2n-1)$.

We have to suppose that $n=2^k, k \geq 0$, right?

Do I have to prove the solution by induction with respect to $n$ or to $k$ ? (Thinking)

Hi! (Blush)

I'd pick $k$, since $T(n)$ is not defined for all $n \in \Bbb N$. (Thinking)

Btw, do you really have to use induction? (Wondering)
 
I like Serena said:
I'd pick $k$, since $T(n)$ is not defined for all $n \in \Bbb N$. (Thinking)

Btw, do you really have to use induction? (Wondering)

The exercise asks the following:

Solve the recurrence relation $ \displaystyle{T(n)=\left\{\begin{matrix}
1 &,n=1 \\
2T \left(\frac{n}{2} \right )+n^2 &, n>1
\end{matrix}\right.}$

and then, prove that the solution you found is right, using mathematical induction.

So, do we have to do it like that?

We suppose that $n=2^k, k \geq 0$.

  • $k=0 \Rightarrow n=1: T(1)=1=1\cdot (2 \cdot 1-1) \checkmark$
    $$$$
  • We suppose that the relation stands for any $k>1$, so $T(2^k)=2^k(2^{k+1}-1)$
    $$$$
  • We will show that the relation stands for $k+1$.

    $$T(2^{k+1})=2T \left (\frac{2^{k+1}}{2} \right )+(2^{k+1})^2=2T(2^k)+2^{2k+2}=2 (2^k(2^{k+1}-1))+2^{2k+2}\\ =2^{2k+2}-2^{k+1}+2^{2k+2}=2^{k+1}(2 \cdot 2^{k+1}-1)$$
 
evinda said:
The exercise asks the following:

Solve the recurrence relation $ \displaystyle{T(n)=\left\{\begin{matrix}
1 &,n=1 \\
2T \left(\frac{n}{2} \right )+n^2 &, n>1
\end{matrix}\right.}$

and then, prove that the solution you found is right, using mathematical induction.

So, do we have to do it like that?

We suppose that $n=2^k, k \geq 0$.

  • $k=0 \Rightarrow n=1: T(1)=1=1\cdot (2 \cdot 1-1) \checkmark$
    $$$$
  • We suppose that the relation stands for any $k>1$, so $T(2^k)=2^k(2^{k+1}-1)$
    $$$$
  • We will show that the relation stands for $k+1$.

    $$T(2^{k+1})=2T \left (\frac{2^{k+1}}{2} \right )+(2^{k+1})^2=2T(2^k)+2^{2k+2}=2 (2^k(2^{k+1}-1))+2^{2k+2}\\ =2^{2k+2}-2^{k+1}+2^{2k+2}=2^{k+1}(2 \cdot 2^{k+1}-1)$$

Perfect! (Happy)Alternatively, note that $T(n)=n(2n-1)$ fits in the original equation, including the boundary condition that $T(1)=1$.
Therefore it is a solution.

$$T(1)=1(2\cdot 1 - 1)=1$$

$$n(2n-1)=T(n)=2T\left(\frac n2\right)+n^2 = 2\cdot \frac n 2 \left(2\cdot \frac n 2 - 1\right) + n^2 = n(n-1) + n^2 = n(2n-1)$$

In other words, there is no real need for a proof by induction.
Just verifying that the proposed solution satisfies the problem statement is enough. (Nerd)
 
Or do I have to suppose maybe, at the second step, that the relation stands for any $k \geq 0$ ? (Thinking)
 
evinda said:
Or do I have to suppose maybe, at the second step, that the relation stands for any $k \geq 0$ ? (Thinking)

Oh yes. (Blush)
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top