Proving Set Convergence with Random Procedure

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter JimmyT
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convergence Sets
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the convergence of a random procedure involving two sets, A and B, with a non-empty intersection C. The procedure involves allocating n items into single-item bins and repeatedly merging bins based on random selections of items from the same set. It is established that if A and B are disjoint, the procedure converges to two non-empty bins. However, if A intersects B, the procedure converges to one non-empty bin due to the ability of elements in C to unify the items from both sets into a single bin.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of set theory, particularly intersections and unions.
  • Familiarity with random processes and probability theory.
  • Knowledge of binomial distributions and their implications in convergence.
  • Basic concepts of convergence in mathematical sequences.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of Markov chains and their applications in convergence proofs.
  • Study the implications of random sampling in set theory and probability.
  • Explore the concept of stochastic processes and their relevance to bin merging procedures.
  • Learn about the law of large numbers and its connection to convergence in random procedures.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, statisticians, computer scientists, and anyone interested in the convergence behavior of random processes involving set operations.

JimmyT
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Suppose there are n items which are belong to two sets, A and B, such that A intersects B yields a non-empty set C. I apply the following procedure:

-------------------------------------------------
Allocate each of the n items to a single item bin (so there will be n single-item bins).
Repeat the following two steps many times:
(1) From the n items, randomly select two separate items i and j
(2) If items i and j are from the same set, move i to j's bin.
-------------------------------------------------

Questions: Will this procedure always converge to a fixed number of non-empty bins?
If yes, can you provide some clues how I can prove this?

Here are some of my thoughts (pls correct me if I am wrong):

The answer is obvious when A and B are disjoint --- there are two non-empty bins left after many iterations.

I find it a bit tricky if A intersects B yields a non-empty set C, then we may end up with one non-empty bin (especially when |C| is a lot larger than |A| and |B|), or we may end up with two non-empty bins (especially when |C| is a lot smaller than |A| and |B|). In any case, I am just interested to show that the procedure will (almost surely) converge to some constant number of non-empty bins, after many iterations.

Any help will be appreciated.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
-------------------------------------------------
Allocate each of the n items to a single item bin (so there will be n single-item bins).
Repeat the following two steps many times:
(1) From the n items, randomly select two separate items i and j
(2) If items i and j are from the same set, move i to j's bin.
-------------------------------------------------
I assume from context that "j's bin" does not mean the bin j started in, but the bin j is in now. According to this interpretation, a bin once empty can never become nonempty. Therefore the number of nonempty bins is nonincreasing, but greater than 0, so it has to converge to some value. As you said, if A and B are disjoint, that value will be 2. If they intersect, that value will be 1. With a certain nonzero probability an element c of C can "pull" all the elements of A and B to the same bin that c is in, and once it has finished doing that, there will be only 1 bin left and no more changes.
 
Thanks heaps. I am clearer now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K