Solving the Tower of Hanoi with 4 Pegs

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter msmith12
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Tower
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Tower of Hanoi problem with four pegs introduces a more complex challenge than the traditional three-peg version. The minimum number of moves required to solve this problem is defined by the recursive formula a(n) = 3 + 2 * a(n - 2), with base cases a(1) = 1 and a(2) = 3. For odd n, the formula simplifies to a(n) = 2^((n-1)/2 + 2) - 3, while for even n, it is expressed as a(n) = 3 * (2^(n/2) - 1). This strategy involves moving n-2 disks to an empty peg before relocating the last two disks to the target peg.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of recursive algorithms
  • Familiarity with the Tower of Hanoi problem
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical induction
  • Experience with algorithm analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Research advanced recursive algorithms in computer science
  • Explore mathematical induction techniques for proving algorithm correctness
  • Learn about dynamic programming approaches to optimization problems
  • Investigate variations of the Tower of Hanoi problem and their solutions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, algorithm enthusiasts, and educators looking to deepen their understanding of recursive problem-solving techniques.

msmith12
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
There is a famous problem called the tower of hanoi in which you have n disks of increasing diameter, and three pegs. The object is to move them from one peg to another in such a way that no larger disk is on top of a smaller disk.

the number of moves is defined by
<br /> T(n)=2^{n}-1<br />

A far more interesting and complicated problem, is, what is the minimum number of moves if you have 4 pegs instead of three?

Bonus: what is a formula in terms of
W(n) and T(n) --(where W(n) is the 4 peg number and T(n) is the number of 3 peg moves).
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Well, one strategy is to first move n-2 discs to one of the empty posts, then move the second-to-last disc to the other empty post, then move the last disc to the target post, then move the second-to-last disc to the target post, then move the n-2 discs to the target post. This gives a(n) = 3 + 2 * (a(n - 2)), with a(1) and a(2) being 1 and 3. Some experimentation (I don't know how to do it methodologically) shows that for odd n, a(n) = 2^((n-1)/2 + 2) - 3, and for even n, a(n) = 3 * (2^(n/2) - 1). Of course, I have no reason to believe this is the best strategy.
 
Now I think it is the best strategy. To move the bottom disk you have to move somehow all the disks above it. To move the second-to-last-disk it must go onto a post that is already empty. The next step is clear, moving the last disk to target, and the step after that is equally clear, moving second-to-last disk to target.

I was thinking that maybe there would be some way to divide up the disks between the two spare posts in a way that might save future moves, but I guess not.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
13K