String Attractors for Automatic Sequences
Abstract
We show that it is decidable, given an automatic sequence $\bf s$ and a constant $c$, whether all prefixes of $\bf s$ have a string attractor of size $\leq c$. Using a decision procedure based on this result, we show that all prefixes of the period-doubling sequence of length $\geq 2$ have a string attractor of size $2$. We also prove analogous results for other sequences, including the Thue-Morse sequence and the Tribonacci sequence. We also provide general upper and lower bounds on string attractor size for different kinds of sequences. For example, if $\bf s$ has a finite appearance constant, then there is a string attractor for ${\bf s}[0..n-1]$ of size $O(\log n)$. If further $\bf s$ is linearly recurrent, then there is a string attractor for ${\bf s}[0..n-1]$ of size $O(1)$. For automatic sequences, the size of the smallest string attractor for ${\bf s}[0..n-1]$ is either $\Theta(1)$ or $\Theta(\log n)$, and it is decidable which case occurs. Finally, we close with some remarks about greedy string attractors.
- Publication:
-
arXiv e-prints
- Pub Date:
- December 2020
- DOI:
- 10.48550/arXiv.2012.06840
- arXiv:
- arXiv:2012.06840
- Bibcode:
- 2020arXiv201206840S
- Keywords:
-
- Computer Science - Formal Languages and Automata Theory;
- Computer Science - Discrete Mathematics;
- Mathematics - Combinatorics
- E-Print:
- The proof of part of Theorem 18 has a gap which we currently do not know how to fix. The error is our implicit assumption that (*) if a sequence is automatic and recurrent, then it is uniformly (and hence linearly) recurrent. However, (*) is not true in general (and a counterexample is the Cantor sequence). Thus the first two claims of Theorem 18 are currently not proved