Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old 10-03-2007, 01:51 AM
beeny beeny is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 177
Default How to use induction

Alright, time for a rant. I'm [censored] pissed at the grade I got from a problem set in my algorithms class... It also kinda pisses me off that they're making induction a big deal in this class when you should have learned it in discrete math? Anyway, give me your opinions on what I should have gotten (out of 7). This is what I wrote:

***START***

For n > 2, let F(n) = F(n-1) + F(n-2), F(0) = 0, F(1) = 1.
I will show that for n > 1 F(n) > .01(3/2)^n using induction.

Base case:
n = 1. F(1) = 1 > .01(3/2)^1 = .015
n = 2. F(2) = F(1) + F(0) = 1 + 0 > .01(3/2)^2

Inductive Hypothesis: Assume F(n) > .01(3/2)^n and F(n-1) > .01(3/2)^(n-1)

Using the inductive hypothesis, we will show that F(n+1) > .01(3/2)^(n+1)

F(n+1) = F(n) + F(n-1) > .01(3/2)^n + .01(3/2)^(n-1) = .01(3/2)(3/2)^(n-1) + .01(3/2)^(n-1) = .01(3/2 + 1)(3/2)^(n-1) = .01(5/2)(3/2)^(n-1) > .01(9/4)(3/2)^(n-1) = .01(3/2)^(n+1) (Ok, this part there may be a few typos (hopefully not!) but this part was correct, even the professor I'm bitching about agreed!)

So, F(n+1) > .01(3/2)^(n+1)

***END***

So, how many points would you give me (out of 7)? Prof gave me 4/7



Basically, the professor's complaint was this:

First, off I have to define a P(n). So he wanted me to clearly state P(n) = F(N) > .01(3/2)^n. From this, use induction on P(n). This whole step isn't necessary (I'm pretty sure) in doing induction. It just helps you save some steps, and things are just clearer. Basically think of it as saying x = messy equation, and if you just state once that x = messy equation, then you can state x afterwards instead of the messy equation all the time...

Second, he didn't like my inductive hypothesis. Assuming I defined P(n) (which is what he wanted) he wanted me to state the inductive hypothesis as such: "Assume P(1) and P(2) and ... and P(n-1) and P(n)". As far as I know, for induction, assuming only P(n) is enough. For this particular problem though I'm pretty sure assuming P(n-1) and P(n) is necessary and sufficient (granted I wrote it out the long way and assumed F(n) > .01(3/2)^n and F(n-1) > .01(3/2)^(n-1), that is instead of using the whole P(n) [censored])

Third, he wants all inductive proofs to end with "P(1) and .... and P(n) => P(n+1), and this holds for all n. By proof of induction for all n > 1, P(n). Q.E.D." He pretty much wants that word for word written at the end of all induction proofs. He actually even said, as long as you wrote that down, you will get 1 or 2 points.

Anyway, I personally think most of what he said was bullcrap, what are your thoughts?
Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.