Improved bounds and new techniques for Davenport - Schinzel sequences and their generalizations

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

44 Scopus citations

Abstract

We present several new results regarding λs(n), the maximum length of a Davenport - Schinzel sequence of order s on n distinct symbols. First, we prove that λs(n) ≤n·2(1/t!)α(n)t + O(α(n) t-1) for s≥4 even, and λs(n)·n 2(1/t)α(n)t log2 α(n) + O(α(n)t) for s≥3 odd, where t = ⌊(s-2)/2⌋, and α(n) denotes the inverse Ackermann function. The previous upper bounds, by Agarwal et al. [1989], had a leading coefficient of 1 instead of 1/t! in the exponent. The bounds for even s are now tight up to lower-order terms in the exponent. These new bounds result from a small improvement on the technique of Agarwal et al. More importantly, we also present a new technique for deriving upper bounds for λs(n). This new technique is very similar to the one we applied to the problem of stabbing interval chains [Alon et al. 2008]. With this new technique we: (1) re-derive the upper bound of λ3(n)≤2n α(n) + O(n√α(n)) (first shown by Klazar [1999]); (2) re-derive our own new upper bounds for general s and (3) obtain improved upper bounds for the generalized Davenport - Schinzel sequences considered by Adamec et al. [1992]. Regarding lower bounds, we show that λ3(n)≥2n α(n) - O(n) (the previous lower bound (Sharir and Agarwal, 1995) had a coefficient of 1/2), so the coefficient 2 is tight. We also present a simpler variant of the construction of Agarwal et al. [1989] that achieves the known lower bounds of λs(n) ≥n·2(1/t!) α(n)t - O(α(n) t-1) for s≥4 even.

Original languageEnglish
Article number17
Number of pages44
JournalJournal of the ACM
Volume57
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Mar 2010
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Davenport-Schinzel sequence
  • Inverse Ackermann function
  • Lower envelope

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Improved bounds and new techniques for Davenport - Schinzel sequences and their generalizations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this