Anonymous user
Talk:Fibonacci word: Difference between revisions
m
added a section header to the first topic to properly place the table-of-contents (TOC) --- (this happens more often than one would think).
mNo edit summary |
m (added a section header to the first topic to properly place the table-of-contents (TOC) --- (this happens more often than one would think).) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
== are you sure ... ==
Uh, are you sure that any of the Fibonacci words actually have rep-strings?
: It would seem not. I have replaced rep string with repeated substring.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 12:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Line 17 ⟶ 19:
::I have found an interesting paper http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/36/79/72/PDF/The_Fibonacci_word_fractal.pdf which suggests another interesting task [[Fibonacci word/fractal]].
::This paper constructs the Fibonacci word in a slightly different manner to the one I am used to, but which comes to the same thing but one iteration later. I have adopted this method for clarity when comparing rosetta code with the reference.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 12:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
== Why is the entropy 0.9594...? ==
As a matter of interest it might be worth mentioning that for the ''infinite'' Fibonacci word (0100101001001...), the relative frequency of <math>0</math> is <math>p = 1/\phi</math>, where <math>\phi</math> is the Golden Ratio ''(1+sqrt(5))/2'', and therefore the entropy is given exactly by the formula <math>h(p) = -p*log_{2}(p)-(1-p)*log_{2}(1-p)</math> (=0.9594187282227441991428630...).
| |||