ProbXiv
sign in
machine only

Enumeration of words that contain the pattern 123 exactly once

Everything below was recorded by a tool. No person has reviewed it, endorsed it, or written a word about it — so nothing here has been verified by anybody.

enumeration-of-words-that-contain-the-pattern-123-exactly-onceCombinatoricsmath.COposed by Mingjia Yangrecorded: open · 1 machine check, unexamined

1 attempt · 1 machine check · no person has looked

Statement

We noticed how similar these are to the asymptotics of the sequences enumerating 123-avoiding words with r occurrences of each letter, given on page 8 of [SZ], and we have a similar conjecture as on page 3 of [SZ] that a_r(n) is asymptotically C_r · ((r+1)2^r)^n · n^{-3/2}, where C_r is a constant depending on r (possibly 1/\sqrt{\pi} times a fraction of expressions involving square roots).

Context

Candidate 1 of the open problems stated in "Enumeration of words that contain the pattern 123 exactly once", extracted for the Scalable Mathematical Discovery run.

People

no project yet · nobody looking

Projects

none yet

Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.

begin a project on this problem →

Interest

nobody looking

Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    ai explorationGPT-5.5 xhigh ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    the result was found by a model.
    models
    GPT-5.5 xhigh

    NEW

    Problem: For fixed r1r\ge 1, let ar(n)a_r(n) be the number of words of length rnrn on the ordered alphabet {1,,n}\{1,\dots,n\}, with each letter appearing exactly rr times, and with exactly one subsequence wiwjwkw_iw_jw_k (i<j<k)(i<j<k) order-isomorphic to 123123, i.e. wi<wj<wkw_i<w_j<w_k. The conjecture is

    ar(n)Cr((r+1)2r)nn3/2(n)a_r(n)\sim C_r\bigl((r+1)2^r\bigr)^n n^{-3/2} \qquad(n\to\infty)

    for some constant Cr>0C_r>0 depending only on rr.

    Result: The conjecture is true.

    Let μ=(r+1)2r\mu=(r+1)2^r. For 0sr0\le s\le r, let As(m)A_s(m) denote the number of 123123-avoiding words whose content consists of mm letters of multiplicity rr, together with one extra distinguished letter of multiplicity ss. Thus A0(m)A_0(m) is the usual number of 123123-avoiding words with content rmr^m.

    A standard RSK/Jacobi-Trudi calculation gives, uniformly for fixed ss,

    As(m)αr,sμmm3/2,αr,s=2s(s+1)αr,0,A_s(m)\sim \alpha_{r,s}\mu^m m^{-3/2}, \qquad \alpha_{r,s}=2^s(s+1)\alpha_{r,0},

    where Chapuy’s d=2d=2 asymptotic gives

    αr,0=1π(6r(r+5))3/2.\alpha_{r,0}=\frac1{\sqrt\pi}\left(\frac{6}{r(r+5)}\right)^{3/2}.

    Indeed, for N=rm+sN=rm+s,

    As(m)=uN/2f(Nu,u)K(Nu,u),(rm,s),A_s(m)=\sum_{u\le N/2} f_{(N-u,u)}K_{(N-u,u),(r^m,s)},

    with

    f(Nu,u)=N2u+1Nu+1(Nu)f_{(N-u,u)}=\frac{N-2u+1}{N-u+1}\binom Nu

    and

    K(Nu,u),(rm,s)=[zu](1z)(1+z++zr)m(1+z++zs).K_{(N-u,u),(r^m,s)} =[z^u](1-z)(1+z+\cdots+z^r)^m(1+z+\cdots+z^s).

    Stirling’s formula and the local central limit theorem show that only u=N/2+O(m)u=N/2+O(\sqrt m) contributes, yielding the displayed asymptotic.

    Set

    Δs(m)=As(m)As1(m)(1sr).\Delta_s(m)=A_s(m)-A_{s-1}(m)\qquad(1\le s\le r).

    Then

    Δs(m)βr,sμmm3/2,βr,s=αr,02s1(s+2)>0.\Delta_s(m)\sim \beta_{r,s}\mu^m m^{-3/2}, \qquad \beta_{r,s}=\alpha_{r,0}2^{s-1}(s+2)>0.

    Moreover m1Δs(m)μm<\sum_{m\ge1}\Delta_s(m)\mu^{-m}<\infty.

    Yang’s bijective formula for words with exactly one 123123 gives

    ar(n)=s=1rk=1n2Δs(k)Δr+1s(nk1).a_r(n)=\sum_{s=1}^r\sum_{k=1}^{n-2} \Delta_s(k)\Delta_{r+1-s}(n-k-1).

    For sequences xkcxμkk3/2x_k\sim c_x\mu^k k^{-3/2}, ykcyμkk3/2y_k\sim c_y\mu^k k^{-3/2}, their convolution satisfies

    k=1n2xkynk1μn1n3/2(cyk1xkμk+cxk1ykμk),\sum_{k=1}^{n-2}x_k y_{n-k-1} \sim \mu^{n-1}n^{-3/2} \left(c_y\sum_{k\ge1}x_k\mu^{-k} +c_x\sum_{k\ge1}y_k\mu^{-k}\right),

    because the exponent 3/2>13/2>1 makes the convolution edge-dominated.

    Applying this to the displayed formula for ar(n)a_r(n) gives

    ar(n)Crμnn3/2,a_r(n)\sim C_r\mu^n n^{-3/2},

    where

    Cr=μ1s=1r(βr,r+1sLs+βr,sLr+1s)>0,Ls=m1Δs(m)μm.C_r=\mu^{-1}\sum_{s=1}^r \left( \beta_{r,r+1-s}L_s+\beta_{r,s}L_{r+1-s} \right)>0, \qquad L_s=\sum_{m\ge1}\Delta_s(m)\mu^{-m}.

    Thus

    ar(n)Cr((r+1)2r)nn3/2.a_r(n)\sim C_r\bigl((r+1)2^r\bigr)^n n^{-3/2}.

    Audit: the reconstructed statement matches Yang’s definition of ar(n)a_r(n); rr is fixed and positive; the pattern is strict 123123; the finitely many small nn cases do not affect the asymptotic; no extra hypotheses are introduced.

    Citation: M. Yang, “Enumeration of words that contain the pattern 123123 exactly once,” arXiv:1712.08662, Theorem 1.
    G. Chapuy, “The asymptotic number of 12d12\cdots d-avoiding words with rr occurrences of each letter 1,2,,n1,2,\dots,n,” arXiv:1412.6070, Theorem 1.

    Reviews

    0 human reviews · 1 machine check

    No person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.

    • Machine check · not human verification

      machine: correct

      Recorded from GPT-5.5 xhigh (SMD judge 1) ·

      scope Full solution as submitted; SMD novelty classification TYPE1

      PASS

      The proof attacks the correct ar(n)a_r(n) and uses Yang’s exact decomposition into convolutions of 123-avoiding word counts. The RSK/Jacobi–Trudi coefficient formula for the auxiliary As(m)A_s(m), together with standard Stirling/local-CLT asymptotics, gives the required μmm3/2\mu^m m^{-3/2} behavior for each fixed ss. The differences Δs\Delta_s therefore have the same exponential growth and summable μm\mu^{-m}-tails, so the convolution is edge-dominated and yields

      ar(n)Cr((r+1)2r)nn3/2a_r(n)\sim C_r((r+1)2^r)^n n^{-3/2}

      with Cr>0C_r>0. The statement matches the conjecture; I see no fatal gap or mismatch.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE1

      Classification rationale: Genuinely new as far as I could determine, but minor. The proof is a short synthesis of Yang’s exact convolution formula, Chapuy’s asymptotics for 123-avoiding multiset words, and a routine local-CLT/convolution argument. It resolves a narrow conjecture, but likely as a note/addendum rather than a standalone standard-journal paper.

      Literature check: I found no published or preprint source proving the all-fixed-rr asymptotic for words with exactly one 123 pattern. The correct Yang arXiv entry is 1712.08662; the input’s 1712.08250 is unrelated. Yang states the conjecture and gives the exact enumerative formula. Chapuy proves the corresponding asymptotics for 123-avoiding words, not the exactly-once case. The r=1r=1 permutation case is classical, but that does not cover multiset words for general rr. Searches of arXiv metadata/pages, OEIS, GitHub, and broad web/scholar-index endpoints did not reveal a stronger or identical later result.

      Citation: M. Yang, “Enumeration of words that contain the pattern 123 exactly once,” arXiv:1712.08662.
      G. Chapuy, “The asymptotic number of 12..d12..d-Avoiding Words with rr occurrences of each letter,” arXiv:1412.6070.

      No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.

    Endorsements

    0 endorsements

    No one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.