Timeline for Sturmian subword whose reverse is not a subword
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 5, 2016 at 14:44 | comment | added | Stéphane Laurent | Ok, sorry. This name came to my mind because my underlying problem would be easier without these words. Thank you for your answer, but I have not studied it yet. | |
| S Apr 5, 2016 at 3:10 | history | suggested | Nikita Sidorov |
Sturmians words are a part of combinatorics on words
|
|
| Apr 5, 2016 at 2:06 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Apr 5, 2016 at 3:10 | |||||
| Apr 4, 2016 at 19:37 | answer | added | Anthony Quas | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 4, 2016 at 19:01 | comment | added | Anthony Quas | I see. The definition is formally clear, but unintuitive to me. A word of length $2^n$ is bad if it can be non-trivially rearranged by switching the first and second halves. (the reason that I find this hard to parse is that I would use the word good to mean legal; and then your definition of a word $w=w_1w_2$ being bad is that both $w_1w_2$ and $w_2ws_1$ are "good"(!)). | |
| Apr 4, 2016 at 18:16 | comment | added | Stéphane Laurent | @AnthonyQuas $abbb$ is bad because its "reverse" $bbab \in {\cal L}_4$. Is my definition not clear ? | |
| Apr 4, 2016 at 17:28 | comment | added | Anthony Quas | What's bad about $abbb$? | |
| Apr 4, 2016 at 16:42 | answer | added | Ilya Bogdanov | timeline score: 2 | |
| Apr 4, 2016 at 14:44 | history | edited | Stéphane Laurent | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 202 characters in body
|
| Apr 4, 2016 at 14:37 | history | asked | Stéphane Laurent | CC BY-SA 3.0 |