6
$\begingroup$

We are given a rectangle $R$ with sides lengths $r_1$ and $r_2$, contained in a square $S$, with sides lengths $s_1=s_2\ge r_1$ and $s_2=s_1\ge r_2$. $R$ and $S$ are axis-aligned in a cartesian plane $P$. With the following recursive random process, we select straight lines orthogonal to the sides of $R$ (and $S$), until $R$ is cut.

At each time step, we select one of the two axes of $P$ with probability $\tfrac12$. Let $a$ the axis selected. Thereafter a straight line $L$ is selected uniformly at random from the ones cutting $S$ and orthogonal to $a$. Let $S'$ and $S''$ be the two parts of $S$ generated by the cut of $L$. These two random steps are repeated until $R$ is cut by $L$, and each time $R$ is not cut, $S$ is transformed by removing its part (either $S'$ or $S''$) that does not contain $R$.


Question: Given the coordinates of the vertices of $R$ providing its position within $S$, what is the probability $p_i$ that it is eventually cut (at the end of the random process) by a line orthogonal to its sides with length $r_i$ for $i\in\{1,2\}$?

(For the sake of clarity, we obviously have $p_1=1-p_2$.).

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If you put the rectangle in the lower left hand corner, as in J O'Rourke's first picture, the process of cutting either side by itself is the well-known stick breaking process. The number of tries until you cut the side on the y axis is about -log(r_1/s_1), and similarly for the side on the x axis. It seems to me that the probability of hitting one side first is likely to depend on those quantities. I haven't tried to make a proof out of this. $\endgroup$ – mike Aug 3 '20 at 13:40
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your comment @mike. I see your point. Would you have any suggestion about what happens then when the rectangle is not positioned in a corner of the square? $\endgroup$ – Penelope Benenati Aug 3 '20 at 17:31
1
$\begingroup$

I wonder if the probability is dependent only on $r_i$, or also dependent on the placement of $R$ within $S$? In these two examples,


      
it takes an average of $2.70$ steps to reach slicing $R$ on the left, but $3.16$ steps on the right.

I realize I'm ignoring your condition that $s_i \gg r_i$.
Added 4Aug2020. I include below some simulation data that might help a theoretical investigation. Here are two examples where $R = 0.2 \times 0.1$ in a unit square $S$.
      
On the left, after one million trials, the probability that the long side of $R$ is sliced was $0.591$. On the right, the probability was $0.622$.
$\endgroup$
12
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your comment Joseph. In my opinion the required probability is independent of the placement of $R$ within $S$, and is independent of the number of time steps to reach slicing R, but I might be wrong. $\endgroup$ – Penelope Benenati Aug 2 '20 at 10:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PenelopeBenenati: Re $S$ a rectangle: $S$ is a rectangle after the first step. $\endgroup$ – Joseph O'Rourke Aug 2 '20 at 11:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PenelopeBenenati: I think I finally understand your question. $R$ will eventually be cut. You are seeking the probability that it is cut on the long side vs the short side, the $r_1$ side vs the $r_2$ side. $\endgroup$ – Joseph O'Rourke Aug 2 '20 at 13:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PenelopeBenenati: Ignoring the $s_i \gg r_i$ condition, simulations suggest: (1) the conjecture is not precisely true; (2) the probability depends on the position of $R$ within $S$. But (a) this is from simulations, and (b) still your conjecture may hold for $s_i \gg r_i$. $\endgroup$ – Joseph O'Rourke Aug 2 '20 at 14:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you again Joseph for your comments. Based on them I have now rephrased the question, which is finally much more significant. $\endgroup$ – Penelope Benenati Aug 4 '20 at 16:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.