Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Post History

66%
+2 −0
Q&A organizing a library

posted 2y ago by r~~‭  ·  edited 2y ago by r~~‭

Answer
#2: Post edited by user avatar r~~‭ · 2022-09-13T02:19:44Z (over 2 years ago)
  • $2^{n-1}-1$ is a lower bound on the maximum, at least. For $n$ books, if you start with the ordering $n, 1, 2, \ldots, n - 1$ (I'm following your convention of 1-indexing the books), then the books could be reordered via the sequence $S_n$ defined as follows:
  • $$
  • \begin{align}
  • S_1 &= () \\\\
  • S_{n + 1} &= ([S_{n} + 1], 1, [S_{n} + 1])
  • \end{align}
  • $$
  • (Here $[S_n + 1]$ means to include the sequence $S_n$, adding 1 to each element.)
  • I'll walk through $n = 4$, where $S_4 = (3, 2, 3, 1, 3, 2, 3)$:
  • ```
  • 4 1 2 3 (choose 3)
  • 4 1 3 2 (choose 2)
  • 4 2 1 3 (choose 3)
  • 4 2 3 1 (choose 1)
  • 1 4 2 3 (choose 3)
  • 1 4 3 2 (choose 2)
  • 1 2 4 3 (choose 3)
  • 1 2 3 4
  • ```
  • It should be clear that the length of $S_n$ is $2^{n-1} - 1$. Slightly less clear is why this strategy is always valid, though an inductive argument should be within reach.
  • I don't know if this is optimal, though.
  • $2^{n-1}-1$ is a lower bound on the maximum, at least. For $n$ books, if you start with the ordering $n, 1, 2, \ldots, n - 1$ (I'm following your convention of 1-indexing the books), then the books could be reordered via the sequence $S_n$ defined as follows:
  • $$
  • \begin{align}
  • S_1 &= () \\\\
  • S_{n + 1} &= ([S_{n} + 1], 1, [S_{n} + 1])
  • \end{align}
  • $$
  • (Here $[S_n + 1]$ means to include the sequence $S_n$, adding 1 to each element.)
  • I'll walk through $n = 4$, where $S_4 = (3, 2, 3, 1, 3, 2, 3)$:
  • ```
  • 4 1 2 3 (choose 3)
  • 4 1 3 2 (choose 2)
  • 4 2 1 3 (choose 3)
  • 4 2 3 1 (choose 1)
  • 1 4 2 3 (choose 3)
  • 1 4 3 2 (choose 2)
  • 1 2 4 3 (choose 3)
  • 1 2 3 4
  • ```
  • It should be clear that the length of $S_n$ is $2^{n-1} - 1$. Slightly less clear is why this strategy is always valid, though an inductive argument should be within reach.
  • I don't know if this is the worst case, though.
#1: Initial revision by user avatar r~~‭ · 2022-09-13T02:18:18Z (over 2 years ago)
$2^{n-1}-1$ is a lower bound on the maximum, at least. For $n$ books, if you start with the ordering $n, 1, 2, \ldots, n - 1$ (I'm following your convention of 1-indexing the books), then the books could be reordered via the sequence $S_n$ defined as follows:
$$
\begin{align}
S_1 &= () \\\\
S_{n + 1} &= ([S_{n} + 1], 1, [S_{n} + 1])
\end{align}
$$

(Here $[S_n + 1]$ means to include the sequence $S_n$, adding 1 to each element.)

I'll walk through $n = 4$, where $S_4 = (3, 2, 3, 1, 3, 2, 3)$:

```
4 1 2 3 (choose 3)
4 1 3 2 (choose 2)
4 2 1 3 (choose 3)
4 2 3 1 (choose 1)
1 4 2 3 (choose 3)
1 4 3 2 (choose 2)
1 2 4 3 (choose 3)
1 2 3 4
```

It should be clear that the length of $S_n$ is $2^{n-1} - 1$. Slightly less clear is why this strategy is always valid, though an inductive argument should be within reach.

I don't know if this is optimal, though.