The Fibonacci Sequence and Schreier-Zeckendorf Sets
Hung Viet Chu

TL;DR
This paper explores novel connections between Schreier sets, Zeckendorf representations, and the Fibonacci sequence, providing multiple counting methods, recurrence relations, and bijections to deepen understanding of these combinatorial structures.
Contribution
It introduces four new ways to generate Fibonacci numbers through counting Schreier sets and establishes recurrence relations and bijections linking these sets to Fibonacci properties.
Findings
C_n = F_{n+2} for weak-Schreier sets
E_n = F_{n+2} for Zeckendorf subsets
New recurrence relations among Schreier-Zeckendorf sets
Abstract
A finite subset of the natural numbers is weak-Schreier if , strong-Schreier if , and maximal if . Let be the number of weak-Schreier sets with being the largest element and denote the Fibonacci sequence. A finite set is said to be Zeckendorf if it does not contain two consecutive natural numbers. Let be the number of Zeckendorf subsets of . It is well-known that . In this paper, we first show four other ways to generate the Fibonacci sequence from counting Schreier sets. For example, let be the number of weak-Schreier subsets of . Then . To understand why , we provide a bijective mapping to prove the equality directly. Next, we prove linear recurrence relations among the number of Schreier-Zeckendorf sets. Lastly, we discover…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
Topicssemigroups and automata theory · Advanced Combinatorial Mathematics · Advanced Mathematical Identities
**The Fibonacci Sequence and Schreier-Zeckendorf Sets
** Hùng Việt Chu
Department of Mathematics
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Champaign, IL 61820
USA
Abstract
A finite subset of the natural numbers is weak-Schreier if , strong-Schreier if , and maximal if . Let be the number of weak-Schreier sets with being the largest element and denote the Fibonacci sequence. A finite set is said to be Zeckendorf if it does not contain two consecutive natural numbers. Let be the number of Zeckendorf subsets of . It is well-known that . In this paper, we first show four other ways to generate the Fibonacci sequence from counting Schreier sets. For example, let be the number of weak-Schreier subsets of . Then . To understand why , we provide a bijective mapping to prove the equality directly. Next, we prove linear recurrence relations among the number of Schreier-Zeckendorf sets. Lastly, we discover the Fibonacci sequence by counting the number of subsets of such that two consecutive elements in increasing order always differ by an odd number.
1 Background and main results
Let the Fibonacci sequence be , , and for all . We only concern ourselves with finite subsets of natural numbers greater than [math] and use for the set . We define a set to be
- •
weak-Schreier if ,
- •
strong-Schreier if and
- •
maximal if ,
where is the cardinality of set . Schreier sets are named after Schreier who defined them to solve a problem in Banach space theory in 1930 [11]. These sets were also independently discovered in combinatorics and are connected to Ramsey-type theorems for subsets of . For each , let be the number of weak-Schreier sets with being the largest element. In notation,
[TABLE]
The first few values of are ; indeed, Bird showed that for all [1]. If we look at either strong-Schreier sets or maximal sets instead, we can also generate the Fibonacci sequence. Let
- •
be the number of strong-Schreier sets with ,
- •
be the number of maximal sets with ,
- •
be the number of weak-Schreier subsets of (including the empty set),
- •
be the number of strong-Schreier subsets of (including the empty set).
For our sequence and , we relax the condition about the maximum of our sets. Clearly, for each , , and .
Theorem 1**.**
For each , we have , , and
The Fibonacci representation of natural numbers was first studied by Ostrowski [10] and Lekkerkerker [9]. In 1972, Zeckendorf proved that every positive integer can be uniquely written as a sum of non-consecutive Fibonacci numbers [12]. Since then, many papers have generalized this result and explored properties of the Zeckendorf decomposition: see [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9]. We instead focus on the important requirement for uniqueness of the Zeckendorf decomposition; that is, our set contains no two consecutive Fibonacci numbers. We give the same definition for natural numbers.
Definition 2**.**
A finite set of natural numbers is Zeckendorf if the set does not contain two consecutive natural numbers.
Let be the number of subsets of that satisfy the Zeckendorf condition. It is well-known that .
Two different ways of counting subsets of give the same number; that is, . To understand the connection, we construct a bijective mapping to show that directly. Our proof is independent of the fact that and thus, provides insight into the seemingly mysterious equality.
Theorem 3**.**
For each , .
Next, a natural question is about sequences formed by the number of sets that satisfy both the Schreier and the Zeckendorf conditions. In particular, we say that a set satisfies the -Zeckendorf condition if two arbitrary numbers in the set are at least apart. We discover linear recurrence relations among the number of sets satisfying both the Schreier and the -Zeckendorf conditions.
For each , let be the number of subsets of that
- (1)
satisfy the -Zeckendorf condition;
- (2)
contain ; and
- (3)
are weak-Schreier.
Theorem 4**.**
Fix . We have
[TABLE]
Using the exact same argument as in the proof of Theorem 4, we can also deduce the following theorems regarding strong and maximal Schreier sets. For each , let be the number of subsets of that (1) satisfy the -Zeckendorf condition, (2) contain , and (3) are strong-Schreier.
Theorem 5**.**
Fix . We have
[TABLE]
For each , let be the number of subsets of that
- (1)
satisfy the -Zeckendorf condition;
- (2)
contain ; and
- (3)
are maximal.
Theorem 6**.**
Fix . We have
[TABLE]
We give the following definition that is useful for the statement of our last result.
Definition 7**.**
Let () for some . The difference set of is . The empty set and a set with exactly one element do not have a difference set.
We end with the following small result.
Theorem 8**.**
Fix . The number of subsets of
that contain and whose difference sets contain only odd numbers is , 2. 2.
whose difference sets contain only odd numbers (the empty set and sets with exactly one element vacuously satisfy this requirement) is .
2 Proof of Theorem 1
Proof of Theorem 1.
We first prove item (1). Simple computation gives , , , , and . It suffices to prove that for . Fix and let us find a formula for . The minimum number in our sets can take values from to . For each value of , there are numbers strictly between and . Because our sets are strong-Schreier, they contain at most numbers out of these numbers. Hence, our formula for is
[TABLE]
Note that the number in our formula accounts for the set . It remains to show that or equivalently, for . We have
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
The last equality is because for each , we have . Hence, and we are done.
Next, we prove item (2), which follows immediately from item (1). We know that
[TABLE]
We prove item (3). Fix . We have
[TABLE]
as desired. The number accounts for the empty set. The fact that is due to Lucas [8, p. 4].
Similarly, we prove item (4). Fix . We have
[TABLE]
We complete our proof of Theorem 1. ∎
Let be the number of weak-Schreier sets as subsets of with an even maximum.
Corollary 9**.**
For each ,
[TABLE]
Proof.
We have
[TABLE]
The number accounts for the empty set.
If is even,
[TABLE]
If is odd,
[TABLE]
∎
Let be the number of strong-Schreier sets as subsets of with an odd maximum.
Corollary 10**.**
For each ,
[TABLE]
Proof.
We have
[TABLE]
If is even,
[TABLE]
If is odd,
[TABLE]
∎
3 Proof of Theorem 3 — Explanation of the mysterious identity
Recall that is the number of weak-Schreier sets as subsets of , while is the number of subsets of that do not contain two consecutive numbers. At the first glance, and are little related, so it is surprising to see that for all .
For each , let denote the set of weak-Schreier sets as subsets of and let denote the set of subsets of that do not contain two consecutive numbers. In this section, we construct a bijective function to prove that .
Proof of Theorem 3.
Fix . Let () be a weak-Schreier subset of . Our mapping acts on as follows
[TABLE]
Define . To show that is well-defined, we show that is in . Because is weak-Schreier, . Hence,
[TABLE]
Let for . If , then is clearly in . If , then for each , we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, . So, is well-defined.
Next, we prove that is injective. Suppose that . Let and , where and . Because
[TABLE]
we know that implies for all . Hence, , which shows that . Therefore, is injective.
Finally, we prove that is surjective. Let be chosen, where . We claim that
[TABLE]
satisfies and . Because do not contain two consecutive numbers, we know that
[TABLE]
Hence, .
We have shown that is both well-defined and bijective. Therefore, or , as desired. ∎
Remark 11*.*
We would like to discuss the motivation for the bijection used in the proof of Theorem 3. Let be a Schreier set. The map serves to increase the gap between adjacent elements of by , thus fulfilling the Zeckendorf condition that adjacent elements differ by at least 2. Furthermore, the weak-Schreier condition that ensures that the resulting set is in .
4 Proof of Theorem 4
Before we prove Theorem 4, we need a simple proposition.
Proposition 12**.**
For , the following claims hold.
If \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-k-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}, then \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-1}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}+1. 2. 2.
If \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}>\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-k-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}, then \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-1}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}<\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}+1. 3. 3.
If \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-k-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}, then \frac{n-k-2}{k+1}=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}.
Proof.
We prove claim (1). We have
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Next, we prove claim (2). We have
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Lastly, we prove claim (3). Write for some . Then
[TABLE]
If , then \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}=p+1>p=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-k-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}, a contradiction. So, , implying that \frac{n-k-2}{k+1}=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}. ∎
The following lemma is from [7, Lemma 2.1] by Kologlǔ et al.
Lemma 13**.**
The number of solutions to with (each a non-negative integer) is .
Proof of Theorem 4.
Fix . We now find a formula for for all . Fix . Suppose that the set satisfies all of our requirements. (For , we have the set .) In particular,
, 2. 2.
and .
Note that
[TABLE]
By Lemma 13, the number of sets satisfying Equation (1) is
[TABLE]
Therefore, the number of sets containing that are -Zeckendorf and weak-Schreier is
[TABLE]
The number accounts for the set and we only let run up to \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-1}{k+1}\big{\rfloor} to make sure that . It can be easily verified that for because \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-1}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}=0 for . It suffices to show that for , . Equivalently,
[TABLE]
Equivalently, noting that the term cancels with the term in the left hand side summation
[TABLE]
We can simplify Equation (3) further by applying the binomial coefficient recurrence
[TABLE]
Reindexing in the first summation, we have
[TABLE]
Subtract the first summation from both sides to have
[TABLE]
We now prove that Equation (4) is correct, which implies that Equation (2) is correct.
Case 1: \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-k-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}<\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}. Then \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}+1>\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-1}{k+1}\big{\rfloor} by Proposition 12. Therefore, two sides of Equation (4) are identically [math].
Case 2: \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-k-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}. Then \big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}+1=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-1}{k+1}\big{\rfloor} and \frac{n-k-2}{k+1}=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor} by Proposition 12. Therefore, the left side of Equation (4) is
[TABLE]
because \frac{n-k-2}{k+1}=\big{\lfloor}\frac{n-2}{k+1}\big{\rfloor}. Similarly, the right side is also equal to .
In both cases, Equation (4) is correct. This completes our proof. ∎
5 Proof of Theorem 8—A new way to generate the Fibonacci sequence
Proof of Theorem 8.
First, we prove item (1). Let be the number of subsets of that contain and whose difference sets contain only odd numbers.
Base cases: For , we have to be the only subset of that satisfies our requirement. So, . For , we have and to be the only two subsets of that satisfy our requirement. So, .
Inductive hypothesis: Suppose that there exists such that for all , . We show that . Let denote the set of subsets of that satisfy our requirement. Observe that unioning a set in (for ) with produces a set in and any set in is of the form of a set in plus the element . Therefore,
[TABLE]
The number accounts for the set . If is odd,
[TABLE]
If is even,
[TABLE]
In both cases, we have . Therefore, , as desired.
Next, we prove item (2). Let be the number of subsets of whose difference sets contain only odd numbers is (the empty set and sets with exactly one element vacuously satisfy this requirement). Note that by definition of and , we have
[TABLE]
as desired. (The before the first summation accounts for the empty set.) ∎
6 Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank the anonymous referee and the editor for various helpful comments that clarify several points made in this paper. Thanks to Kevin Beanland at Washington and Lee University for useful comments on earlier drafts.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] A. Bird, Schreier sets and the Fibonacci sequence, 2012. Available at https://outofthenormmaths.wordpress.com/2012/05/13/jozef-schreier-schreier-sets-and-the-fibonacci-sequence/ .
- 2[2] E. Burger, D. Clyde, C. Colbert, G. Shin, and Z. Wang, Canonical diophantine representations of natural numbers with respect to quadratic “bases”, J. Number Theory 133 (2013), 1372–1388.
- 3[3] O. Beckwith, A. Bower, L. Gaudet, R. Insoft, S. Li, S. Miller, and P. Tosteson, The average gap distribution for generalized Zeckendorf decompositions, Fibonacci Quart. 51 (2013), 13–27.
- 4[4] A. Best, P. Dynes, X. Edelsbrunner, B. Mc Donald, S. Miller, C. Turnage-Butterbaugh, and M. Weinstein, Benford behavior of Zeckendorf decompositions, Fibonacci Quart. 52 (2014), 35–46.
- 5[5] P. Demontigny, T. Do, A. Kulkarni, S. Miller, D. Moon, and U. Varma, Generalizing Zeckendorf’s theorem to f 𝑓 f -decompositions, J. Number Theory 141 (2014), 136–158.
- 6[6] T. J. Keller, Generalizations of Zeckendorf’s theorem, Fibonacci Quart. 10 (1972), 95–102.
- 7[7] G. S. Kopp, M. Kologlu, S. Miller, and Y. Wang, On the number of summands in Zeckendorf decompositions, Fibonacci Quart. 49 (2011), 116–130.
- 8[8] E. Lucas. Theorie Des Nombres , Gauthier-Villars, 1891.
