Freshmark
← Back to all writing

Reverse Recursion and Absolute-Value Sequence Problems

Question (I) enumerates the possible values of a4a_4; question (II) proves that if there is a maximum value, it must contain 00; question (III) uses proof by contradiction to prove that the positive term sequence has no upper bound: assuming there is an upper bound MM, we can derive two adjacent items, one large and one small. After three steps of recursion, the large term increases and the small term 2times2\\times is exceeded. Continuous repetition will eventually exceed MM, contradictory.

(This question is worth 15 points in total) It is known that the infinite sequence {an}\{a_n\} satisfies an=max{an+1,an+2}min{an+1,an+2} (n=1,2,3,)a_n = \max\{a_{n+1}, a_{n+2}\} - \min\{a_{n+1}, a_{n+2}\} \ (n=1,2,3,\cdots), where max{x,y}\max\{x,y\} represents the largest number in x,yx,y, and min{x,y}\min\{x,y\} represents the smallest number in x,yx,y.

(I) Write all possible values of a4a_4 when a1=1,a2=2a_1=1, a_2=2.

(II) If the term in the sequence {an}\{a_n\} has a maximum value, prove: 0 is the term in the sequence {an}\{a_n\}.

(III) If an>0 (n=1,2,3,)a_n>0\ (n=1,2,3,\cdots), is there a positive real number MM such that for any positive integer nn, there is anMa_n \leq M? If it exists, write down an MM that satisfies the conditions; if it does not exist, explain the reason.

(I)(II) is relatively simple, readers are asked to prove it themselves.

The original recursion is equivalent to an=an+1an+2a_n=|a_{n+1}-a_{n+2}|. It can be seen that pushing forward from the back (terms with large subscripts) is unique, but it is difficult to push backward from the front (terms with small subscripts). We think "backwards".

From the extreme point of view, the overall trend of the sequence is probably increasing, and there must be some items tending to M and other items tending to 0. Otherwise, if they all tend to M, it will lead to the an=an+1an+2a_n=|a_{n+1}-a_{n+2}| contradiction. We use this as the starting point for writing (III). an+2=an+1±ana_{n+2}=a_{n+1}\pm a_n (III) does not exist. Assuming that such M exists, we might as well set M as the tightest upper bound:

First, ak<M\forall a_k\lt M, otherwise if ak=M,max{ak+1,ak+2}>Ma_k=M,max\{a_{k+1},a_{k+2}\}\gt M, it is contradictory.

aN=Mm,m<M2\exist a_N=M-m,m\lt \frac{M}{2}.

The following shows that there must be two items before and after, the former term is not less than M-m, and the latter term is not greater than m.

Classify aN+1a_{N+1}:

  1. aN+1[m,Mm]a_{N+1}\in [m,M-m], then if aN+2=aN+1aN0a_{N+2}=a_{N+1}-a_N\leq 0, this leads to a contradiction. If aN+2=aN+1+anMa_{N+2}=a_{N+1}+a_n\geq M, this leads to a contradiction
  2. aN+1(Mm,M)a_{N+1}\in (M-m,M), if aN+2=aN+1+an>2M2m>Ma_{N+2}=a_{N+1}+a_n\gt 2M-2m\gt M, is contradictory. If aN+2=aN+1ana_{N+2}=a_{N+1}-a_n, then aN+2<ma_{N+2}\lt m. At this time, select aN+1,aN+2a_{N+1},a_{N+2}
  3. aN+1(0,m)a_{N+1}\in (0,m), now select aN,aN+1a_N,a_{N+1}

Let the selected two items be atMm,at+1m<at(i)a_t\geq M-m,a_{t+1}\leq m\lt a_t(i) and proceed backwards.

There must be at+2=at+1+ata_{t+2}=a_{t+1}+a_{t}, otherwise there must be at+2=at+1at<0a_{t+2}=a_{t+1}-a_{t}\lt 0, resulting in a contradiction.

The following is classified according to at+3a_{t+3}:

  1. at+3=at+2at+1=ata_{t+3}=a_{t+2}-a_{t+1}=a_t, if at+4=at+3+at+2a_{t+4}=a_{t+3}+a_{t+2}, then at+4=2at+at+1>2at2(Mm)>Ma_{t+4}=2a_t+a_{t+1}\gt 2a_t\geq 2(M-m)\gt M, it is contradictory; if at+4=at+3at+2=at(at+1+at)=at+1<0a_{t+4}=a_{t+3}-a_{t+2}=a_t-(a_{t+1}+a_{t})=-a_{t+1}\lt 0, it is also contradictory.
  2. at+3=at+2+at+1a_{t+3}=a_{t+2}+a_{t+1}, if at+4=at+3+at+2a_{t+4}=a_{t+3}+a_{t+2}, then at+4=2at+2+at+1>2at2(Mm)>Ma_{t+4}=2a_{t+2}+a_{t+1}\gt 2a_t\geq 2(M-m)\gt M, which leads to a contradiction; if at+4=at+3at+2=at+1a_{t+4}=a_{t+3}-a_{t+2}=a_{t+1}, then at+3,at+4a_{t+3},a_{t+4} returns to situation i, that is, at+5=at+3+at+4a_{t+5}=a_{t+3}+a_{t+4} and at+4=at+1a_{t+4}=a_{t+1}.

Then we can get:

  1. at+1=at+4=at+7=...=at+3k+1a_{t+1}=a_{t+4}=a_{t+7}=...=a_{t+3k+1}
  2. at+2=at+at+1,at+5=at+3+at+4,...,at+3k+2=a3k+a3k+1a_{t+2}=a_t+a_{t+1},a_{t+5}=a_{t+3}+a_{t+4},...,a_{t+3k+2}=a_{3k}+a_{3k+1}
  3. at+3k+1=at+3k+at+3k1a_{t+3k+1}=a_{t+3k}+a_{t+3k-1}

By analogy, at+3k=at+2kat+1(nN)a_{t+3k}=a_t+2ka_{t+1}(n\in N^*), as long as k is chosen to be large enough, at+3k>Ma_{t+3k}\gt M can be used to derive a contradiction.

Q.E.D

(III) Answer (organized by DeepSeek)

Suppose there exists a positive real number MM such that for all nn there is anMa_n \le M. Since all terms are positive, let MM be the minimum upper bound (upper bound), then M>0M>0 and each term is less than MM (otherwise if a term is equal to MM, from (II) there will be 0, which is a contradiction).

Taking 0<m<M/20 < m < M/2, defined by the supremum, there exists NN such that aN>Mma_N > M - m. Classify aN+1a_{N+1}:

  • If aN+1[m,Mm]a_{N+1} \in [m, M-m], then get from aN>MmaN+1a_N > M-m \ge a_{N+1} aN+2=aN+1±aNa_{N+2} = a_{N+1} \pm a_N: Take “-” to get aN+20a_{N+2}\le 0, take “++” to get aN+2Ma_{N+2}\ge M, both are contradictory.
  • If aN+1(Mm,M)a_{N+1} \in (M-m, M), then “++” gives aN+2>2(Mm)>Ma_{N+2} > 2(M-m) > M, which is a contradiction; only “-” can be taken to get 0<aN+2<m0 < a_{N+2} < m. This time order t=N+1t = N+1.
  • If aN+1(0,m)a_{N+1} \in (0, m), then let t=Nt = N.

So there are two adjacent terms atMma_t \ge M-m, at+1ma_{t+1} \le m and at>at+1a_t > a_{t+1}.

Recursive Analysis:

Starting from ata_t, every three items in the sequence show a "large or small" trend:

From at=at+1at+2a_t = |a_{t+1} - a_{t+2}| and at>at+1a_t > a_{t+1}, there must be at+2=at+at+1a_{t+2} = a_t + a_{t+1}. Then we get two possibilities from at+1=at+2at+3a_{t+1} = |a_{t+2} - a_{t+3}|:

  • at+3=at+2+at+1=at+2at+1a_{t+3} = a_{t+2} + a_{t+1} = a_t + 2a_{t+1}
  • at+3=at+2at+1=ata_{t+3} = a_{t+2} - a_{t+1} = a_t

If at+3=ata_{t+3}=a_t is taken, the next step is obtained from at+2=at+3at+4a_{t+2}=|a_{t+3}-a_{t+4}| at+4=at+3+at+2=2at+at+1>Ma_{t+4} = a_{t+3}+a_{t+2}=2a_t+a_{t+1}>M (Contradiction) or at+4=at+3at+2=at+1<0a_{t+4}=a_{t+3}-a_{t+2}=-a_{t+1}<0 (Contradiction). Therefore only at+3=at+2at+1a_{t+3}=a_t+2a_{t+1} can be taken.

Next, we get from at+2=at+3at+4a_{t+2}=|a_{t+3}-a_{t+4}|: -at+4=at+3+at+2=2at+3at+1>Ma_{t+4}=a_{t+3}+a_{t+2}=2a_t+3a_{t+1}>M (Contradiction)

  • at+4=at+3at+2=at+1a_{t+4}=a_{t+3}-a_{t+2}=a_{t+1}

Taking at+4=at+1a_{t+4}=a_{t+1} returns to the decimal at+1a_{t+1}, and the new large number is at+3=at+2at+1a_{t+3}=a_t+2a_{t+1}.

Repeat the above process, increasing the maximum number by 2at+12a_{t+1} every three steps, that is: at+3k=at+2kat+1(k=1,2,3,)a_{t+3k} = a_t + 2k a_{t+1} \quad (k=1,2,3,\dots) Taking k>Mat2at+1k > \dfrac{M - a_t}{2a_{t+1}}, then at+3k>Ma_{t+3k} > M is inconsistent with the upper bound MM. Therefore, the assumption does not hold, that is, there is no such MM.

Invisible things (standard answer)

A very Cthulhu way to prove it: (III) [Solution] There is no positive real number MM, so that for any positive integer nn, there is anMa_n \leqslant M. The reasons are as follows. Because an>0(nN)a_n > 0 (n \in \mathbf{N}^*), therefore anan+1(n=2,3,)a_n \neq a_{n+1} (n = 2, 3, \dots). Let the set S={nan>an+1,n1}S = \{n \mid a_n > a_{n+1}, n \geqslant 1\}. (1) If S={nan>an+1,n1}=S = \{n \mid a_n > a_{n+1}, n \geqslant 1\} = \varnothing, then a1a2,ai<ai+1(i=2,3,)a_1 \leqslant a_2, a_i < a_{i+1} (i = 2, 3, \dots). For any M>0M > 0, take n1=[Ma1]+2n_1 = \left[ \frac{M}{a_1} \right] + 2 (where [x][x] represents the largest integer not exceeding xx), Then when n>n1n > n_1, an=(anan1)+(an1an2)++(a3a2)+a2=an2+an3++a1+a2(n1)a1>Ma_n = (a_n - a_{n-1}) + (a_{n-1} - a_{n-2}) + \dots + (a_3 - a_2) + a_2 = a_{n-2} + a_{n-3} + \dots + a_1 + a_2 \geqslant (n - 1)a_1 > M. (2) If S={nan>an+1,n1}S = \{n \mid a_n > a_{n+1}, n \geqslant 1\} \neq \varnothing, and SS is a finite set, Suppose m=max{nan>an+1,n1}m = \max \{n \mid a_n > a_{n+1}, n \geqslant 1\}, then am+i<am+i+1(i=1,2,)a_{m+i} < a_{m+i+1} (i = 1, 2, \dots). For any M>0M > 0, take n2=[Mam+1]+m+1n_2 = \left[ \frac{M}{a_{m+1}} \right] + m + 1 (where [x][x] represents the largest integer not exceeding xx), Then when n>n2n > n_2, an=(anan1)+(an1an2)++(am+2am+1)+am+1=an2+an3++am+am+1>(nm)am+1>Ma_n = (a_n - a_{n-1}) + (a_{n-1} - a_{n-2}) + \dots + (a_{m+2} - a_{m+1}) + a_{m+1} = a_{n-2} + a_{n-3} + \dots + a_m + a_{m+1} > (n - m)a_{m+1} > M. (3) If S={nan>an+1,n1}S = \{n \mid a_n > a_{n+1}, n \geqslant 1\} \neq \varnothing, and SS is an infinite set, Let p1=min{nan>an+1,n1},pi+1=min{nan>an+1,n>pi}(i=1,2,)p_1 = \min \{n \mid a_n > a_{n+1}, n \geqslant 1\}, p_{i+1} = \min \{n \mid a_n > a_{n+1}, n > p_i\} (i = 1, 2, \dots). If pi+1pi=1p_{i+1} - p_i = 1, then api>api+1>api+2a_{p_i} > a_{p_i+1} > a_{p_i+2}. Also api<max(api+1,api+2)a_{p_i} < \max(a_{p_i+1}, a_{p_i+2}), a contradiction. So pi+1pi2(i=1,2,)p_{i+1} - p_i \geqslant 2 (i = 1, 2, \dots). Remember mi=api+1(i=1,2,)m_i = a_{p_i+1} (i = 1, 2, \dots). When pi+1pi=2p_{i+1} - p_i = 2, api>api+1,api+1<api+2,api+2>api+3a_{p_i} > a_{p_i+1}, a_{p_i+1} < a_{p_i+2}, a_{p_i+2} > a_{p_i+3}. Because api+1=api+2api+3a_{p_i+1} = a_{p_i+2} - a_{p_i+3}, therefore mi+1=api+1+1=api+2api+1=api>api+1=mim_{i+1} = a_{p_{i+1}+1} = a_{p_i+2} - a_{p_i+1} = a_{p_i} > a_{p_i+1} = m_i. When pi+1pi3p_{i+1} - p_i \geqslant 3, api>api+1,api+1<api+2<<api+1,api+1>api+1+1a_{p_i} > a_{p_i+1}, a_{p_i+1} < a_{p_i+2} < \dots < a_{p_{i+1}}, a_{p_{i+1}} > a_{p_{i+1}+1}. Because api+11=api+1api+1+1a_{p_{i+1}-1} = a_{p_{i+1}} - a_{p_{i+1}+1}, therefore mi+1=api+1+1=api+1api+11=api+12api+1=mim_{i+1} = a_{p_{i+1}+1} = a_{p_{i+1}} - a_{p_{i+1}-1} = a_{p_{i+1}-2} \geqslant a_{p_i+1} = m_i. So mimi+1(i=1,2,)m_i \leqslant m_{i+1} (i = 1, 2, \dots). Because api+1=api+1+2api+1+1a_{p_{i+1}} = a_{p_{i+1}+2} - a_{p_{i+1}+1}, So api+1+2=api+1+api+1+1=api+1+mi+1api+1+m1api+2+m1(i=1,2,)a_{p_{i+1}+2} = a_{p_{i+1}} + a_{p_{i+1}+1} = a_{p_{i+1}} + m_{i+1} \geqslant a_{p_{i+1}} + m_1 \geqslant a_{p_i+2} + m_1 (i = 1, 2, \dots). So api+1+2api+2m1(i=1,2,)a_{p_{i+1}+2} - a_{p_i+2} \geqslant m_1 (i = 1, 2, \dots), and ap1+2>ap1+1=m1a_{p_1+2} > a_{p_1+1} = m_1. For any M>0M > 0, Taking n3=[Mm1]+1n_3 = \left[ \frac{M}{m_1} \right] + 1 (where [x][x] represents the largest integer not exceeding xx), then when k>n3k > n_3, apk+2=(apk+2apk1+2)+(apk1+2apk2+2)++(ap2+2ap1+2)+ap1+2(k1)m1+ap1+2>km1>Ma_{p_k+2} = (a_{p_k+2} - a_{p_{k-1}+2}) + (a_{p_{k-1}+2} - a_{p_{k-2}+2}) + \dots + (a_{p_2+2} - a_{p_1+2}) + a_{p_1+2} \geqslant (k - 1)m_1 + a_{p_1+2} > km_1 > M. In summary, there is no positive real number MM, so that for any positive integer nn, there is anMa_n \leqslant M.