Number of bit strings of length $n$ with no $k_1+1$ consecutive 0s and no $k_2+1$ consecutive 1s.












3












$begingroup$


Just as the question asks. I am trying to calculate the number of bit strings of length $n$ with a maximum of $k_1$ consecutive $0s$ and $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Of course we assume $k_1+k_2leq n$. I am trying to set up a recurrence but I am completely puzzled. I know that to not get two consecutive 0s, we have the recurrence $a_n=a_{n-1}+a_{n-2}$ with $a_1=2$ and $a_2=3$. However I can't seem to generalize this to no more than $k_1$ $0s$ especially that you have the second condition of no more than $k_2$ 1s.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    3












    $begingroup$


    Just as the question asks. I am trying to calculate the number of bit strings of length $n$ with a maximum of $k_1$ consecutive $0s$ and $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Of course we assume $k_1+k_2leq n$. I am trying to set up a recurrence but I am completely puzzled. I know that to not get two consecutive 0s, we have the recurrence $a_n=a_{n-1}+a_{n-2}$ with $a_1=2$ and $a_2=3$. However I can't seem to generalize this to no more than $k_1$ $0s$ especially that you have the second condition of no more than $k_2$ 1s.










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      3












      3








      3


      3



      $begingroup$


      Just as the question asks. I am trying to calculate the number of bit strings of length $n$ with a maximum of $k_1$ consecutive $0s$ and $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Of course we assume $k_1+k_2leq n$. I am trying to set up a recurrence but I am completely puzzled. I know that to not get two consecutive 0s, we have the recurrence $a_n=a_{n-1}+a_{n-2}$ with $a_1=2$ and $a_2=3$. However I can't seem to generalize this to no more than $k_1$ $0s$ especially that you have the second condition of no more than $k_2$ 1s.










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Just as the question asks. I am trying to calculate the number of bit strings of length $n$ with a maximum of $k_1$ consecutive $0s$ and $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Of course we assume $k_1+k_2leq n$. I am trying to set up a recurrence but I am completely puzzled. I know that to not get two consecutive 0s, we have the recurrence $a_n=a_{n-1}+a_{n-2}$ with $a_1=2$ and $a_2=3$. However I can't seem to generalize this to no more than $k_1$ $0s$ especially that you have the second condition of no more than $k_2$ 1s.







      combinatorics statistics discrete-mathematics permutations computer-science






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Sep 29 '16 at 14:01









      AspiringMatAspiringMat

      540518




      540518






















          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5












          $begingroup$

          This answer is based upon the Goulden-Jackson Cluster Method.




          We consider the words of length $ngeq 0$ built from an alphabet $$mathcal{V}={0,1}$$ and the set $B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}$ of bad words, $k_1,k_2geq 0$, which are not allowed to be part of the words we are looking for.



          We derive a generating function $f(s)$ with the coefficient of $s^n$ being the number of searched words of length $n$.




          According to the paper (p.7) the generating function $f(s)$ is




          begin{align*}
          f(s)=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}tag{1}
          end{align*}

          with $d=|mathcal{V}|=2$, the size of the alphabet and $mathcal{C}$ the weight-numerator with
          begin{align*}
          text{weight}(mathcal{C})=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])
          end{align*}




          We calculate according to the paper
          begin{align*}
          text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-s^{k_1+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_1})\
          text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])&=-s^{k_2+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_2})\
          end{align*}

          and get
          begin{align*}
          text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_1}}=-frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}\
          text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_2}}=-frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}\
          end{align*}



          It follows
          begin{align*}
          text{weight}(mathcal{C})&=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])\
          &=-(1-s)left(frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)
          end{align*}



          $$ $$




          We obtain the generating function
          begin{align*}
          f(s)&=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}\
          &=left(1-2s+frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)^{-1}tag{1}\
          end{align*}




          $$ $$




          Example: $k_1=2,k_2=3$.



          We consider the special case with the bad words $$B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}={000,1111}$$



          We obtain from (1) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



          begin{align*}
          f(s)&=left(1-2s+frac{s^{3}(1-s)}{1-s^{3}}+frac{s^{4}(1-s)}{1-s^{4}}right)^{-1}\
          &=frac{(1+s)(1+s^2)(1+s+s^2)}{1-s^2-2s^3-2s^4-s^5}\
          &=1+2s+4s^2+7s^3+12s^4+color{blue}{21}s^5\
          &qquad+36s^6+63s^7+109s^8+189s^9+328s^{10}+cdots
          end{align*}




          We see the coefficient of $s^5$ is $21$.
          So, out of $2^5=32$ binary words of length $5$ there are $11$ invalid words containing subwords ${000,1111}$ which are marked blue in the table below.



          begin{array}{cccc}
          color{blue}{00000}&color{blue}{01000}&color{blue}{10000}&color{blue}{11000}\
          color{blue}{00001}&01001&color{blue}{10001}&11001\
          color{blue}{00010}&01010&10010&11010\
          color{blue}{00011}&01011&10011&11011\
          00100&01100&10100&11100\
          00101&01101&10101&11101\
          00110&01110&10110&color{blue}{11110}\
          00111&color{blue}{01111}&10111&color{blue}{11111}\
          end{array}






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            This is truly beautiful! Thank you for sharing this answer!! Really amazing!
            $endgroup$
            – AspiringMat
            Oct 4 '16 at 16:16










          • $begingroup$
            @AspiringMat: Many thanks for your nice comment! Good to see the answer us useful! :-)Btw. If you search for patterns of this kind in a word with given chars there is another cool technique.
            $endgroup$
            – Markus Scheuer
            Oct 4 '16 at 20:08





















          2












          $begingroup$

          Any string fulfilling the wanted constraints has one of the following structures:
          $$ 0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}ldots qquad 1^{b_1}0^{a_1}1^{b_2}0^{a_2}ldots $$
          with $a_ileq k_1, b_jleq k_2$ and $sum a_i+sum b_j = n$. Assume that we want to compute how many strings are there of the $0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}0^{a_3}$ kind. They are given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in the product
          $$ left(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_1}right)^3cdotleft(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_2}right)^2 = p_{k_1}(x)^3 p_{k_2}(x)^2$$
          hence by accounting for all possible kinds, the answer is given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in
          $$ sum_{rgeq 0}left(p_{k_1}(x)^r p_{k_2}(x)^{r+1}+p_{k_1}(x)^{r+1}p_{k_2}(x)^rright) =color{red}{frac{p_{k_1}(x)+p_{k_2}(x)}{1-p_{k_1}(x),p_{k_2}(x)}}.$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$





















            2












            $begingroup$

            Here is a comment showing how to compute the generating functions from
            first principles. We may then continue as in the answer by
            @MarkusScheuer.




            Using $z$ for zero and $w$ for one we have the generating function



            $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
            sum_{qge 0} (w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
            \ times (1+w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2}).$$



            As we are only interested in the count we may write this as



            $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
            sum_{qge 0} (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
            \ times (1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}).$$



            This is



            $$frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z}
            left(sum_{qge 0} z^q frac{(1-z^{k_2})^q}{(1-z)^q}
            z^q frac{(1-z^{k_1})^q}{(1-z)^q}right)
            frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
            \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z} frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
            frac{1}{1-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})/(1-z)/(1-z)}
            \ = frac{(1-z^{k_1+1})(1-z^{k_2+1})}
            {1-2z+z^2-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})}
            \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}-z^{k_2+1}+z^{k_1+k_2+2}}
            {1-2z+z^{k_1+2}+z^{k_2+2}-z^{2+k_1+k_2}}.$$



            Some Maple code to verify these follows.




            RL :=
            proc(n, k1, k2)
            option remember;
            local ind, d, pos, cur, run, runs, res,
            zmax, wmax;

            res := 0;

            for ind from 2^n to 2*2^n-1 do
            d := convert(ind, base, 2);

            cur := -1; pos := 1;
            run := ; runs := ;


            while pos <= n do
            if d[pos] <> cur then
            if nops(run) > 0 then
            runs :=
            [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];
            fi;

            cur := d[pos];
            run := [cur];
            else
            run := [op(run), cur];
            fi;

            pos := pos + 1;
            od;

            runs := [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];

            zmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 0, r[2], 0), r in runs));
            wmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 1, r[2], 0), r in runs));

            if zmax <= k1 and wmax <= k2 then
            res := res + 1;
            fi;
            od;

            res;
            end;

            X :=
            proc(n, k1, k2)
            option remember;
            local gf;

            gf :=
            (1-z^(k1+1)-z^(k2+1)+z^(k1+k2+2))
            /(1-2*z+z^(k1+2)+z^(k2+2)-z^(k1+k2+2));

            coeftayl(gf, z=0, n);
            end;





            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$





















              1












              $begingroup$

              You can set up a set of coupled recurrences. Let $A(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings that end with $k 0$'s and $B(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings ending with $k 1$'s. Then $A(k+1,n+1)=A(k,n)$ and $A(1,n+1)=sum_{i=0}^{k_2}B(i,n)$ and similarly for $B(k,n+1)$ Put the $A$'s and $B$'s into a column vector and you have a matrix that you multiply by the vector to increase the length of the string. You can diagonalize the matrix and find eigenvalues to find the asymptotic rate of growth.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                Thanks for the answer. How would I cope if there was even further constrictions on the number of 1s and 0s we can use. For example $n_1$ 0s with max $k_1$ consecutive 0s and $n_2$ 1s with max $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Can we employ the same method? Just out of curiosity.
                $endgroup$
                – AspiringMat
                Sep 29 '16 at 14:26










              • $begingroup$
                As asked, you have now required a fixed length of the string at $n_1+n_2$. This is more easily handled by picking the places for the $1$'s and making sure you satisfy the restrictions, using inclusion/exclusion. If you want to require a certain string of $1$'s but forbid some longer string, yes, but the number of states can get unwieldy. Each $A(-,k)$ and $B(-,k)$ represents a state in a Markov chain. You need a new variable for each state, so will need $C(-,k)$ to be unacceptable strings ending in $k 1$'s
                $endgroup$
                – Ross Millikan
                Sep 29 '16 at 14:32










              • $begingroup$
                @RossMillikan: Anyway, the ordinary generating function associated to this problem is easy to write down, so instead of considering a huge Markov chain and diagonalize it, it is faster to look at the zeroes of $1-p_{k_1}(x)p_{k_2}(x)$ - i.e. we already know the characteristic polynomial, despite "hugeness".
                $endgroup$
                – Jack D'Aurizio
                Sep 29 '16 at 15:48



















              0












              $begingroup$

              Let me to begin with changing the $k$s to $k_0$ and $k_1$, so to help and remember their association with the values.



              First step is to fix the total number of ones at , let say $0 leqslant q leqslant n$ (and the number of zeros is consequently fixed).
              We know the total number of ways to obtain strings of length $n$ with $q$ ones, so we will at end accomodate for that.
              Then your scheme is equivalent to many other combinatorial ones, e.g.
              number of lattice paths from $(0,0)$ to $(n-q,q)$ with steps from $left{ {left( {1 ldots k_0 ,0} right),left( {0,1 ldots k_1 } right)} right}$.

              After fixing the total number of $1$s, let now fix the number of $1$-blocks at $m$.
              The number of $0$-blocks will be either $m$ (if the string starts and ends with different values), or $m-1$ (starts and ends with $1$) or $m+1$ (starts and ends with $0$).

              The number of ways to arrange $q$ ones into $m$ blocks with no more than $k_1$ in each, is the number of compositions of $q$ in $m$ parts of max size $k_1$.
              An expression for that can be derived from the answers to Rolling dice problem (re. to there for details), where we have:
              $$
              N_{,b} (s,r,m) = text{No}text{. of solutions to};left{ begin{gathered}
              0 leqslant text{integer }x_{,j} leqslant r hfill \
              x_{,1} + x_{,2} + cdots + x_{,m} = s hfill \
              end{gathered} right.
              $$
              which can be expressed as
              $$
              N_{,b} (s,r,m)quad left| {;0 le {rm integers};s,r,m} right.quad = sumlimits_{left( {0, le } right),k,left( { le ,{s over r}, le ,m} right)} {left( { - 1} right)^{,k} left( matrix{
              m cr
              k cr} right)left( matrix{
              s + m - 1 - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr
              s - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr} right)}
              $$
              In our case, since the number of $1$s goes from $1$ to $k_1$, we shall replace $r$ with $k_1-1$ and $s$ with $q-m$.

              Now we shall intersperse the $1$-blocks into the $0$-blocks "comb-to-comb".
              The number of ways to make up the $0$-blocks follows the same formula, with the appropriate parameters.

              Considering that the "starting-block($0$/$1$)-end-block($0$/$1$)" represents a partition of the considered strings,
              it is not difficult to make up the four parts and conclude:
              $$
              begin{gathered}
              N(k_{,0} ,k_{,1} ,n,q,m) = hfill \
              = N_b (q - m,k_{,1} - 1,m)left( {N_b (n - q - m + 1,k_{,0} - 1,m - 1) + 2N_b (n - q - m,k_{,0} - 1,m) + N_b (n - q - m - 1,k_{,0} - 1,m + 1)} right) hfill \
              end{gathered}
              $$
              In summing through $m$ and then $p$ (after multiplying by C(n,q)), note that in the $N_{,b} (s,r,m)$ formula, the bounds in the summation and in the parameters may be omitted (practically: stretched from $0$ to a suitable max),
              because the binomials (as defined and as written), or the sum itself, are null for $m<k$ and $mr<s$, etc., being enough to ensure that $0 leqslant r$.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$





















                0












                $begingroup$


                We consider the binary alphabet $V={0,1}$ and look for the number $g_n(k_1,k_2)$ of binary words of length $n$ which contain runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$.




                Words with no consecutive equal characters at all are called Smirnov or Carlitz words. See example III.24 Smirnov words from Analytic Combinatorics by Philippe Flajolet and Robert Sedgewick for more information.



                A generating function for the number of Smirnov words over a binary alphabet is given by
                begin{align*}
                left(1-frac{2z}{1+z}right)^{-1}tag{1}
                end{align*}




                We replace occurrences of $0$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_1$ zeros to generate strings having runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$
                begin{align*}
                zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}tag{2}
                end{align*}



                We replace occurrences of $1$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_2$ ones to generate strings having runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$
                begin{align*}
                zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}tag{3}
                end{align*}



                We substitue (2) and (3) in (1) and obtain



                begin{align*}
                &left(1- frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}
                - frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}right)^{-1}\
                &qquad=frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}tag{4}
                end{align*}



                Denoting with $[z^n]$ the coefficient of $z^n$ in a series we obtain from (4) the number of wanted words as
                begin{align*}
                color{blue}{g_n(k_1,k_2)
                =[z^n]frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}}tag{5}
                end{align*}




                Example: $n=5,k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                We consider the special case with words of length $5$ containing runs of $0$ with length at most $2$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $3$



                We obtain from (5) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                begin{align*}
                sum_{n=0}^infty g_n(k_1,k_2)z^n&=frac{(1+z)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}{1-z+2z^2-(z^3+z^4)(1+z)-z^7(1+3z)}\
                &=frac{(1+z)(1+z^2)(1+z+z^2)}{1-z^2-2z^3-2z^4-z^5}\
                &=1+2z+4z^2+7z^3+12z^4+color{blue}{21}z^5+36z^6+63z^7+cdots
                end{align*}



                We see the coefficient of $z^5$ is $21$.
                The $21$ valid words are
                $$
                begin{array}{cccc}
                00100&01001&10010&11001\
                00101&01010&10011&11010\
                00110&01011&10100&11011\
                00111&01100&10101&11100\
                &01101&10110&11101\
                &01110&10111&
                end{array}
                $$






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$













                  Your Answer





                  StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
                  return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
                  StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
                  StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
                  });
                  });
                  }, "mathjax-editing");

                  StackExchange.ready(function() {
                  var channelOptions = {
                  tags: "".split(" "),
                  id: "69"
                  };
                  initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

                  StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
                  // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
                  if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
                  StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
                  createEditor();
                  });
                  }
                  else {
                  createEditor();
                  }
                  });

                  function createEditor() {
                  StackExchange.prepareEditor({
                  heartbeatType: 'answer',
                  autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
                  convertImagesToLinks: true,
                  noModals: true,
                  showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
                  reputationToPostImages: 10,
                  bindNavPrevention: true,
                  postfix: "",
                  imageUploader: {
                  brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
                  contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
                  allowUrls: true
                  },
                  noCode: true, onDemand: true,
                  discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
                  ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
                  });


                  }
                  });














                  draft saved

                  draft discarded


















                  StackExchange.ready(
                  function () {
                  StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1946514%2fnumber-of-bit-strings-of-length-n-with-no-k-11-consecutive-0s-and-no-k-21%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                  }
                  );

                  Post as a guest















                  Required, but never shown

























                  6 Answers
                  6






                  active

                  oldest

                  votes








                  6 Answers
                  6






                  active

                  oldest

                  votes









                  active

                  oldest

                  votes






                  active

                  oldest

                  votes









                  5












                  $begingroup$

                  This answer is based upon the Goulden-Jackson Cluster Method.




                  We consider the words of length $ngeq 0$ built from an alphabet $$mathcal{V}={0,1}$$ and the set $B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}$ of bad words, $k_1,k_2geq 0$, which are not allowed to be part of the words we are looking for.



                  We derive a generating function $f(s)$ with the coefficient of $s^n$ being the number of searched words of length $n$.




                  According to the paper (p.7) the generating function $f(s)$ is




                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}tag{1}
                  end{align*}

                  with $d=|mathcal{V}|=2$, the size of the alphabet and $mathcal{C}$ the weight-numerator with
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C})=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])
                  end{align*}




                  We calculate according to the paper
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-s^{k_1+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_1})\
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])&=-s^{k_2+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_2})\
                  end{align*}

                  and get
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_1}}=-frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}\
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_2}}=-frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}\
                  end{align*}



                  It follows
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C})&=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])\
                  &=-(1-s)left(frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)
                  end{align*}



                  $$ $$




                  We obtain the generating function
                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)&=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}\
                  &=left(1-2s+frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)^{-1}tag{1}\
                  end{align*}




                  $$ $$




                  Example: $k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                  We consider the special case with the bad words $$B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}={000,1111}$$



                  We obtain from (1) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)&=left(1-2s+frac{s^{3}(1-s)}{1-s^{3}}+frac{s^{4}(1-s)}{1-s^{4}}right)^{-1}\
                  &=frac{(1+s)(1+s^2)(1+s+s^2)}{1-s^2-2s^3-2s^4-s^5}\
                  &=1+2s+4s^2+7s^3+12s^4+color{blue}{21}s^5\
                  &qquad+36s^6+63s^7+109s^8+189s^9+328s^{10}+cdots
                  end{align*}




                  We see the coefficient of $s^5$ is $21$.
                  So, out of $2^5=32$ binary words of length $5$ there are $11$ invalid words containing subwords ${000,1111}$ which are marked blue in the table below.



                  begin{array}{cccc}
                  color{blue}{00000}&color{blue}{01000}&color{blue}{10000}&color{blue}{11000}\
                  color{blue}{00001}&01001&color{blue}{10001}&11001\
                  color{blue}{00010}&01010&10010&11010\
                  color{blue}{00011}&01011&10011&11011\
                  00100&01100&10100&11100\
                  00101&01101&10101&11101\
                  00110&01110&10110&color{blue}{11110}\
                  00111&color{blue}{01111}&10111&color{blue}{11111}\
                  end{array}






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$













                  • $begingroup$
                    This is truly beautiful! Thank you for sharing this answer!! Really amazing!
                    $endgroup$
                    – AspiringMat
                    Oct 4 '16 at 16:16










                  • $begingroup$
                    @AspiringMat: Many thanks for your nice comment! Good to see the answer us useful! :-)Btw. If you search for patterns of this kind in a word with given chars there is another cool technique.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Markus Scheuer
                    Oct 4 '16 at 20:08


















                  5












                  $begingroup$

                  This answer is based upon the Goulden-Jackson Cluster Method.




                  We consider the words of length $ngeq 0$ built from an alphabet $$mathcal{V}={0,1}$$ and the set $B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}$ of bad words, $k_1,k_2geq 0$, which are not allowed to be part of the words we are looking for.



                  We derive a generating function $f(s)$ with the coefficient of $s^n$ being the number of searched words of length $n$.




                  According to the paper (p.7) the generating function $f(s)$ is




                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}tag{1}
                  end{align*}

                  with $d=|mathcal{V}|=2$, the size of the alphabet and $mathcal{C}$ the weight-numerator with
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C})=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])
                  end{align*}




                  We calculate according to the paper
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-s^{k_1+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_1})\
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])&=-s^{k_2+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_2})\
                  end{align*}

                  and get
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_1}}=-frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}\
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_2}}=-frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}\
                  end{align*}



                  It follows
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C})&=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])\
                  &=-(1-s)left(frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)
                  end{align*}



                  $$ $$




                  We obtain the generating function
                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)&=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}\
                  &=left(1-2s+frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)^{-1}tag{1}\
                  end{align*}




                  $$ $$




                  Example: $k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                  We consider the special case with the bad words $$B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}={000,1111}$$



                  We obtain from (1) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)&=left(1-2s+frac{s^{3}(1-s)}{1-s^{3}}+frac{s^{4}(1-s)}{1-s^{4}}right)^{-1}\
                  &=frac{(1+s)(1+s^2)(1+s+s^2)}{1-s^2-2s^3-2s^4-s^5}\
                  &=1+2s+4s^2+7s^3+12s^4+color{blue}{21}s^5\
                  &qquad+36s^6+63s^7+109s^8+189s^9+328s^{10}+cdots
                  end{align*}




                  We see the coefficient of $s^5$ is $21$.
                  So, out of $2^5=32$ binary words of length $5$ there are $11$ invalid words containing subwords ${000,1111}$ which are marked blue in the table below.



                  begin{array}{cccc}
                  color{blue}{00000}&color{blue}{01000}&color{blue}{10000}&color{blue}{11000}\
                  color{blue}{00001}&01001&color{blue}{10001}&11001\
                  color{blue}{00010}&01010&10010&11010\
                  color{blue}{00011}&01011&10011&11011\
                  00100&01100&10100&11100\
                  00101&01101&10101&11101\
                  00110&01110&10110&color{blue}{11110}\
                  00111&color{blue}{01111}&10111&color{blue}{11111}\
                  end{array}






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$













                  • $begingroup$
                    This is truly beautiful! Thank you for sharing this answer!! Really amazing!
                    $endgroup$
                    – AspiringMat
                    Oct 4 '16 at 16:16










                  • $begingroup$
                    @AspiringMat: Many thanks for your nice comment! Good to see the answer us useful! :-)Btw. If you search for patterns of this kind in a word with given chars there is another cool technique.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Markus Scheuer
                    Oct 4 '16 at 20:08
















                  5












                  5








                  5





                  $begingroup$

                  This answer is based upon the Goulden-Jackson Cluster Method.




                  We consider the words of length $ngeq 0$ built from an alphabet $$mathcal{V}={0,1}$$ and the set $B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}$ of bad words, $k_1,k_2geq 0$, which are not allowed to be part of the words we are looking for.



                  We derive a generating function $f(s)$ with the coefficient of $s^n$ being the number of searched words of length $n$.




                  According to the paper (p.7) the generating function $f(s)$ is




                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}tag{1}
                  end{align*}

                  with $d=|mathcal{V}|=2$, the size of the alphabet and $mathcal{C}$ the weight-numerator with
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C})=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])
                  end{align*}




                  We calculate according to the paper
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-s^{k_1+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_1})\
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])&=-s^{k_2+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_2})\
                  end{align*}

                  and get
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_1}}=-frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}\
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_2}}=-frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}\
                  end{align*}



                  It follows
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C})&=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])\
                  &=-(1-s)left(frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)
                  end{align*}



                  $$ $$




                  We obtain the generating function
                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)&=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}\
                  &=left(1-2s+frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)^{-1}tag{1}\
                  end{align*}




                  $$ $$




                  Example: $k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                  We consider the special case with the bad words $$B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}={000,1111}$$



                  We obtain from (1) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)&=left(1-2s+frac{s^{3}(1-s)}{1-s^{3}}+frac{s^{4}(1-s)}{1-s^{4}}right)^{-1}\
                  &=frac{(1+s)(1+s^2)(1+s+s^2)}{1-s^2-2s^3-2s^4-s^5}\
                  &=1+2s+4s^2+7s^3+12s^4+color{blue}{21}s^5\
                  &qquad+36s^6+63s^7+109s^8+189s^9+328s^{10}+cdots
                  end{align*}




                  We see the coefficient of $s^5$ is $21$.
                  So, out of $2^5=32$ binary words of length $5$ there are $11$ invalid words containing subwords ${000,1111}$ which are marked blue in the table below.



                  begin{array}{cccc}
                  color{blue}{00000}&color{blue}{01000}&color{blue}{10000}&color{blue}{11000}\
                  color{blue}{00001}&01001&color{blue}{10001}&11001\
                  color{blue}{00010}&01010&10010&11010\
                  color{blue}{00011}&01011&10011&11011\
                  00100&01100&10100&11100\
                  00101&01101&10101&11101\
                  00110&01110&10110&color{blue}{11110}\
                  00111&color{blue}{01111}&10111&color{blue}{11111}\
                  end{array}






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  This answer is based upon the Goulden-Jackson Cluster Method.




                  We consider the words of length $ngeq 0$ built from an alphabet $$mathcal{V}={0,1}$$ and the set $B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}$ of bad words, $k_1,k_2geq 0$, which are not allowed to be part of the words we are looking for.



                  We derive a generating function $f(s)$ with the coefficient of $s^n$ being the number of searched words of length $n$.




                  According to the paper (p.7) the generating function $f(s)$ is




                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}tag{1}
                  end{align*}

                  with $d=|mathcal{V}|=2$, the size of the alphabet and $mathcal{C}$ the weight-numerator with
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C})=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])
                  end{align*}




                  We calculate according to the paper
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-s^{k_1+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_1})\
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])&=-s^{k_2+1}-text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_2+1}])(s+s^2+cdots+s^{k_2})\
                  end{align*}

                  and get
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_1}}=-frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}\
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])&=-frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1+s+cdots+s^{k_2}}=-frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}\
                  end{align*}



                  It follows
                  begin{align*}
                  text{weight}(mathcal{C})&=text{weight}(mathcal{C}[0^{k_1+1}])+text{weight}(mathcal{C}[1^{k_2+1}])\
                  &=-(1-s)left(frac{s^{k_1+1}}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)
                  end{align*}



                  $$ $$




                  We obtain the generating function
                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)&=frac{1}{1-ds-text{weight}(mathcal{C})}\
                  &=left(1-2s+frac{s^{k_1+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_1+1}}+frac{s^{k_2+1}(1-s)}{1-s^{k_2+1}}right)^{-1}tag{1}\
                  end{align*}




                  $$ $$




                  Example: $k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                  We consider the special case with the bad words $$B={0^{k_1+1},1^{k_2+1}}={000,1111}$$



                  We obtain from (1) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                  begin{align*}
                  f(s)&=left(1-2s+frac{s^{3}(1-s)}{1-s^{3}}+frac{s^{4}(1-s)}{1-s^{4}}right)^{-1}\
                  &=frac{(1+s)(1+s^2)(1+s+s^2)}{1-s^2-2s^3-2s^4-s^5}\
                  &=1+2s+4s^2+7s^3+12s^4+color{blue}{21}s^5\
                  &qquad+36s^6+63s^7+109s^8+189s^9+328s^{10}+cdots
                  end{align*}




                  We see the coefficient of $s^5$ is $21$.
                  So, out of $2^5=32$ binary words of length $5$ there are $11$ invalid words containing subwords ${000,1111}$ which are marked blue in the table below.



                  begin{array}{cccc}
                  color{blue}{00000}&color{blue}{01000}&color{blue}{10000}&color{blue}{11000}\
                  color{blue}{00001}&01001&color{blue}{10001}&11001\
                  color{blue}{00010}&01010&10010&11010\
                  color{blue}{00011}&01011&10011&11011\
                  00100&01100&10100&11100\
                  00101&01101&10101&11101\
                  00110&01110&10110&color{blue}{11110}\
                  00111&color{blue}{01111}&10111&color{blue}{11111}\
                  end{array}







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Dec 24 '18 at 0:49

























                  answered Sep 29 '16 at 21:11









                  Markus ScheuerMarkus Scheuer

                  61.9k457149




                  61.9k457149












                  • $begingroup$
                    This is truly beautiful! Thank you for sharing this answer!! Really amazing!
                    $endgroup$
                    – AspiringMat
                    Oct 4 '16 at 16:16










                  • $begingroup$
                    @AspiringMat: Many thanks for your nice comment! Good to see the answer us useful! :-)Btw. If you search for patterns of this kind in a word with given chars there is another cool technique.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Markus Scheuer
                    Oct 4 '16 at 20:08




















                  • $begingroup$
                    This is truly beautiful! Thank you for sharing this answer!! Really amazing!
                    $endgroup$
                    – AspiringMat
                    Oct 4 '16 at 16:16










                  • $begingroup$
                    @AspiringMat: Many thanks for your nice comment! Good to see the answer us useful! :-)Btw. If you search for patterns of this kind in a word with given chars there is another cool technique.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Markus Scheuer
                    Oct 4 '16 at 20:08


















                  $begingroup$
                  This is truly beautiful! Thank you for sharing this answer!! Really amazing!
                  $endgroup$
                  – AspiringMat
                  Oct 4 '16 at 16:16




                  $begingroup$
                  This is truly beautiful! Thank you for sharing this answer!! Really amazing!
                  $endgroup$
                  – AspiringMat
                  Oct 4 '16 at 16:16












                  $begingroup$
                  @AspiringMat: Many thanks for your nice comment! Good to see the answer us useful! :-)Btw. If you search for patterns of this kind in a word with given chars there is another cool technique.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Markus Scheuer
                  Oct 4 '16 at 20:08






                  $begingroup$
                  @AspiringMat: Many thanks for your nice comment! Good to see the answer us useful! :-)Btw. If you search for patterns of this kind in a word with given chars there is another cool technique.
                  $endgroup$
                  – Markus Scheuer
                  Oct 4 '16 at 20:08













                  2












                  $begingroup$

                  Any string fulfilling the wanted constraints has one of the following structures:
                  $$ 0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}ldots qquad 1^{b_1}0^{a_1}1^{b_2}0^{a_2}ldots $$
                  with $a_ileq k_1, b_jleq k_2$ and $sum a_i+sum b_j = n$. Assume that we want to compute how many strings are there of the $0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}0^{a_3}$ kind. They are given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in the product
                  $$ left(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_1}right)^3cdotleft(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_2}right)^2 = p_{k_1}(x)^3 p_{k_2}(x)^2$$
                  hence by accounting for all possible kinds, the answer is given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in
                  $$ sum_{rgeq 0}left(p_{k_1}(x)^r p_{k_2}(x)^{r+1}+p_{k_1}(x)^{r+1}p_{k_2}(x)^rright) =color{red}{frac{p_{k_1}(x)+p_{k_2}(x)}{1-p_{k_1}(x),p_{k_2}(x)}}.$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$


















                    2












                    $begingroup$

                    Any string fulfilling the wanted constraints has one of the following structures:
                    $$ 0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}ldots qquad 1^{b_1}0^{a_1}1^{b_2}0^{a_2}ldots $$
                    with $a_ileq k_1, b_jleq k_2$ and $sum a_i+sum b_j = n$. Assume that we want to compute how many strings are there of the $0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}0^{a_3}$ kind. They are given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in the product
                    $$ left(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_1}right)^3cdotleft(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_2}right)^2 = p_{k_1}(x)^3 p_{k_2}(x)^2$$
                    hence by accounting for all possible kinds, the answer is given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in
                    $$ sum_{rgeq 0}left(p_{k_1}(x)^r p_{k_2}(x)^{r+1}+p_{k_1}(x)^{r+1}p_{k_2}(x)^rright) =color{red}{frac{p_{k_1}(x)+p_{k_2}(x)}{1-p_{k_1}(x),p_{k_2}(x)}}.$$






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$
















                      2












                      2








                      2





                      $begingroup$

                      Any string fulfilling the wanted constraints has one of the following structures:
                      $$ 0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}ldots qquad 1^{b_1}0^{a_1}1^{b_2}0^{a_2}ldots $$
                      with $a_ileq k_1, b_jleq k_2$ and $sum a_i+sum b_j = n$. Assume that we want to compute how many strings are there of the $0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}0^{a_3}$ kind. They are given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in the product
                      $$ left(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_1}right)^3cdotleft(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_2}right)^2 = p_{k_1}(x)^3 p_{k_2}(x)^2$$
                      hence by accounting for all possible kinds, the answer is given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in
                      $$ sum_{rgeq 0}left(p_{k_1}(x)^r p_{k_2}(x)^{r+1}+p_{k_1}(x)^{r+1}p_{k_2}(x)^rright) =color{red}{frac{p_{k_1}(x)+p_{k_2}(x)}{1-p_{k_1}(x),p_{k_2}(x)}}.$$






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      Any string fulfilling the wanted constraints has one of the following structures:
                      $$ 0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}ldots qquad 1^{b_1}0^{a_1}1^{b_2}0^{a_2}ldots $$
                      with $a_ileq k_1, b_jleq k_2$ and $sum a_i+sum b_j = n$. Assume that we want to compute how many strings are there of the $0^{a_1}1^{b_1}0^{a_2}1^{b_2}0^{a_3}$ kind. They are given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in the product
                      $$ left(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_1}right)^3cdotleft(1+x+x^2+ldots+x^{k_2}right)^2 = p_{k_1}(x)^3 p_{k_2}(x)^2$$
                      hence by accounting for all possible kinds, the answer is given by the coefficient of $x^n$ in
                      $$ sum_{rgeq 0}left(p_{k_1}(x)^r p_{k_2}(x)^{r+1}+p_{k_1}(x)^{r+1}p_{k_2}(x)^rright) =color{red}{frac{p_{k_1}(x)+p_{k_2}(x)}{1-p_{k_1}(x),p_{k_2}(x)}}.$$







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Sep 29 '16 at 15:41









                      Jack D'AurizioJack D'Aurizio

                      290k33282662




                      290k33282662























                          2












                          $begingroup$

                          Here is a comment showing how to compute the generating functions from
                          first principles. We may then continue as in the answer by
                          @MarkusScheuer.




                          Using $z$ for zero and $w$ for one we have the generating function



                          $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
                          sum_{qge 0} (w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
                          \ times (1+w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2}).$$



                          As we are only interested in the count we may write this as



                          $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
                          sum_{qge 0} (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
                          \ times (1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}).$$



                          This is



                          $$frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z}
                          left(sum_{qge 0} z^q frac{(1-z^{k_2})^q}{(1-z)^q}
                          z^q frac{(1-z^{k_1})^q}{(1-z)^q}right)
                          frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
                          \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z} frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
                          frac{1}{1-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})/(1-z)/(1-z)}
                          \ = frac{(1-z^{k_1+1})(1-z^{k_2+1})}
                          {1-2z+z^2-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})}
                          \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}-z^{k_2+1}+z^{k_1+k_2+2}}
                          {1-2z+z^{k_1+2}+z^{k_2+2}-z^{2+k_1+k_2}}.$$



                          Some Maple code to verify these follows.




                          RL :=
                          proc(n, k1, k2)
                          option remember;
                          local ind, d, pos, cur, run, runs, res,
                          zmax, wmax;

                          res := 0;

                          for ind from 2^n to 2*2^n-1 do
                          d := convert(ind, base, 2);

                          cur := -1; pos := 1;
                          run := ; runs := ;


                          while pos <= n do
                          if d[pos] <> cur then
                          if nops(run) > 0 then
                          runs :=
                          [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];
                          fi;

                          cur := d[pos];
                          run := [cur];
                          else
                          run := [op(run), cur];
                          fi;

                          pos := pos + 1;
                          od;

                          runs := [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];

                          zmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 0, r[2], 0), r in runs));
                          wmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 1, r[2], 0), r in runs));

                          if zmax <= k1 and wmax <= k2 then
                          res := res + 1;
                          fi;
                          od;

                          res;
                          end;

                          X :=
                          proc(n, k1, k2)
                          option remember;
                          local gf;

                          gf :=
                          (1-z^(k1+1)-z^(k2+1)+z^(k1+k2+2))
                          /(1-2*z+z^(k1+2)+z^(k2+2)-z^(k1+k2+2));

                          coeftayl(gf, z=0, n);
                          end;





                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$


















                            2












                            $begingroup$

                            Here is a comment showing how to compute the generating functions from
                            first principles. We may then continue as in the answer by
                            @MarkusScheuer.




                            Using $z$ for zero and $w$ for one we have the generating function



                            $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
                            sum_{qge 0} (w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
                            \ times (1+w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2}).$$



                            As we are only interested in the count we may write this as



                            $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
                            sum_{qge 0} (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
                            \ times (1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}).$$



                            This is



                            $$frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z}
                            left(sum_{qge 0} z^q frac{(1-z^{k_2})^q}{(1-z)^q}
                            z^q frac{(1-z^{k_1})^q}{(1-z)^q}right)
                            frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
                            \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z} frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
                            frac{1}{1-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})/(1-z)/(1-z)}
                            \ = frac{(1-z^{k_1+1})(1-z^{k_2+1})}
                            {1-2z+z^2-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})}
                            \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}-z^{k_2+1}+z^{k_1+k_2+2}}
                            {1-2z+z^{k_1+2}+z^{k_2+2}-z^{2+k_1+k_2}}.$$



                            Some Maple code to verify these follows.




                            RL :=
                            proc(n, k1, k2)
                            option remember;
                            local ind, d, pos, cur, run, runs, res,
                            zmax, wmax;

                            res := 0;

                            for ind from 2^n to 2*2^n-1 do
                            d := convert(ind, base, 2);

                            cur := -1; pos := 1;
                            run := ; runs := ;


                            while pos <= n do
                            if d[pos] <> cur then
                            if nops(run) > 0 then
                            runs :=
                            [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];
                            fi;

                            cur := d[pos];
                            run := [cur];
                            else
                            run := [op(run), cur];
                            fi;

                            pos := pos + 1;
                            od;

                            runs := [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];

                            zmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 0, r[2], 0), r in runs));
                            wmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 1, r[2], 0), r in runs));

                            if zmax <= k1 and wmax <= k2 then
                            res := res + 1;
                            fi;
                            od;

                            res;
                            end;

                            X :=
                            proc(n, k1, k2)
                            option remember;
                            local gf;

                            gf :=
                            (1-z^(k1+1)-z^(k2+1)+z^(k1+k2+2))
                            /(1-2*z+z^(k1+2)+z^(k2+2)-z^(k1+k2+2));

                            coeftayl(gf, z=0, n);
                            end;





                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$
















                              2












                              2








                              2





                              $begingroup$

                              Here is a comment showing how to compute the generating functions from
                              first principles. We may then continue as in the answer by
                              @MarkusScheuer.




                              Using $z$ for zero and $w$ for one we have the generating function



                              $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
                              sum_{qge 0} (w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
                              \ times (1+w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2}).$$



                              As we are only interested in the count we may write this as



                              $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
                              sum_{qge 0} (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
                              \ times (1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}).$$



                              This is



                              $$frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z}
                              left(sum_{qge 0} z^q frac{(1-z^{k_2})^q}{(1-z)^q}
                              z^q frac{(1-z^{k_1})^q}{(1-z)^q}right)
                              frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
                              \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z} frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
                              frac{1}{1-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})/(1-z)/(1-z)}
                              \ = frac{(1-z^{k_1+1})(1-z^{k_2+1})}
                              {1-2z+z^2-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})}
                              \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}-z^{k_2+1}+z^{k_1+k_2+2}}
                              {1-2z+z^{k_1+2}+z^{k_2+2}-z^{2+k_1+k_2}}.$$



                              Some Maple code to verify these follows.




                              RL :=
                              proc(n, k1, k2)
                              option remember;
                              local ind, d, pos, cur, run, runs, res,
                              zmax, wmax;

                              res := 0;

                              for ind from 2^n to 2*2^n-1 do
                              d := convert(ind, base, 2);

                              cur := -1; pos := 1;
                              run := ; runs := ;


                              while pos <= n do
                              if d[pos] <> cur then
                              if nops(run) > 0 then
                              runs :=
                              [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];
                              fi;

                              cur := d[pos];
                              run := [cur];
                              else
                              run := [op(run), cur];
                              fi;

                              pos := pos + 1;
                              od;

                              runs := [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];

                              zmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 0, r[2], 0), r in runs));
                              wmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 1, r[2], 0), r in runs));

                              if zmax <= k1 and wmax <= k2 then
                              res := res + 1;
                              fi;
                              od;

                              res;
                              end;

                              X :=
                              proc(n, k1, k2)
                              option remember;
                              local gf;

                              gf :=
                              (1-z^(k1+1)-z^(k2+1)+z^(k1+k2+2))
                              /(1-2*z+z^(k1+2)+z^(k2+2)-z^(k1+k2+2));

                              coeftayl(gf, z=0, n);
                              end;





                              share|cite|improve this answer









                              $endgroup$



                              Here is a comment showing how to compute the generating functions from
                              first principles. We may then continue as in the answer by
                              @MarkusScheuer.




                              Using $z$ for zero and $w$ for one we have the generating function



                              $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
                              sum_{qge 0} (w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
                              \ times (1+w+w^2+cdots+w^{k_2}).$$



                              As we are only interested in the count we may write this as



                              $$(1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})
                              sum_{qge 0} (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2})^q (z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1})^q
                              \ times (1+z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}).$$



                              This is



                              $$frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z}
                              left(sum_{qge 0} z^q frac{(1-z^{k_2})^q}{(1-z)^q}
                              z^q frac{(1-z^{k_1})^q}{(1-z)^q}right)
                              frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
                              \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}}{1-z} frac{1-z^{k_2+1}}{1-z}
                              frac{1}{1-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})/(1-z)/(1-z)}
                              \ = frac{(1-z^{k_1+1})(1-z^{k_2+1})}
                              {1-2z+z^2-z^2(1-z^{k_1})(1-z^{k_2})}
                              \ = frac{1-z^{k_1+1}-z^{k_2+1}+z^{k_1+k_2+2}}
                              {1-2z+z^{k_1+2}+z^{k_2+2}-z^{2+k_1+k_2}}.$$



                              Some Maple code to verify these follows.




                              RL :=
                              proc(n, k1, k2)
                              option remember;
                              local ind, d, pos, cur, run, runs, res,
                              zmax, wmax;

                              res := 0;

                              for ind from 2^n to 2*2^n-1 do
                              d := convert(ind, base, 2);

                              cur := -1; pos := 1;
                              run := ; runs := ;


                              while pos <= n do
                              if d[pos] <> cur then
                              if nops(run) > 0 then
                              runs :=
                              [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];
                              fi;

                              cur := d[pos];
                              run := [cur];
                              else
                              run := [op(run), cur];
                              fi;

                              pos := pos + 1;
                              od;

                              runs := [op(runs), [run[1], nops(run)]];

                              zmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 0, r[2], 0), r in runs));
                              wmax := max(seq(`if`(r[1] = 1, r[2], 0), r in runs));

                              if zmax <= k1 and wmax <= k2 then
                              res := res + 1;
                              fi;
                              od;

                              res;
                              end;

                              X :=
                              proc(n, k1, k2)
                              option remember;
                              local gf;

                              gf :=
                              (1-z^(k1+1)-z^(k2+1)+z^(k1+k2+2))
                              /(1-2*z+z^(k1+2)+z^(k2+2)-z^(k1+k2+2));

                              coeftayl(gf, z=0, n);
                              end;






                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered Sep 29 '16 at 21:41









                              Marko RiedelMarko Riedel

                              40.3k339109




                              40.3k339109























                                  1












                                  $begingroup$

                                  You can set up a set of coupled recurrences. Let $A(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings that end with $k 0$'s and $B(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings ending with $k 1$'s. Then $A(k+1,n+1)=A(k,n)$ and $A(1,n+1)=sum_{i=0}^{k_2}B(i,n)$ and similarly for $B(k,n+1)$ Put the $A$'s and $B$'s into a column vector and you have a matrix that you multiply by the vector to increase the length of the string. You can diagonalize the matrix and find eigenvalues to find the asymptotic rate of growth.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer









                                  $endgroup$













                                  • $begingroup$
                                    Thanks for the answer. How would I cope if there was even further constrictions on the number of 1s and 0s we can use. For example $n_1$ 0s with max $k_1$ consecutive 0s and $n_2$ 1s with max $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Can we employ the same method? Just out of curiosity.
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – AspiringMat
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 14:26










                                  • $begingroup$
                                    As asked, you have now required a fixed length of the string at $n_1+n_2$. This is more easily handled by picking the places for the $1$'s and making sure you satisfy the restrictions, using inclusion/exclusion. If you want to require a certain string of $1$'s but forbid some longer string, yes, but the number of states can get unwieldy. Each $A(-,k)$ and $B(-,k)$ represents a state in a Markov chain. You need a new variable for each state, so will need $C(-,k)$ to be unacceptable strings ending in $k 1$'s
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – Ross Millikan
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 14:32










                                  • $begingroup$
                                    @RossMillikan: Anyway, the ordinary generating function associated to this problem is easy to write down, so instead of considering a huge Markov chain and diagonalize it, it is faster to look at the zeroes of $1-p_{k_1}(x)p_{k_2}(x)$ - i.e. we already know the characteristic polynomial, despite "hugeness".
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – Jack D'Aurizio
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 15:48
















                                  1












                                  $begingroup$

                                  You can set up a set of coupled recurrences. Let $A(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings that end with $k 0$'s and $B(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings ending with $k 1$'s. Then $A(k+1,n+1)=A(k,n)$ and $A(1,n+1)=sum_{i=0}^{k_2}B(i,n)$ and similarly for $B(k,n+1)$ Put the $A$'s and $B$'s into a column vector and you have a matrix that you multiply by the vector to increase the length of the string. You can diagonalize the matrix and find eigenvalues to find the asymptotic rate of growth.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer









                                  $endgroup$













                                  • $begingroup$
                                    Thanks for the answer. How would I cope if there was even further constrictions on the number of 1s and 0s we can use. For example $n_1$ 0s with max $k_1$ consecutive 0s and $n_2$ 1s with max $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Can we employ the same method? Just out of curiosity.
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – AspiringMat
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 14:26










                                  • $begingroup$
                                    As asked, you have now required a fixed length of the string at $n_1+n_2$. This is more easily handled by picking the places for the $1$'s and making sure you satisfy the restrictions, using inclusion/exclusion. If you want to require a certain string of $1$'s but forbid some longer string, yes, but the number of states can get unwieldy. Each $A(-,k)$ and $B(-,k)$ represents a state in a Markov chain. You need a new variable for each state, so will need $C(-,k)$ to be unacceptable strings ending in $k 1$'s
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – Ross Millikan
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 14:32










                                  • $begingroup$
                                    @RossMillikan: Anyway, the ordinary generating function associated to this problem is easy to write down, so instead of considering a huge Markov chain and diagonalize it, it is faster to look at the zeroes of $1-p_{k_1}(x)p_{k_2}(x)$ - i.e. we already know the characteristic polynomial, despite "hugeness".
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – Jack D'Aurizio
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 15:48














                                  1












                                  1








                                  1





                                  $begingroup$

                                  You can set up a set of coupled recurrences. Let $A(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings that end with $k 0$'s and $B(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings ending with $k 1$'s. Then $A(k+1,n+1)=A(k,n)$ and $A(1,n+1)=sum_{i=0}^{k_2}B(i,n)$ and similarly for $B(k,n+1)$ Put the $A$'s and $B$'s into a column vector and you have a matrix that you multiply by the vector to increase the length of the string. You can diagonalize the matrix and find eigenvalues to find the asymptotic rate of growth.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer









                                  $endgroup$



                                  You can set up a set of coupled recurrences. Let $A(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings that end with $k 0$'s and $B(k,n)$ be the number of acceptable $n$ bit strings ending with $k 1$'s. Then $A(k+1,n+1)=A(k,n)$ and $A(1,n+1)=sum_{i=0}^{k_2}B(i,n)$ and similarly for $B(k,n+1)$ Put the $A$'s and $B$'s into a column vector and you have a matrix that you multiply by the vector to increase the length of the string. You can diagonalize the matrix and find eigenvalues to find the asymptotic rate of growth.







                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  share|cite|improve this answer



                                  share|cite|improve this answer










                                  answered Sep 29 '16 at 14:10









                                  Ross MillikanRoss Millikan

                                  297k23198371




                                  297k23198371












                                  • $begingroup$
                                    Thanks for the answer. How would I cope if there was even further constrictions on the number of 1s and 0s we can use. For example $n_1$ 0s with max $k_1$ consecutive 0s and $n_2$ 1s with max $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Can we employ the same method? Just out of curiosity.
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – AspiringMat
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 14:26










                                  • $begingroup$
                                    As asked, you have now required a fixed length of the string at $n_1+n_2$. This is more easily handled by picking the places for the $1$'s and making sure you satisfy the restrictions, using inclusion/exclusion. If you want to require a certain string of $1$'s but forbid some longer string, yes, but the number of states can get unwieldy. Each $A(-,k)$ and $B(-,k)$ represents a state in a Markov chain. You need a new variable for each state, so will need $C(-,k)$ to be unacceptable strings ending in $k 1$'s
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – Ross Millikan
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 14:32










                                  • $begingroup$
                                    @RossMillikan: Anyway, the ordinary generating function associated to this problem is easy to write down, so instead of considering a huge Markov chain and diagonalize it, it is faster to look at the zeroes of $1-p_{k_1}(x)p_{k_2}(x)$ - i.e. we already know the characteristic polynomial, despite "hugeness".
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – Jack D'Aurizio
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 15:48


















                                  • $begingroup$
                                    Thanks for the answer. How would I cope if there was even further constrictions on the number of 1s and 0s we can use. For example $n_1$ 0s with max $k_1$ consecutive 0s and $n_2$ 1s with max $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Can we employ the same method? Just out of curiosity.
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – AspiringMat
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 14:26










                                  • $begingroup$
                                    As asked, you have now required a fixed length of the string at $n_1+n_2$. This is more easily handled by picking the places for the $1$'s and making sure you satisfy the restrictions, using inclusion/exclusion. If you want to require a certain string of $1$'s but forbid some longer string, yes, but the number of states can get unwieldy. Each $A(-,k)$ and $B(-,k)$ represents a state in a Markov chain. You need a new variable for each state, so will need $C(-,k)$ to be unacceptable strings ending in $k 1$'s
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – Ross Millikan
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 14:32










                                  • $begingroup$
                                    @RossMillikan: Anyway, the ordinary generating function associated to this problem is easy to write down, so instead of considering a huge Markov chain and diagonalize it, it is faster to look at the zeroes of $1-p_{k_1}(x)p_{k_2}(x)$ - i.e. we already know the characteristic polynomial, despite "hugeness".
                                    $endgroup$
                                    – Jack D'Aurizio
                                    Sep 29 '16 at 15:48
















                                  $begingroup$
                                  Thanks for the answer. How would I cope if there was even further constrictions on the number of 1s and 0s we can use. For example $n_1$ 0s with max $k_1$ consecutive 0s and $n_2$ 1s with max $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Can we employ the same method? Just out of curiosity.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – AspiringMat
                                  Sep 29 '16 at 14:26




                                  $begingroup$
                                  Thanks for the answer. How would I cope if there was even further constrictions on the number of 1s and 0s we can use. For example $n_1$ 0s with max $k_1$ consecutive 0s and $n_2$ 1s with max $k_2$ consecutive 1s. Can we employ the same method? Just out of curiosity.
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – AspiringMat
                                  Sep 29 '16 at 14:26












                                  $begingroup$
                                  As asked, you have now required a fixed length of the string at $n_1+n_2$. This is more easily handled by picking the places for the $1$'s and making sure you satisfy the restrictions, using inclusion/exclusion. If you want to require a certain string of $1$'s but forbid some longer string, yes, but the number of states can get unwieldy. Each $A(-,k)$ and $B(-,k)$ represents a state in a Markov chain. You need a new variable for each state, so will need $C(-,k)$ to be unacceptable strings ending in $k 1$'s
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Ross Millikan
                                  Sep 29 '16 at 14:32




                                  $begingroup$
                                  As asked, you have now required a fixed length of the string at $n_1+n_2$. This is more easily handled by picking the places for the $1$'s and making sure you satisfy the restrictions, using inclusion/exclusion. If you want to require a certain string of $1$'s but forbid some longer string, yes, but the number of states can get unwieldy. Each $A(-,k)$ and $B(-,k)$ represents a state in a Markov chain. You need a new variable for each state, so will need $C(-,k)$ to be unacceptable strings ending in $k 1$'s
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Ross Millikan
                                  Sep 29 '16 at 14:32












                                  $begingroup$
                                  @RossMillikan: Anyway, the ordinary generating function associated to this problem is easy to write down, so instead of considering a huge Markov chain and diagonalize it, it is faster to look at the zeroes of $1-p_{k_1}(x)p_{k_2}(x)$ - i.e. we already know the characteristic polynomial, despite "hugeness".
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Jack D'Aurizio
                                  Sep 29 '16 at 15:48




                                  $begingroup$
                                  @RossMillikan: Anyway, the ordinary generating function associated to this problem is easy to write down, so instead of considering a huge Markov chain and diagonalize it, it is faster to look at the zeroes of $1-p_{k_1}(x)p_{k_2}(x)$ - i.e. we already know the characteristic polynomial, despite "hugeness".
                                  $endgroup$
                                  – Jack D'Aurizio
                                  Sep 29 '16 at 15:48











                                  0












                                  $begingroup$

                                  Let me to begin with changing the $k$s to $k_0$ and $k_1$, so to help and remember their association with the values.



                                  First step is to fix the total number of ones at , let say $0 leqslant q leqslant n$ (and the number of zeros is consequently fixed).
                                  We know the total number of ways to obtain strings of length $n$ with $q$ ones, so we will at end accomodate for that.
                                  Then your scheme is equivalent to many other combinatorial ones, e.g.
                                  number of lattice paths from $(0,0)$ to $(n-q,q)$ with steps from $left{ {left( {1 ldots k_0 ,0} right),left( {0,1 ldots k_1 } right)} right}$.

                                  After fixing the total number of $1$s, let now fix the number of $1$-blocks at $m$.
                                  The number of $0$-blocks will be either $m$ (if the string starts and ends with different values), or $m-1$ (starts and ends with $1$) or $m+1$ (starts and ends with $0$).

                                  The number of ways to arrange $q$ ones into $m$ blocks with no more than $k_1$ in each, is the number of compositions of $q$ in $m$ parts of max size $k_1$.
                                  An expression for that can be derived from the answers to Rolling dice problem (re. to there for details), where we have:
                                  $$
                                  N_{,b} (s,r,m) = text{No}text{. of solutions to};left{ begin{gathered}
                                  0 leqslant text{integer }x_{,j} leqslant r hfill \
                                  x_{,1} + x_{,2} + cdots + x_{,m} = s hfill \
                                  end{gathered} right.
                                  $$
                                  which can be expressed as
                                  $$
                                  N_{,b} (s,r,m)quad left| {;0 le {rm integers};s,r,m} right.quad = sumlimits_{left( {0, le } right),k,left( { le ,{s over r}, le ,m} right)} {left( { - 1} right)^{,k} left( matrix{
                                  m cr
                                  k cr} right)left( matrix{
                                  s + m - 1 - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr
                                  s - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr} right)}
                                  $$
                                  In our case, since the number of $1$s goes from $1$ to $k_1$, we shall replace $r$ with $k_1-1$ and $s$ with $q-m$.

                                  Now we shall intersperse the $1$-blocks into the $0$-blocks "comb-to-comb".
                                  The number of ways to make up the $0$-blocks follows the same formula, with the appropriate parameters.

                                  Considering that the "starting-block($0$/$1$)-end-block($0$/$1$)" represents a partition of the considered strings,
                                  it is not difficult to make up the four parts and conclude:
                                  $$
                                  begin{gathered}
                                  N(k_{,0} ,k_{,1} ,n,q,m) = hfill \
                                  = N_b (q - m,k_{,1} - 1,m)left( {N_b (n - q - m + 1,k_{,0} - 1,m - 1) + 2N_b (n - q - m,k_{,0} - 1,m) + N_b (n - q - m - 1,k_{,0} - 1,m + 1)} right) hfill \
                                  end{gathered}
                                  $$
                                  In summing through $m$ and then $p$ (after multiplying by C(n,q)), note that in the $N_{,b} (s,r,m)$ formula, the bounds in the summation and in the parameters may be omitted (practically: stretched from $0$ to a suitable max),
                                  because the binomials (as defined and as written), or the sum itself, are null for $m<k$ and $mr<s$, etc., being enough to ensure that $0 leqslant r$.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer











                                  $endgroup$


















                                    0












                                    $begingroup$

                                    Let me to begin with changing the $k$s to $k_0$ and $k_1$, so to help and remember their association with the values.



                                    First step is to fix the total number of ones at , let say $0 leqslant q leqslant n$ (and the number of zeros is consequently fixed).
                                    We know the total number of ways to obtain strings of length $n$ with $q$ ones, so we will at end accomodate for that.
                                    Then your scheme is equivalent to many other combinatorial ones, e.g.
                                    number of lattice paths from $(0,0)$ to $(n-q,q)$ with steps from $left{ {left( {1 ldots k_0 ,0} right),left( {0,1 ldots k_1 } right)} right}$.

                                    After fixing the total number of $1$s, let now fix the number of $1$-blocks at $m$.
                                    The number of $0$-blocks will be either $m$ (if the string starts and ends with different values), or $m-1$ (starts and ends with $1$) or $m+1$ (starts and ends with $0$).

                                    The number of ways to arrange $q$ ones into $m$ blocks with no more than $k_1$ in each, is the number of compositions of $q$ in $m$ parts of max size $k_1$.
                                    An expression for that can be derived from the answers to Rolling dice problem (re. to there for details), where we have:
                                    $$
                                    N_{,b} (s,r,m) = text{No}text{. of solutions to};left{ begin{gathered}
                                    0 leqslant text{integer }x_{,j} leqslant r hfill \
                                    x_{,1} + x_{,2} + cdots + x_{,m} = s hfill \
                                    end{gathered} right.
                                    $$
                                    which can be expressed as
                                    $$
                                    N_{,b} (s,r,m)quad left| {;0 le {rm integers};s,r,m} right.quad = sumlimits_{left( {0, le } right),k,left( { le ,{s over r}, le ,m} right)} {left( { - 1} right)^{,k} left( matrix{
                                    m cr
                                    k cr} right)left( matrix{
                                    s + m - 1 - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr
                                    s - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr} right)}
                                    $$
                                    In our case, since the number of $1$s goes from $1$ to $k_1$, we shall replace $r$ with $k_1-1$ and $s$ with $q-m$.

                                    Now we shall intersperse the $1$-blocks into the $0$-blocks "comb-to-comb".
                                    The number of ways to make up the $0$-blocks follows the same formula, with the appropriate parameters.

                                    Considering that the "starting-block($0$/$1$)-end-block($0$/$1$)" represents a partition of the considered strings,
                                    it is not difficult to make up the four parts and conclude:
                                    $$
                                    begin{gathered}
                                    N(k_{,0} ,k_{,1} ,n,q,m) = hfill \
                                    = N_b (q - m,k_{,1} - 1,m)left( {N_b (n - q - m + 1,k_{,0} - 1,m - 1) + 2N_b (n - q - m,k_{,0} - 1,m) + N_b (n - q - m - 1,k_{,0} - 1,m + 1)} right) hfill \
                                    end{gathered}
                                    $$
                                    In summing through $m$ and then $p$ (after multiplying by C(n,q)), note that in the $N_{,b} (s,r,m)$ formula, the bounds in the summation and in the parameters may be omitted (practically: stretched from $0$ to a suitable max),
                                    because the binomials (as defined and as written), or the sum itself, are null for $m<k$ and $mr<s$, etc., being enough to ensure that $0 leqslant r$.






                                    share|cite|improve this answer











                                    $endgroup$
















                                      0












                                      0








                                      0





                                      $begingroup$

                                      Let me to begin with changing the $k$s to $k_0$ and $k_1$, so to help and remember their association with the values.



                                      First step is to fix the total number of ones at , let say $0 leqslant q leqslant n$ (and the number of zeros is consequently fixed).
                                      We know the total number of ways to obtain strings of length $n$ with $q$ ones, so we will at end accomodate for that.
                                      Then your scheme is equivalent to many other combinatorial ones, e.g.
                                      number of lattice paths from $(0,0)$ to $(n-q,q)$ with steps from $left{ {left( {1 ldots k_0 ,0} right),left( {0,1 ldots k_1 } right)} right}$.

                                      After fixing the total number of $1$s, let now fix the number of $1$-blocks at $m$.
                                      The number of $0$-blocks will be either $m$ (if the string starts and ends with different values), or $m-1$ (starts and ends with $1$) or $m+1$ (starts and ends with $0$).

                                      The number of ways to arrange $q$ ones into $m$ blocks with no more than $k_1$ in each, is the number of compositions of $q$ in $m$ parts of max size $k_1$.
                                      An expression for that can be derived from the answers to Rolling dice problem (re. to there for details), where we have:
                                      $$
                                      N_{,b} (s,r,m) = text{No}text{. of solutions to};left{ begin{gathered}
                                      0 leqslant text{integer }x_{,j} leqslant r hfill \
                                      x_{,1} + x_{,2} + cdots + x_{,m} = s hfill \
                                      end{gathered} right.
                                      $$
                                      which can be expressed as
                                      $$
                                      N_{,b} (s,r,m)quad left| {;0 le {rm integers};s,r,m} right.quad = sumlimits_{left( {0, le } right),k,left( { le ,{s over r}, le ,m} right)} {left( { - 1} right)^{,k} left( matrix{
                                      m cr
                                      k cr} right)left( matrix{
                                      s + m - 1 - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr
                                      s - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr} right)}
                                      $$
                                      In our case, since the number of $1$s goes from $1$ to $k_1$, we shall replace $r$ with $k_1-1$ and $s$ with $q-m$.

                                      Now we shall intersperse the $1$-blocks into the $0$-blocks "comb-to-comb".
                                      The number of ways to make up the $0$-blocks follows the same formula, with the appropriate parameters.

                                      Considering that the "starting-block($0$/$1$)-end-block($0$/$1$)" represents a partition of the considered strings,
                                      it is not difficult to make up the four parts and conclude:
                                      $$
                                      begin{gathered}
                                      N(k_{,0} ,k_{,1} ,n,q,m) = hfill \
                                      = N_b (q - m,k_{,1} - 1,m)left( {N_b (n - q - m + 1,k_{,0} - 1,m - 1) + 2N_b (n - q - m,k_{,0} - 1,m) + N_b (n - q - m - 1,k_{,0} - 1,m + 1)} right) hfill \
                                      end{gathered}
                                      $$
                                      In summing through $m$ and then $p$ (after multiplying by C(n,q)), note that in the $N_{,b} (s,r,m)$ formula, the bounds in the summation and in the parameters may be omitted (practically: stretched from $0$ to a suitable max),
                                      because the binomials (as defined and as written), or the sum itself, are null for $m<k$ and $mr<s$, etc., being enough to ensure that $0 leqslant r$.






                                      share|cite|improve this answer











                                      $endgroup$



                                      Let me to begin with changing the $k$s to $k_0$ and $k_1$, so to help and remember their association with the values.



                                      First step is to fix the total number of ones at , let say $0 leqslant q leqslant n$ (and the number of zeros is consequently fixed).
                                      We know the total number of ways to obtain strings of length $n$ with $q$ ones, so we will at end accomodate for that.
                                      Then your scheme is equivalent to many other combinatorial ones, e.g.
                                      number of lattice paths from $(0,0)$ to $(n-q,q)$ with steps from $left{ {left( {1 ldots k_0 ,0} right),left( {0,1 ldots k_1 } right)} right}$.

                                      After fixing the total number of $1$s, let now fix the number of $1$-blocks at $m$.
                                      The number of $0$-blocks will be either $m$ (if the string starts and ends with different values), or $m-1$ (starts and ends with $1$) or $m+1$ (starts and ends with $0$).

                                      The number of ways to arrange $q$ ones into $m$ blocks with no more than $k_1$ in each, is the number of compositions of $q$ in $m$ parts of max size $k_1$.
                                      An expression for that can be derived from the answers to Rolling dice problem (re. to there for details), where we have:
                                      $$
                                      N_{,b} (s,r,m) = text{No}text{. of solutions to};left{ begin{gathered}
                                      0 leqslant text{integer }x_{,j} leqslant r hfill \
                                      x_{,1} + x_{,2} + cdots + x_{,m} = s hfill \
                                      end{gathered} right.
                                      $$
                                      which can be expressed as
                                      $$
                                      N_{,b} (s,r,m)quad left| {;0 le {rm integers};s,r,m} right.quad = sumlimits_{left( {0, le } right),k,left( { le ,{s over r}, le ,m} right)} {left( { - 1} right)^{,k} left( matrix{
                                      m cr
                                      k cr} right)left( matrix{
                                      s + m - 1 - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr
                                      s - kleft( {r + 1} right) cr} right)}
                                      $$
                                      In our case, since the number of $1$s goes from $1$ to $k_1$, we shall replace $r$ with $k_1-1$ and $s$ with $q-m$.

                                      Now we shall intersperse the $1$-blocks into the $0$-blocks "comb-to-comb".
                                      The number of ways to make up the $0$-blocks follows the same formula, with the appropriate parameters.

                                      Considering that the "starting-block($0$/$1$)-end-block($0$/$1$)" represents a partition of the considered strings,
                                      it is not difficult to make up the four parts and conclude:
                                      $$
                                      begin{gathered}
                                      N(k_{,0} ,k_{,1} ,n,q,m) = hfill \
                                      = N_b (q - m,k_{,1} - 1,m)left( {N_b (n - q - m + 1,k_{,0} - 1,m - 1) + 2N_b (n - q - m,k_{,0} - 1,m) + N_b (n - q - m - 1,k_{,0} - 1,m + 1)} right) hfill \
                                      end{gathered}
                                      $$
                                      In summing through $m$ and then $p$ (after multiplying by C(n,q)), note that in the $N_{,b} (s,r,m)$ formula, the bounds in the summation and in the parameters may be omitted (practically: stretched from $0$ to a suitable max),
                                      because the binomials (as defined and as written), or the sum itself, are null for $m<k$ and $mr<s$, etc., being enough to ensure that $0 leqslant r$.







                                      share|cite|improve this answer














                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer








                                      edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:19









                                      Community

                                      1




                                      1










                                      answered Sep 29 '16 at 17:50









                                      G CabG Cab

                                      19.6k31239




                                      19.6k31239























                                          0












                                          $begingroup$


                                          We consider the binary alphabet $V={0,1}$ and look for the number $g_n(k_1,k_2)$ of binary words of length $n$ which contain runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$.




                                          Words with no consecutive equal characters at all are called Smirnov or Carlitz words. See example III.24 Smirnov words from Analytic Combinatorics by Philippe Flajolet and Robert Sedgewick for more information.



                                          A generating function for the number of Smirnov words over a binary alphabet is given by
                                          begin{align*}
                                          left(1-frac{2z}{1+z}right)^{-1}tag{1}
                                          end{align*}




                                          We replace occurrences of $0$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_1$ zeros to generate strings having runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$
                                          begin{align*}
                                          zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}tag{2}
                                          end{align*}



                                          We replace occurrences of $1$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_2$ ones to generate strings having runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$
                                          begin{align*}
                                          zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}tag{3}
                                          end{align*}



                                          We substitue (2) and (3) in (1) and obtain



                                          begin{align*}
                                          &left(1- frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}
                                          - frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}right)^{-1}\
                                          &qquad=frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}tag{4}
                                          end{align*}



                                          Denoting with $[z^n]$ the coefficient of $z^n$ in a series we obtain from (4) the number of wanted words as
                                          begin{align*}
                                          color{blue}{g_n(k_1,k_2)
                                          =[z^n]frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}}tag{5}
                                          end{align*}




                                          Example: $n=5,k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                                          We consider the special case with words of length $5$ containing runs of $0$ with length at most $2$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $3$



                                          We obtain from (5) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                                          begin{align*}
                                          sum_{n=0}^infty g_n(k_1,k_2)z^n&=frac{(1+z)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}{1-z+2z^2-(z^3+z^4)(1+z)-z^7(1+3z)}\
                                          &=frac{(1+z)(1+z^2)(1+z+z^2)}{1-z^2-2z^3-2z^4-z^5}\
                                          &=1+2z+4z^2+7z^3+12z^4+color{blue}{21}z^5+36z^6+63z^7+cdots
                                          end{align*}



                                          We see the coefficient of $z^5$ is $21$.
                                          The $21$ valid words are
                                          $$
                                          begin{array}{cccc}
                                          00100&01001&10010&11001\
                                          00101&01010&10011&11010\
                                          00110&01011&10100&11011\
                                          00111&01100&10101&11100\
                                          &01101&10110&11101\
                                          &01110&10111&
                                          end{array}
                                          $$






                                          share|cite|improve this answer











                                          $endgroup$


















                                            0












                                            $begingroup$


                                            We consider the binary alphabet $V={0,1}$ and look for the number $g_n(k_1,k_2)$ of binary words of length $n$ which contain runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$.




                                            Words with no consecutive equal characters at all are called Smirnov or Carlitz words. See example III.24 Smirnov words from Analytic Combinatorics by Philippe Flajolet and Robert Sedgewick for more information.



                                            A generating function for the number of Smirnov words over a binary alphabet is given by
                                            begin{align*}
                                            left(1-frac{2z}{1+z}right)^{-1}tag{1}
                                            end{align*}




                                            We replace occurrences of $0$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_1$ zeros to generate strings having runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$
                                            begin{align*}
                                            zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}tag{2}
                                            end{align*}



                                            We replace occurrences of $1$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_2$ ones to generate strings having runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$
                                            begin{align*}
                                            zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}tag{3}
                                            end{align*}



                                            We substitue (2) and (3) in (1) and obtain



                                            begin{align*}
                                            &left(1- frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}
                                            - frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}right)^{-1}\
                                            &qquad=frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}tag{4}
                                            end{align*}



                                            Denoting with $[z^n]$ the coefficient of $z^n$ in a series we obtain from (4) the number of wanted words as
                                            begin{align*}
                                            color{blue}{g_n(k_1,k_2)
                                            =[z^n]frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}}tag{5}
                                            end{align*}




                                            Example: $n=5,k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                                            We consider the special case with words of length $5$ containing runs of $0$ with length at most $2$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $3$



                                            We obtain from (5) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                                            begin{align*}
                                            sum_{n=0}^infty g_n(k_1,k_2)z^n&=frac{(1+z)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}{1-z+2z^2-(z^3+z^4)(1+z)-z^7(1+3z)}\
                                            &=frac{(1+z)(1+z^2)(1+z+z^2)}{1-z^2-2z^3-2z^4-z^5}\
                                            &=1+2z+4z^2+7z^3+12z^4+color{blue}{21}z^5+36z^6+63z^7+cdots
                                            end{align*}



                                            We see the coefficient of $z^5$ is $21$.
                                            The $21$ valid words are
                                            $$
                                            begin{array}{cccc}
                                            00100&01001&10010&11001\
                                            00101&01010&10011&11010\
                                            00110&01011&10100&11011\
                                            00111&01100&10101&11100\
                                            &01101&10110&11101\
                                            &01110&10111&
                                            end{array}
                                            $$






                                            share|cite|improve this answer











                                            $endgroup$
















                                              0












                                              0








                                              0





                                              $begingroup$


                                              We consider the binary alphabet $V={0,1}$ and look for the number $g_n(k_1,k_2)$ of binary words of length $n$ which contain runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$.




                                              Words with no consecutive equal characters at all are called Smirnov or Carlitz words. See example III.24 Smirnov words from Analytic Combinatorics by Philippe Flajolet and Robert Sedgewick for more information.



                                              A generating function for the number of Smirnov words over a binary alphabet is given by
                                              begin{align*}
                                              left(1-frac{2z}{1+z}right)^{-1}tag{1}
                                              end{align*}




                                              We replace occurrences of $0$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_1$ zeros to generate strings having runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$
                                              begin{align*}
                                              zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}tag{2}
                                              end{align*}



                                              We replace occurrences of $1$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_2$ ones to generate strings having runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$
                                              begin{align*}
                                              zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}tag{3}
                                              end{align*}



                                              We substitue (2) and (3) in (1) and obtain



                                              begin{align*}
                                              &left(1- frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}
                                              - frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}right)^{-1}\
                                              &qquad=frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}tag{4}
                                              end{align*}



                                              Denoting with $[z^n]$ the coefficient of $z^n$ in a series we obtain from (4) the number of wanted words as
                                              begin{align*}
                                              color{blue}{g_n(k_1,k_2)
                                              =[z^n]frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}}tag{5}
                                              end{align*}




                                              Example: $n=5,k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                                              We consider the special case with words of length $5$ containing runs of $0$ with length at most $2$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $3$



                                              We obtain from (5) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                                              begin{align*}
                                              sum_{n=0}^infty g_n(k_1,k_2)z^n&=frac{(1+z)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}{1-z+2z^2-(z^3+z^4)(1+z)-z^7(1+3z)}\
                                              &=frac{(1+z)(1+z^2)(1+z+z^2)}{1-z^2-2z^3-2z^4-z^5}\
                                              &=1+2z+4z^2+7z^3+12z^4+color{blue}{21}z^5+36z^6+63z^7+cdots
                                              end{align*}



                                              We see the coefficient of $z^5$ is $21$.
                                              The $21$ valid words are
                                              $$
                                              begin{array}{cccc}
                                              00100&01001&10010&11001\
                                              00101&01010&10011&11010\
                                              00110&01011&10100&11011\
                                              00111&01100&10101&11100\
                                              &01101&10110&11101\
                                              &01110&10111&
                                              end{array}
                                              $$






                                              share|cite|improve this answer











                                              $endgroup$




                                              We consider the binary alphabet $V={0,1}$ and look for the number $g_n(k_1,k_2)$ of binary words of length $n$ which contain runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$.




                                              Words with no consecutive equal characters at all are called Smirnov or Carlitz words. See example III.24 Smirnov words from Analytic Combinatorics by Philippe Flajolet and Robert Sedgewick for more information.



                                              A generating function for the number of Smirnov words over a binary alphabet is given by
                                              begin{align*}
                                              left(1-frac{2z}{1+z}right)^{-1}tag{1}
                                              end{align*}




                                              We replace occurrences of $0$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_1$ zeros to generate strings having runs of $0$ with length at most $k_1$
                                              begin{align*}
                                              zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_1}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}tag{2}
                                              end{align*}



                                              We replace occurrences of $1$ in a Smirnov word by one up to $k_2$ ones to generate strings having runs of $1$ with length at most $k_2$
                                              begin{align*}
                                              zlongrightarrow z+z^2+cdots+z^{k_2}=frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}tag{3}
                                              end{align*}



                                              We substitue (2) and (3) in (1) and obtain



                                              begin{align*}
                                              &left(1- frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_1}right)}{1-z}}
                                              - frac{frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}{1+frac{zleft(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z}}right)^{-1}\
                                              &qquad=frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}tag{4}
                                              end{align*}



                                              Denoting with $[z^n]$ the coefficient of $z^n$ in a series we obtain from (4) the number of wanted words as
                                              begin{align*}
                                              color{blue}{g_n(k_1,k_2)
                                              =[z^n]frac{(1+z)left(1-z^{k_1}right)left(1-z^{k_2}right)}{1-z+2z^2-left(z^{k_1+1}+z^{k_2+1}right)(1+z)-z^{k_1+k_2+2}(1+3z)}}tag{5}
                                              end{align*}




                                              Example: $n=5,k_1=2,k_2=3$.



                                              We consider the special case with words of length $5$ containing runs of $0$ with length at most $2$ and runs of $1$ with length at most $3$



                                              We obtain from (5) with some help of Wolfram Alpha



                                              begin{align*}
                                              sum_{n=0}^infty g_n(k_1,k_2)z^n&=frac{(1+z)(1-z^3)(1-z^4)}{1-z+2z^2-(z^3+z^4)(1+z)-z^7(1+3z)}\
                                              &=frac{(1+z)(1+z^2)(1+z+z^2)}{1-z^2-2z^3-2z^4-z^5}\
                                              &=1+2z+4z^2+7z^3+12z^4+color{blue}{21}z^5+36z^6+63z^7+cdots
                                              end{align*}



                                              We see the coefficient of $z^5$ is $21$.
                                              The $21$ valid words are
                                              $$
                                              begin{array}{cccc}
                                              00100&01001&10010&11001\
                                              00101&01010&10011&11010\
                                              00110&01011&10100&11011\
                                              00111&01100&10101&11100\
                                              &01101&10110&11101\
                                              &01110&10111&
                                              end{array}
                                              $$







                                              share|cite|improve this answer














                                              share|cite|improve this answer



                                              share|cite|improve this answer








                                              edited Dec 24 '18 at 9:24

























                                              answered Dec 24 '18 at 0:47









                                              Markus ScheuerMarkus Scheuer

                                              61.9k457149




                                              61.9k457149






























                                                  draft saved

                                                  draft discarded




















































                                                  Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                                  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                                  But avoid



                                                  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                                  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                                  Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                                  To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                                  draft saved


                                                  draft discarded














                                                  StackExchange.ready(
                                                  function () {
                                                  StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1946514%2fnumber-of-bit-strings-of-length-n-with-no-k-11-consecutive-0s-and-no-k-21%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                                  }
                                                  );

                                                  Post as a guest















                                                  Required, but never shown





















































                                                  Required, but never shown














                                                  Required, but never shown












                                                  Required, but never shown







                                                  Required, but never shown

































                                                  Required, but never shown














                                                  Required, but never shown












                                                  Required, but never shown







                                                  Required, but never shown







                                                  Popular posts from this blog

                                                  Ellipse (mathématiques)

                                                  Quarter-circle Tiles

                                                  Mont Emei