Induction and recursion

Chapter 4

With Question/Answer Animations

Copyright © McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Chapter Summary
● Mathematical Induction

● Recursive Definitions
Mathematical Induction
Section 4.1
Section Summary
● Mathematical Induction
● Examples of Proof by Mathematical Induction
● Mistaken Proofs by Mathematical Induction
● Guidelines for Proofs by Mathematical Induction
Climbing an
Infinite Ladder
Suppose we have an infinite ladder:
1. We can reach the first rung of the ladder.
2. If we can reach a particular rung of the ladder, then we can
reach the next rung.

From (1), we can reach the first rung. Then by

applying (2), we can reach the second rung.
Applying (2) again, the third rung. And so on.
We can apply (2) any number of times to reach
any particular rung, no matter how high up.

This example motivates proof by

mathematical induction.
 Principle of Mathematical Induction
Principle of Mathematical Induction: To prove that P(n) is true for all
positive integers n, we complete these steps:
● Basis Step: Show that P(1) is true.
● Inductive Step: Show that P(k) → P(k + 1) is true for all positive integers k.
To complete the inductive step, assuming the inductive hypothesis that
P(k) holds for an arbitrary integer k, show that must P(k + 1) be true.

Climbing an Infinite Ladder

Example:
● BASIS STEP: By (1), we can reach rung
1.
● INDUCTIVE STEP: Assume the
inductive hypothesis that we can
reach rung k. Then by (2), we can
reach rung k + 1.
Hence, P(k) → P(k + 1) is true for all
positive integers k. We can reach
every rung on the ladder.
Important Points About Using
Mathematical Induction
● Mathematical induction can be expressed as the rule of
inference
(P(1) ∧ ∀k (P(k) → P(k + 1))) → ∀n P(n),
where the domain is the set of positive integers.
● Remark: In a proof by mathematical induction, we don’t
assume that P(k) is true for all positive integers! We show
that if we assume that P(k) is true, then P(k + 1) must also
be true.
● Remark: Proofs by mathematical induction do not always
start at the integer 1. In such a case, the basis step begins
at a starting point b where b is an integer. We will see
examples of this soon.
Validity of Mathematical Induction
● Mathematical induction is valid because of the well ordering property, which
states that every nonempty subset of the set of positive integers has a least
element.
Here is the proof:
● Suppose that P(1) holds and P(k) → P(k + 1) is true for all positive integers
k.
● Assume there is at least one positive integer n for which P(n) is false. Then
the set S of positive integers for which P(n) is false is nonempty.
● By the well-ordering property, S has a least element, say m.
● We know that m can not be 1 since P(1) holds.
● Since m is positive and greater than 1, m − 1 must be a positive integer. Since
m − 1 < m, it is not in S, so P(m − 1) must be true.
● But then, since the conditional P(k) → P(k + 1) for every positive integer k
holds, P(m) must also be true. This contradicts P(m) being false.
● Hence, P(n) must be true for every positive integer n.
 Remembering How Mathematical
Induction Works

Consider an infinite We know that the first domino is

sequence of dominoes, knocked down, i.e., P(1) is true .
labeled 1,2,3, …, where
each domino is standing. We also know that if whenever
the kth domino is knocked over,
Let P(n) be the it knocks over the (k + 1)st
proposition that the domino, i.e, P(k) → P(k + 1) is
nth domino is true for all positive integers k.
knocked over.

Hence, all dominos are knocked over.

P(n) is true for all positive integers n.

Proving a Summation Formula by
Mathematical Induction
Example: Show that:
Solution: Let P(n) be the proposition that
● BASIS STEP: P(1) is true since 1(1 + 1)/2 = 1.
● INDUCTIVE STEP: Assume true for P(k).

The inductive hypothesis is

Under this assumption,
Conjecturing and Proving Correct a
Summation Formula
Example: Conjecture and prove correct a formula for the sum of the first n positive odd integers. Then
prove your conjecture.
Solution: We have: 1= 1, 1 + 3 = 4, 1 + 3 + 5 = 9, 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 = 16, 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 9 = 25.
● We can conjecture that the sum of the first n positive odd integers is n2,

1 + 3 + 5 + ∙∙∙+ (2n − 1) + (2n + 1) =n2 .

● We prove the conjecture is proved correct with mathematical induction.
● BASIS STEP: P(1) is true since 12 = 1.
● INDUCTIVE STEP: P(k) → P(k + 1) for every positive integer k.
Assume the inductive hypothesis holds and then show that P(k + 1) holds has well.

Inductive Hypothesis: 1 + 3 + 5 + ∙∙∙+ (2k

● So, assuming P(k), it follows − 1) =k2
that:

1 + 3 + 5 + ∙∙∙+ (2k − 1) + (2k + 1) =[1 + 3 + 5 + ∙∙∙+ (2k − 1)] + (2k + 1)

= k2 + (2k + 1) (by the inductive hypothesis)
= k2 + 2k + 1
= (k + 1) 2
● Hence, we have shown that P(k + 1) follows from P(k). Therefore the sum of the first n positive odd integers is
n 2.
Proving Inequalities
Example: Use mathematical induction to prove that n < 2n
for all positive integers n.
Solution: Let P(n) be the proposition that n < 2n.
● BASIS STEP: P(1) is true since 1 < 21 = 2.
● INDUCTIVE STEP: Assume P(k) holds, i.e., k < 2k, for an
arbitrary positive integer k.
● Must show that P(k + 1) holds. Since by the inductive
hypothesis, k < 2k, it follows that:
k + 1 < 2k + 1 ≤ 2k + 2k = 2 ∙ 2k = 2k+1
Therefore n < 2n holds for all positive integers n.
Proving Inequalities
Example: Use mathematical induction to prove that 2n < n!,
for every integer n ≥ 4.
Solution: Let P(n) be the proposition that 2n < n!.
● BASIS STEP: P(4) is true since 24 = 16 < 4! = 24.
● INDUCTIVE STEP: Assume P(k) holds, i.e., 2k < k! for an
arbitrary integer k ≥ 4. To show that P(k + 1) holds:
2k+1 = 2∙2k
< 2∙ k! (by the inductive hypothesis)

< (k + 1)k!

= (k + 1)!
Therefore, 2n < n! holds, for every integer n ≥ 4.

Note that here the basis step is P(4), since P(0), P(1), P(2), and P(3) are all false.
Proving Divisibility Results
Example: Use mathematical induction to prove that n3 − n is
divisible by 3, for every positive integer n.
Solution: Let P(n) be the proposition that n3 − n is divisible by 3.
● BASIS STEP: P(1) is true since 13 − 1 = 0, which is divisible by 3.
● INDUCTIVE STEP: Assume P(k) holds, i.e., k3 − k is divisible by 3, for
an arbitrary positive integer k. To show that P(k + 1) follows:
(k + 1)3 − (k + 1) = (k3 + 3k2 + 3k + 1) − (k + 1)
= (k3 − k) + 3(k2 + k)
By the inductive hypothesis, the first term (k3 − k) is divisible by 3 and
the second term is divisible by 3 since it is an integer multiplied by 3. So
by part (i) of Theorem 1 in Section 4.1 , (k + 1)3 − (k + 1) is divisible by 3.
Therefore, n3 − n is divisible by 3, for every integer positive integer n.
Number of Subsets of a Finite Set
Example: Use mathematical induction to show that if S
is a finite set with n elements, where n is a nonnegative
integer, then S has 2n subsets.
(Chapter 6 uses combinatorial methods to prove this result.)
Solution: Let P(n) be the proposition that a set with n
elements has 2n subsets.
● Basis Step: P(0) is true, because the empty set has only
itself as a subset and 20 = 1.
● Inductive Step: Assume P(k) is true for an arbitrary
nonnegative integer k.
continued →
Number of Subsets of a Finite Set
Inductive Hypothesis: For an arbitrary nonnegative integer k,
every set with k elements has 2k subsets.
● Let T be a set with k + 1 elements. Then T = S ∪ {a}, where a ∈ T and S =
T − {a}. Hence |S| = k.
● For each subset X of S, there are exactly two subsets of T, i.e., X and
X ∪ {a}.

● By the inductive hypothesis S has 2k subsets. Since there are two subsets
of T for each subset of S, the number of subsets of T is 2 ∙2k = 2k+1 .
Tiling Checkerboards
Example: Show that every 2n ×2n checkerboard with one square removed can be tiled
using right triominoes.

A right triomino is an L-shaped tile which covers

three squares at a time.
Solution: Let P(n) be the proposition that every 2n ×2n checkerboard with one square
removed can be tiled using right triominoes. Use mathematical induction to prove
that P(n) is true for all positive integers n.
● BASIS STEP: P(1) is true, because each of the four 2 ×2 checkerboards with one square
removed can be tiled using one right triomino.

● INDUCTIVE STEP: Assume that P(k) is true for every 2k ×2k checkerboard, for some
positive integer k.

continued →
Tiling Checkerboards
Inductive Hypothesis: Every 2k ×2k checkerboard, for some
positive integer k, with one square removed can be tiled using
right triominoes.
● Consider a 2k+1 ×2k+1 checkerboard with one square removed. Split this checkerboard into four
checkerboards of size 2k ×2k,by dividing it in half in both directions.

● Remove a square from one of the four 2k ×2k checkerboards. By the inductive hypothesis, this board can
be tiled. Also by the inductive hypothesis, the other three boards can be tiled with the square from the
corner of the center of the original board removed. We can then cover the three adjacent squares with a
triominoe.
● Hence, the entire 2k+1 ×2k+1 checkerboard with one square removed can be tiled using right triominoes.
An Incorrect “Proof” by Mathematical
Induction
Example: Let P(n) be the statement that every set of n lines in the
plane, no two of which are parallel, meet in a common point.
Here is a “proof” that P(n) is true for all positive integers n ≥ 2.
● BASIS STEP: The statement P(2) is true because any two lines in the
plane that are not parallel meet in a common point.
● INDUCTIVE STEP: The inductive hypothesis is the statement that
P(k) is true for the positive integer k ≥ 2, i.e., every set of k lines in
the plane, no two of which are parallel, meet in a common point.
● We must show that if P(k) holds, then P(k + 1) holds, i.e., if every
set of k lines in the plane, no two of which are parallel, k ≥ 2, meet
in a common point, then every set of k + 1 lines in the plane, no two
of which are parallel, meet in a common point.

continued →
An Incorrect “Proof” by Mathematical
Induction
Inductive Hypothesis: Every set of k lines in the plane, where k
≥ 2, no two of which are parallel, meet in a common point.
● Consider a set of k + 1 distinct lines in the plane, no two parallel. By the inductive
hypothesis, the first k of these lines must meet in a common point p1. By the inductive
hypothesis, the last k of these lines meet in a common point p2.
● If p and p are different points, all lines containing both of them must be the same
1 2
line since two points determine a line. This contradicts the assumption that the lines
are distinct. Hence, p1 = p2 lies on all k + 1 distinct lines, and therefore P(k + 1) holds.
Assuming that k ≥2, distinct lines meet in a common point, then every k + 1 lines
meet in a common point.
● There must be an error in this proof since the conclusion is absurd. But where is the
error?
● Answer: P(k)→ P(k + 1) only holds for k ≥3. It is not the case that P(2) implies P(3). The first
two lines must meet in a common point p1 and the second two must meet in a common point
p2. They do not have to be the same point since only the second line is common to both sets of
lines.
 Guidelines:
Mathematical Induction Proofs
 Terminology
● Mathematical Induction : Quy nạp toán học
● Inductive hypothesis : Giả thuyết quy nạp
● Well-ordering property : Tính sắp thứ tự tốt
● Divisibility: Tính chia hết
● Inequalitie: Bất đẳng thức
● Conjecturing: Việc đặt giả thuyết
● Summation Formula: Công thức tính tổng
● Tiling Checkerboards: Lát bàn cờ
● Parallel: Song song
 Terminology
● Line: Đường thẳng
● Plane: Mặt phẳng
● Common point: Điểm chung
● Distinct lines: Các đường thẳng phân biệt
● Contradict: Mâu thuẫn