Where the monotone pattern (mostly) rules
From MaRDI portal
Abstract: We consider pattern containment and avoidance with a very tight definition that was used first by Riordan more than 60 years ago. Using this definition, we prove the monotone pattern is easier to avoid than almost any other pattern of the same length. We also show that with this definition, almost all patterns of length are avoided by the same number of permutations of length . The corresponding statements are not known to be true for more relaxed definitions of pattern containment. This is the first time we know of that expectations are used to compare numbers of permutations avoiding certain patterns.
Recommendations
Cites work
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3529866 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1033382 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 2107707 (Why is no real title available?)
- A note on permutations without runs of given length
- Consecutive patterns in permutations
- Counting permutations by their rigid patterns
- Generalized permutation patterns and a classification of the Mahonian statistics
- New records in Stanley-Wilf limits
- Note on Runs of Consecutive Elements
- Permutations without 3-sequences
- The Asymptotic Distribution of Runs of Consecutive Elements
- The limit of a Stanley-Wilf sequence is not always rational, and layered patterns beat monotone patterns
Cited in
(5)
This page was built for publication: Where the monotone pattern (mostly) rules
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q998460)