'selfish' set to be a set which has its own cardinality (number of elements) as an element

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












Define a selfish set to be a set which has its own cardinality (number of elements) as an element. Find, with proof, the number of subsets of $1, 2, ldots, n$ which are minimal selfish sets, that is, selfish sets none of whose proper subsets is selfish.



My Attempt:
Assume $textbfA$ to be a selfish set. If the cardinality of $textbfA$ is $c$, then can $textbfA$ contain $1,2,3....c-1$. Definitely answer is no. because if it contains $k<c$ then deleting $c-k$ elements except $k$ from $textbfA$ gives a subset of k elements contradicting the fact that $textbfA$ is minimal selfish.
Thus $textbfA$ must contain elements greater than or equal to $c$. But how do I find the minimal selfish sets with order $c$?










share|cite|improve this question























  • Reference note: This question, including the terminology, was problem B1 on the 1996 Putnam.
    – jmerry
    Dec 8 at 7:51














up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1












Define a selfish set to be a set which has its own cardinality (number of elements) as an element. Find, with proof, the number of subsets of $1, 2, ldots, n$ which are minimal selfish sets, that is, selfish sets none of whose proper subsets is selfish.



My Attempt:
Assume $textbfA$ to be a selfish set. If the cardinality of $textbfA$ is $c$, then can $textbfA$ contain $1,2,3....c-1$. Definitely answer is no. because if it contains $k<c$ then deleting $c-k$ elements except $k$ from $textbfA$ gives a subset of k elements contradicting the fact that $textbfA$ is minimal selfish.
Thus $textbfA$ must contain elements greater than or equal to $c$. But how do I find the minimal selfish sets with order $c$?










share|cite|improve this question























  • Reference note: This question, including the terminology, was problem B1 on the 1996 Putnam.
    – jmerry
    Dec 8 at 7:51












up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
4
down vote

favorite
1






1





Define a selfish set to be a set which has its own cardinality (number of elements) as an element. Find, with proof, the number of subsets of $1, 2, ldots, n$ which are minimal selfish sets, that is, selfish sets none of whose proper subsets is selfish.



My Attempt:
Assume $textbfA$ to be a selfish set. If the cardinality of $textbfA$ is $c$, then can $textbfA$ contain $1,2,3....c-1$. Definitely answer is no. because if it contains $k<c$ then deleting $c-k$ elements except $k$ from $textbfA$ gives a subset of k elements contradicting the fact that $textbfA$ is minimal selfish.
Thus $textbfA$ must contain elements greater than or equal to $c$. But how do I find the minimal selfish sets with order $c$?










share|cite|improve this question















Define a selfish set to be a set which has its own cardinality (number of elements) as an element. Find, with proof, the number of subsets of $1, 2, ldots, n$ which are minimal selfish sets, that is, selfish sets none of whose proper subsets is selfish.



My Attempt:
Assume $textbfA$ to be a selfish set. If the cardinality of $textbfA$ is $c$, then can $textbfA$ contain $1,2,3....c-1$. Definitely answer is no. because if it contains $k<c$ then deleting $c-k$ elements except $k$ from $textbfA$ gives a subset of k elements contradicting the fact that $textbfA$ is minimal selfish.
Thus $textbfA$ must contain elements greater than or equal to $c$. But how do I find the minimal selfish sets with order $c$?







combinatorics discrete-mathematics






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 8 at 10:20









Mutantoe

558411




558411










asked Dec 8 at 6:03









Suraj

1309




1309











  • Reference note: This question, including the terminology, was problem B1 on the 1996 Putnam.
    – jmerry
    Dec 8 at 7:51
















  • Reference note: This question, including the terminology, was problem B1 on the 1996 Putnam.
    – jmerry
    Dec 8 at 7:51















Reference note: This question, including the terminology, was problem B1 on the 1996 Putnam.
– jmerry
Dec 8 at 7:51




Reference note: This question, including the terminology, was problem B1 on the 1996 Putnam.
– jmerry
Dec 8 at 7:51










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
5
down vote



accepted










Your argument is correct.



Lets see if recursion helps.



Let $[n]$ denote the set $1,2,ldots,n$, and let $f_n$ denote the
number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$. Then the number of
minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$ not containing $n$ is equal to
$f_n-1$. On the other hand, for any minimal selfish subset of $[n]$
containing $n$, by subtracting 1 from each element, and then taking
away the element $n-1$ from the set, we obtain a minimal selfish
subset of $[n-2]$ (since $1$ and $n$ cannot both occur in a selfish
set). Conversely, any minimal selfish subset of $[n-2]$ gives rise to
a minimal selfish subset of $[n]$ containing $n$ by the inverse
procedure. Hence the number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$
containing $n$ is $f_n-2$. Thus we obtain $f_n=f_n-1+f_n-2$.
Since $f_1=f_2=1$, we have $f_n=F_n$, where $F_n$ denotes the $n$th
term of the Fibonacci sequence.






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Your logic so far is fine. So what you know is that, since $c$ is in the set, then the other $c-1$ elements must all be at least $c+1$. There are $binomn-cc-1$ ways to choose them.



    Summing over these gives you the total count. It turns out that this gives you the $n^th$ Fibonacci number, which you can prove by induction (hint: use Pascal’s identity).






    share|cite|improve this answer




















      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',
      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%2f3030745%2fselfish-set-to-be-a-set-which-has-its-own-cardinality-number-of-elements-as%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      5
      down vote



      accepted










      Your argument is correct.



      Lets see if recursion helps.



      Let $[n]$ denote the set $1,2,ldots,n$, and let $f_n$ denote the
      number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$. Then the number of
      minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$ not containing $n$ is equal to
      $f_n-1$. On the other hand, for any minimal selfish subset of $[n]$
      containing $n$, by subtracting 1 from each element, and then taking
      away the element $n-1$ from the set, we obtain a minimal selfish
      subset of $[n-2]$ (since $1$ and $n$ cannot both occur in a selfish
      set). Conversely, any minimal selfish subset of $[n-2]$ gives rise to
      a minimal selfish subset of $[n]$ containing $n$ by the inverse
      procedure. Hence the number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$
      containing $n$ is $f_n-2$. Thus we obtain $f_n=f_n-1+f_n-2$.
      Since $f_1=f_2=1$, we have $f_n=F_n$, where $F_n$ denotes the $n$th
      term of the Fibonacci sequence.






      share|cite|improve this answer
























        up vote
        5
        down vote



        accepted










        Your argument is correct.



        Lets see if recursion helps.



        Let $[n]$ denote the set $1,2,ldots,n$, and let $f_n$ denote the
        number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$. Then the number of
        minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$ not containing $n$ is equal to
        $f_n-1$. On the other hand, for any minimal selfish subset of $[n]$
        containing $n$, by subtracting 1 from each element, and then taking
        away the element $n-1$ from the set, we obtain a minimal selfish
        subset of $[n-2]$ (since $1$ and $n$ cannot both occur in a selfish
        set). Conversely, any minimal selfish subset of $[n-2]$ gives rise to
        a minimal selfish subset of $[n]$ containing $n$ by the inverse
        procedure. Hence the number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$
        containing $n$ is $f_n-2$. Thus we obtain $f_n=f_n-1+f_n-2$.
        Since $f_1=f_2=1$, we have $f_n=F_n$, where $F_n$ denotes the $n$th
        term of the Fibonacci sequence.






        share|cite|improve this answer






















          up vote
          5
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          5
          down vote



          accepted






          Your argument is correct.



          Lets see if recursion helps.



          Let $[n]$ denote the set $1,2,ldots,n$, and let $f_n$ denote the
          number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$. Then the number of
          minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$ not containing $n$ is equal to
          $f_n-1$. On the other hand, for any minimal selfish subset of $[n]$
          containing $n$, by subtracting 1 from each element, and then taking
          away the element $n-1$ from the set, we obtain a minimal selfish
          subset of $[n-2]$ (since $1$ and $n$ cannot both occur in a selfish
          set). Conversely, any minimal selfish subset of $[n-2]$ gives rise to
          a minimal selfish subset of $[n]$ containing $n$ by the inverse
          procedure. Hence the number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$
          containing $n$ is $f_n-2$. Thus we obtain $f_n=f_n-1+f_n-2$.
          Since $f_1=f_2=1$, we have $f_n=F_n$, where $F_n$ denotes the $n$th
          term of the Fibonacci sequence.






          share|cite|improve this answer












          Your argument is correct.



          Lets see if recursion helps.



          Let $[n]$ denote the set $1,2,ldots,n$, and let $f_n$ denote the
          number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$. Then the number of
          minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$ not containing $n$ is equal to
          $f_n-1$. On the other hand, for any minimal selfish subset of $[n]$
          containing $n$, by subtracting 1 from each element, and then taking
          away the element $n-1$ from the set, we obtain a minimal selfish
          subset of $[n-2]$ (since $1$ and $n$ cannot both occur in a selfish
          set). Conversely, any minimal selfish subset of $[n-2]$ gives rise to
          a minimal selfish subset of $[n]$ containing $n$ by the inverse
          procedure. Hence the number of minimal selfish subsets of $[n]$
          containing $n$ is $f_n-2$. Thus we obtain $f_n=f_n-1+f_n-2$.
          Since $f_1=f_2=1$, we have $f_n=F_n$, where $F_n$ denotes the $n$th
          term of the Fibonacci sequence.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 8 at 6:10









          Rakesh Bhatt

          994114




          994114




















              up vote
              1
              down vote













              Your logic so far is fine. So what you know is that, since $c$ is in the set, then the other $c-1$ elements must all be at least $c+1$. There are $binomn-cc-1$ ways to choose them.



              Summing over these gives you the total count. It turns out that this gives you the $n^th$ Fibonacci number, which you can prove by induction (hint: use Pascal’s identity).






              share|cite|improve this answer
























                up vote
                1
                down vote













                Your logic so far is fine. So what you know is that, since $c$ is in the set, then the other $c-1$ elements must all be at least $c+1$. There are $binomn-cc-1$ ways to choose them.



                Summing over these gives you the total count. It turns out that this gives you the $n^th$ Fibonacci number, which you can prove by induction (hint: use Pascal’s identity).






                share|cite|improve this answer






















                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote









                  Your logic so far is fine. So what you know is that, since $c$ is in the set, then the other $c-1$ elements must all be at least $c+1$. There are $binomn-cc-1$ ways to choose them.



                  Summing over these gives you the total count. It turns out that this gives you the $n^th$ Fibonacci number, which you can prove by induction (hint: use Pascal’s identity).






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  Your logic so far is fine. So what you know is that, since $c$ is in the set, then the other $c-1$ elements must all be at least $c+1$. There are $binomn-cc-1$ ways to choose them.



                  Summing over these gives you the total count. It turns out that this gives you the $n^th$ Fibonacci number, which you can prove by induction (hint: use Pascal’s identity).







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Dec 8 at 6:08









                  platty

                  3,360320




                  3,360320



























                      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.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • 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.

                      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%2f3030745%2fselfish-set-to-be-a-set-which-has-its-own-cardinality-number-of-elements-as%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

                      How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                      Displaying single band from multi-band raster using QGIS

                      How many registers does an x86_64 CPU actually have?