When Math meets CS: Radix Conversion = Jigsaw Puzzles!

Here's a neat little (inefficient) trick: say I give you 8 types of puzzle pieces

puzzle piecespuzzle pieces

then I can arbitrarily convert any number from base 4 into base 2! Don't believe me? Here's how: say you want to convert (301)4=4910=1100012 (301)_4 = 49_{10} = 110001_2 , what we should do is create an empty frame whose right side matches the number we need to transform in base 4:

basic framebasic frame

and try to fill this frame out. It turns out that there's a unique way to fill this puzzle out, but after we're done, we can just read the type of the curve on the bottom of the puzzle to extract the base two representation:

puzzle solutionpuzzle solution

notice that 1100012=3014=49 110001_2 = 301_4 = 49 ! What sorcery is this?

In order to understand how this works, let's look at two operators. Let ab \begin{array}{c}a\\ \triangledown\\b\end{array} be the representation of (ab)4 (ab)_4 , so for example 230=(230)4=44 \begin{array}{c}2\\\triangledown\\3\\\triangledown \\ 0 \end{array} = (230)_4 = 44 and let ab a \triangleright b be the binary representation (ab)2 (ab)_2 , so 1001=(1001)2=9 1 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 1 = (1001)_2 = 9 It can be easily shown that ab=4a+b a\triangledown b = 4a + b and cd=2c+d c \triangleright d = 2c + d .

Hmmm, now things become a bit clearer. Consider an edge of a puzzle piece, say piece G G :

piece Gpiece G \triangleq 12=3 0 \boxed{\begin{array}{cc} \triangleright & 1 \\ &\triangledown \\ &2 \end{array}} = \boxed{\begin{array}{cc} \\ \triangledown \\ 3 & \triangleright~ 0 \end{array}}

the horizontal edges are in reality functions that takes in the input x x , and produces xn x \triangleright n for whatever n n that edge is displaying. So the top edge of piece G denotes the function xx1=2x+1 x \mapsto x \triangleright 1 = 2x+1 and the bottom edge denotes the function xx0=2x x \mapsto x \triangleright 0 = 2x . The vertical edges are symmetric w.r.t to \triangledown

It turns out that each piece denotes functional equality between a x x \triangleright \cdot \triangledown \cdot and a x x \triangledown \cdot \triangleright \cdot . For example, the G piece says that x12=4(2x+1)+2=2(4x+3)+0=x30 x \triangleright 1 \triangledown 2 = 4(2x+1)+2 = 2(4x+3) + 0 = x \triangledown 3 \triangleright 0 .

Therefore, our original system is just 000000301 \begin{array}{cc} \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright & 0 \\ &\triangledown \\ &3 \\ &\triangledown \\ &0 \\ & \triangledown \\ &1 \end{array} but by placing down the D piece, we're basically claiming that 000000301   =   000001101 \begin{array}{cc} \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright & 0 \\ &\triangledown \\ &3 \\ &\triangledown \\ &0 \\ & \triangledown \\ &1 \end{array} ~~~=~~~ \begin{array}{cccc} \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright 0 \triangleright &0 \\ &\triangledown\\ & 1 &\triangleright &1 \\ &&&\triangledown \\ &&&0 \\ &&& \triangledown \\ &&&1 \end{array} because the D piece says that 03=11 \triangleright 0 \triangledown 3 = \triangledown 1 \triangleright 1 . Because of this equality, we can also see that when we look at the final solution, no matter what path we take, the composition of all of the edges will all be the same function! With a little bit more analysis, we can derive nice properties about this system: each of the jigsaw piece is uniquely determined by the top and right edges and each puzzle has a unique solution, and it is the same solution such that all of the downward arrows are zeros, because the right-ward arrows composes only base 2 numbers. Therefore, our system basically reduces to a rewrite system on the language of (n,m) (\triangleright n,\triangledown m) and we seek a final form (a normal form if you will) where the downward arrows are all zeros.

Finally, we can now compute this via dynamic programming: notice that we only need to have the top and the right edge curves in order to uniquely determine the next piece. This means that we can progressively reduce our system into the normal form by zig-zagging:

dynamic programmingdynamic programming

Note by Lee Gao
5 years, 5 months ago

No vote yet
1 vote

</code>...<code></code> ... <code>.">   Easy Math Editor

MarkdownAppears as
*italics* or _italics_ italics
**bold** or __bold__ bold

- bulleted
- list

  • bulleted
  • list

1. numbered
2. list

  1. numbered
  2. list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
paragraph 1

paragraph 2

paragraph 1

paragraph 2

[example link](https://brilliant.org)example link
> This is a quote
This is a quote
    # I indented these lines
    # 4 spaces, and now they show
    # up as a code block.

    print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
MathAppears as
Remember to wrap math in </span>...<span></span> ... <span> or </span>...<span></span> ... <span> to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3 2×3 2 \times 3
2^{34} 234 2^{34}
a_{i-1} ai1 a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3} 23 \frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2} 2 \sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3 i=13 \sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta sinθ \sin \theta
\boxed{123} 123 \boxed{123}


Sort by:

Top Newest


I have no words on how awesome this is. It's just mind blown.

Daniel Liu - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

Haha, thanks :) I had a fun time writing this up too

Lee Gao - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply

after reading this, i am left with nothing except to say waaoooow! that was really amazing... at first, it was a bit unclear... but the things then came out smoothly afterwards! cheers!! :)

Pradeep Ch - 5 years, 5 months ago

Log in to reply


Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...