arXiv++ Combinatorics

D. Krieger and J. Shallit have proved that every real number greater than 1 is a critical exponent of some sequence. We show how this result can be derived from some general statements about sequences whose subsequences have (almost) maximal Kolmogorov complexity. In this way one can also construct a sequence that has no "approximate" fractional powers with exponent that exceeds a given value.

Let $A$ be an $a$-letter alphabet. We consider fractional powers of $A$-strings: if $x$ is a $n$-letter string, $x^r$ is a prefix of $xxxx...$ having length $nr$. Let $l$ be a positive integer. Ilie, Ochem and Shallit defined $R(a,l)$ as the infimum of reals $r>1$ such that there exist a sequence of $A$-letters without factors (substrings) that are fractional powers $x^{r'}$ where $x$ has length at least $l$ and $r'\ge r$. We prove that $1+\frac{1}{la}\le R(a,l)\le 1+\frac{c}{la}$ for some constant $c$.

Assume that for some $α<1$ and for all nutural $n$ a set $F_n$ of at most $2^{αn}$ "forbidden" binary strings of length $n$ is fixed. Then there exists an infinite binary sequence $ω$ that does not have (long) forbidden substrings. We prove this combinatorial statement by translating it into a statement about Kolmogorov complexity and compare this proof with a combinatorial one based on Laslo Lovasz local lemma. Then we construct an almost periodic sequence with the same property (thus combines the results of Levin and Muchnik-Semenov-Ushakov). Both the combinatorial proof and Kolmogorov complexity argument can be generalized to the multidimensional case.

The main subject of the paper is everywhere complex sequences. An everywhere complex sequence is a sequence that does not contain substrings of Kolmogorov complexity less than $αn-O(1)$ where $n$ is the length of substring and $α$ is a constant between 0 and 1. First, we prove that no randomized algorithm can produce everywhere complex sequence with positive probability. On the other hand, for weaker notions of everywhere complex sequences the situation is different. For example, there is a probabilistic algorithm that produces (with probability~1) sequences whose substrings of length $n$ have complexity $\sqrt{n}-O(1)$. Finally, one may replace the complexity of a substring (in the definition of everywhere complex sequence) by its conditional complexity when the position is given. This gives a stronger notion of everywhere complex sequence, and no randomized algorighm can produce (with positive probability) such a sequence even if $αn$ is replaced by $\sqrt{n}$, $\log^* n $ or any other monotone unbounded computable function.