De Bruijn graphs and entropy at finite scales

Let {\mathcal{A}} be a finite set, which we call an alphabet, and let {x \in \mathcal{A}^{\mathbb N}} be an infinite sequence of letters from {A}. It is natural to ask how complex the sequence {x} is: for example, if the alphabet is {\{H,T\}}, then we expect a typical sequence produced by flipping a coin to be in some sense more complex than the sequence {x=HHHHH\dots}.

One important way of making this notion precise is the entropy of the shift space generated by {x}, a notion coming from symbolic dynamics. Let {a_k(x)} be the number of words of length {k} (that is, elements of {A^k}) that appear as subwords of {x}. Clearly we have {1\leq a_k(x) \leq (\#\mathcal{A})^k}. Roughly speaking, the entropy of {x} is the exponential growth rate of {a_k(x)}. More precisely, we write

\displaystyle  h(x) := \varlimsup_{k\rightarrow\infty} \tfrac 1k \log a_k(x).

Of course, in practice it is often the case that one does not have an infinite sequence, but merely a very long one. For example, it has been suggested that entropy (and a related quantity, the topological pressure) can play a role in the analysis of DNA sequences; see [D. Koslicki, “Topological entropy of DNA sequences”, Bioinformatics 27(8), 2011, p. 1061–1067] and [D. Koslicki and D.J. Thompson, “Coding sequence density estimation via topological pressure”, J. Math. Biol. 70, 2015, p. 45–69]. In this case we have {\mathcal{A} = \{A,C,G,T\}} and are dealing with sequences {x} whose length is large, but finite.

Given a sequence {x} with length {n}, one can try to get some reasonable `entropy-like’ quantity by fixing some {k} and putting {h(x) = \frac 1k\log a_k(x)}. But what should we take {k} to be? If we take {k} to be too small we will get an overestimate (with {k=1} we will probably just find out that {x} contains every letter of {\mathcal{A}}), but if we take {k} too small we get an underestimate (with {k=n} we have {a_k(x)=1} so {h=0}).

The convention proposed by Koslicki in the first paper above is to let {k} be the largest number such that there is some word of length {n} that contains every word of length {k}. If this actually happens, then {h(x)} achieves its maximum value {\log \#\mathcal{A}}; if some words do not appear, then {h(x)<\log \#\mathcal{A}}.

What is the relationship between {n} and {k} that guarantees existence of a word of length {n} containing every word of length {k}? Let {p=\#\mathcal{A}} and note that there are {p^k} words of length {k}; if {w\in \mathcal{A}^n} contains every such word then we must have {n\geq p^k + k-1}, since the length-{k} subwords of {w} are precisely {(w_1\cdots w_k)}, {(w_2\cdots w_k)}, \dots, {(w_{n-k+1} \cdots w_n)}, so we must have {n-k+1 \geq p^k}.

The converse implication is a little harder, though. Given {k}, let {n=p^k + k-1}. Is it necessarily true that there is a word {w\in \mathcal{A}^n} that contains every subword of length {k}? After all, once {w_1\cdots w_k} is determined, there are not many possibilities for the word {w_2\cdots w_{k+1}}; can we navigate these restrictions successfully?

It is useful to rephrase the problem in the language of graph theory (what follows can be found in the proof of Lemma 1 in Koslicki’s paper). Let {G_k} be the directed graph defined as follows:

  • the vertex set is {\mathcal{A}^k}, so each vertex corresponds to a word of length {k};
  • there is an edge from {u\in \mathcal{A}^k} to {v\in \mathcal{A}^k} if and only if {u_1 v = uv_k}, that is, if {u_2\cdots u_k = v_1\cdots v_{k-1}}.

The graph {G_k} is the {k}-dimensional De Bruijn graph of {p} symbols. Recall that a Hamiltonian path in a graph is a path that visits each vertex exactly once. Thus the question above, regarding existence of a word in {\mathcal{A}^n} that contains every word in {\mathcal{A}^k}, where {n=p^k + k-1}, is equivalent to asking for the existence of a Hamiltonian path in the De Bruijn graph.

There is a correspondence between {G_k} and {G_{k-1}}; vertices in {G_k} correspond to edges in {G_{k-1}} (since both are labeled by elements of {\mathcal{A}^k}). Thus a Hamiltonian path in {G_k} corresponds to an Eulerian path in {G_{k-1}}; that is, a path that visits every edge exactly once.

This correspondence is very useful, since in general the problem of determining whether a Hamiltonian path exists is hard (NP-complete), while it is easy to check existence of an Eulerian path in a directed graph: a sufficient condition is that every vertex have in-degree equal to its out-degree (and a slight weakening of this condition is both necessary and sufficient). This is the case for De Bruijn graphs, where every vertex has {p=\#\mathcal{A}} edges coming in and going out. Thus {G_{k-1}} has an Eulerian path, which corresponds to a Hamiltonian path for {G_k}. This answers the original question, demonstrating that for every {k}, there is a word {w} of length {n=p^k+k-1} such that {w} contains every word of length {k} as a subword.


About Vaughn Climenhaga

I'm an assistant professor of mathematics at the University of Houston. I'm interested in dynamical systems, ergodic theory, thermodynamic formalism, dimension theory, multifractal analysis, non-uniform hyperbolicity, and things along those lines.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to De Bruijn graphs and entropy at finite scales

  1. Jairo B. says:

    Nice post. A related (equivalent?) notion of “recursive complexity” of a finite cyclic word appears in a 1992 paper by U.M. Maurer:
    He looks for the least k such that each symbol of the word can be computed from the previous k symbols; equivalently, the least k such that the word corresponds to a simple cycle on the graph G_k.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s