arxiv: v1 [math.ds] 22 Dec 2018

Transcription

1 arxiv: v1 [math.ds] 22 Dec 2018 An algebraic approach to entropy plateaus in non-integer base expansions Pieter C. Allaart December 27, 2018 Abstract For a positive integer M and a real base q 1,M + 1], let U q denote the set of numbers having a unique expansion in base q over the alphabet {0,1,...,M}, and let U q denotethesetofcorrespondingsequencesofdigitsfrom{0,1,...,m}. Itwasshown by Komornik et al. [Adv. Math ), ] that the Hausdorff dimension of U q is given by hu q )/logq, where hu q ) denotes the topological entropy of U q, and that the function H : q hu q ) is continuous, nondecreasing and locally constant almost everywhere. The plateaus of H were characterized recently by Alcaraz-Barrera et al. [arxiv: , To appear in Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.] In this article we reinterpret their results by introducing a notion of composition of admissible words, and use this to obtain new information about the structure of the function H. This method furthermore leads to a more streamlined proof of their main theorem. AMS 2010 subject classification: 11A63 primary), 37B10, 37B40, 68R15 secondary) Key words and phrases: Beta-expansion, univoque set, topological entropy, entropy plateau. 1 Introduction In recent years, there has been a great deal of interest in expansions of numbers in noninteger bases. Specifically, fixaninteger M 1, and,forq 1,M+1], considerexpressions of the form x i x = q i =: π qx 1 x 2...), 1.1) i=1 where x i {0,1,...,M} for each i. The sequence x i ) is called a q-expansion of x; it exists if and only if x J q,m := [0,M/q 1)]. Such non-integer base expansions were introduced Address: Department of Mathematics, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #311430, Denton, TX , USA; allaart@unt.edu 1

2 by Rényi [19] and studied further by Parry [18]. The subject seemed to be largely forgotten for about 30 years, until Erdős and others [10, 8, 9] breathed new life into it. These authors were interested in the set U q of numbers having a unique q-expansion, and in particular, in the set U := {q 1,M +1] : 1 U q }. Komornik and Loreti [13, 14] found the smallest element of U, which is now called the Komornik-Loreti constant and which we denote by q KL ; see below. Later, Glendinning and Sidorov [11] showed that U q is countable for q < q KL, but has positive Hausdorff dimension for q > q KL ; their result was generalized to larger alphabets by Kong, Li and Dekking [16]. Kong and Li [15] further examined the Hausdorff dimension of U q, and more recently, Komornik, Kong and Li [12] showed that this dimension is related to the topological entropy of the symbolic univoque set where Ω M := {0,1,...,M} N. Namely, U q := {x i ) Ω M : π q x i )) U q }, dim H U q = hu q) logq. 1.2) Here the topological entropy of any subset X Ω M is defined by hx) := lim n log#b n X), n assuming the limit exists, where B n X) denotes the set of all length n prefixes of sequences from X, and log denotes the natural logarithm. Since we will be considering different values of M simultaneously, the neutral base e logarithm is used to avoid confusion.) Note that the limit always exists when X is invariant under the left shift map σ, since the map n #B n X) is then submultiplicative. This is the case, in particular, for U q. Komornik, Kong and Li proved furthermore that the function H : q hu q ) is a devil s staircase. That is, H is continuous, nondecreasing, and locally constant almost everywhere. Recently, the present author and Kong [4] discovered a gap in their proof, and gave a completely different demonstration of their results. Kong and Li [15] identified intervals on which H is constant; their work was extended by Alcaraz Barrera et al. [2], who determined the maximal intervals of constancy of H. See also [1] for the case M = 1.) These so-called entropy plateaus have since played an important role in the study of noninteger base expansions e.g. [3, 5]). In this paper we detail the main results of [2], and develop a new approach which not only presents these results in a new light, but also simplifies some of the proofs and provides new information on the nature of the entropy plateaus. Let αq) = α i q)) Ω M denote the quasi-greedy q-expansion of 1; that is, the lexicographically largest q-expansion of 1 not ending with 0. The following useful characterization was proved in [7, Proposition 2.3]: 2

3 Lemma 1.1. The map q αq) is strictly increasing and bijective from 1,M +1] to the set of sequences a i ) Ω M not ending with 0 and satisfying σ n a i )) a i ) n 0, where σ denotes the left shift map, and the lexicographical order, on Ω M. Let τ i ) = be the shifted) Thue-Morse sequence. Recall from [14] that the Komornik-Loreti constant q KL = q KL M) satisfies αq KL ) = λ i ), where for each i 1, { k+τ i τ i 1 if M = 2k, λ i = λ i M) := 1.3) k+τ i if M = 2k +1. For a word c 1...c k with c k < M, we write c 1...c + k := c 1...c k 1 c k + 1). Likewise, for a word c 1...c k with c k > 0, we write c 1...c k := c 1...c k 1 c k 1). For any word c 1...c k, its reflection is the word c 1...c k := M c 1 )...M c k ). For an infinite sequence c i ) Ω M, we similarly define c i ) i := M c i ) i. Using this notation, we define special bases q n = q n M) by { αq n) λ 1...λ = 2 n 1 λ1...λ 2 n 1+) if M is even, λ 1...λ 2 n λ1...λ 2 n+) if M is odd. We denote q 1 also by q T; it is called the transitive base in [2]. Note by Lemma 1.1 that q n is well defined. Finally, we define a special base q G called a generalized golden ratio in [6]) by { k if M = 2k, αq G ) = ) 1.4) k +1)k if M = 2k+1. Let V := { c i ) Ω M : c i ) σ n c i )) c i ) n 0 }. In [2], irreducible sequences in Ω M were defined as follows: Definition 1.2 [2]). A sequence a i ) V is irreducible if for every j N, the following implication holds: a 1...a j ) V = a 1...a j a 1...a j + ) a i ). 1.5) A sequence a i ) V is -irreducible if there exists n N such that αq n+1 ) a i) αq n), and 1.5) holds for every j > 2 n if M is even, or for every j > 2 n+1 if M is odd. Definition 1.3 [2]). An interval [p L,p R ] q KL,M + 1] is irreducible -irreducible) if αp L ) is irreducible -irreducible) and there is a word a 1...a m with a m < M such that αp L ) = a 1...a m ), and αp R ) = a 1...a + m a 1...a m ). 3

4 Definition 1.4. An interval [p L,p R ] is a plateau of H, or entropy plateau, if [p L,p R ] is a maximal interval in the partial order of set inclusion) on which H is positive and constant. The main result of [2] is: Theorem 1.5. An interval [p L,p R ] q KL,M + 1] is an entropy plateau if and only if it is either irreducible or -irreducible. Moreover, the irreducible entropy plateaus lie in q T,M +1], and the -irreducible entropy plateaus lie in q KL,q T ). In this paper we present some new ideas that further illuminate the nature of the entropy plateaus, and in the process simplify the proof of Theorem 1.5. The paper is organized as follows. First, in Section 2, we introduce a family of intervals of which the entropy plateaus form a special subfamily. Each of these intervals is associated with a specific word a 1...a m, which we call admissible. We then define a notion of composition of admissible words which allows us to put a semigroup structure on the set of all admissible words in the special butimportant case M = 1. This notion of composition yields a natural algebraic interpretation of the concepts of irreducible and -irreducible intervals. We use it in Section 3 to uncover a direct connection between the -irreducible intervals for any M) and the irreducible intervals for M = 1. This will provide new information about the behavior of the entropy function H on the interval q KL,q T ]. In particular, we derive the part of Theorem 1.5 concerning -irreducible plateaus in a very conceptual way from the part of the theorem concerning irreducible plateaus. For completeness, we include in Section 4 a more streamlined proof of the latter. 2 Composition of admissible words This section borrows ideas and results from the paper [5] by the author and Kong. The interested reader is referred to that paper for the proofs. Definition 2.1. A word a = a 1...a m {0,1,...,M} m with m 2 is admissible if a 1...a m i a i+1...a m a 1...a m i 1 i < m. When M 2, the word a 1 {0,1,...,M} is admissible if a 1 a 1 < M. It is easy to check that, if a 1...a m is admissible, then a 1...a m ) V. Let A M denote the set of all admissible words with alphabet {0,1,...,M}. For each a A M, there is by Lemma 1.1 a unique interval J a = [q L a),q R a)] such that αq L a)) = a, αq R a)) = a + a). We call J a a basic interval. Observe for any a A M that a + a a a ) 4

5 The middle inequality is not always strict: in the exceptional but important case that M is even and a = a 1 = M/2 we have that a = a. Figure 1 shows a directed graph G = V,E) with edge set E = {e 0,e 1,...,e 4 } and with two edge labelings. In view of 2.1), the labeled graph G a = G,L a ) with labeling L a : E L a := { a,a +,a,a +} is right-resolving, i.e. the out-going edges from the same vertex in G a have different labels. Let X a be the set of infinite sequences determined by the automata G a = G,L a ), beginning at the Start vertex cf. [17]). We emphasize that each digit d in L a is a block of length m, and any sequence in X a is an infinite concatenation of blocks from L a. We also let Xa fin denote the set of all finite prefixes of sequences in X a whose length is a multiple of a. Likewise, the labeled graph G = G,L ) with labeling L : E {0,1} is rightresolving. Hence for each q 1,2] the quasi-greedy expansion α q) of 1 in base q is uniquely represented by an infinite path determined by the automata G. Let X {0,1} N be the set of all infinite sequences determined by the automata G, and note that X = {x i ) {0,1} N : x 1 = 1}. Then {α q) : q 1,2]} X, the inclusion being proper in view of Lemma 1.1. Start e 0 : a + / 1 e 1 : a + / 0 e 4 : a / 1 A B e 2 : a / 0 e 3 : a + / 1 Figure 1: The labeled graph G a = G,L a ) with labeling L a : E L a := { a,a +,a,a +}, and the labeled graph G = G,L ) with labeling L : E {0,1}. For a given word a A M, we define a map Φ a : X a X as follows. Given a sequence d i ) X a of blocks from L a, there is a unique infinite path e i1 e i2... in G a with i 1 = 0 such that L a e i1 e i2...) = d 1 d 2... Define Φ a d i )) by Φ a d 1 d 2...) := L e i1 e i2...). Similarly, for any finite word d 1...d k starting with d 1 = a + generated by the labeling L a along a path e i1...e ik with i 1 = 0, we define Φ a d 1...d k ) := L e i1...e ik ). Likewise, for a word d 1...d k starting with d 1 = a + generated by the labeling L a along a path e i1...e ik necessarily with i 1 = 1), we define Φ a d 1...d k ) in the same way. And when a a, we can also define Φ a d 1...d k ) for words d 1...d k starting with d 1 = a or a in the same way. However, we leave Φ a d 1...d k ) undefined for such words when a = a; the reason is that 5

6 in this case, the edges e 2 and e 4 have the same label under L a, but different labels under L, causing some ambiguity. Remark 2.2. The definition of Φ a slightly generalizes the definition of the maps Φ J introduced in [5, Section 3]. But our definitions here require a bit more care due to the possibility that a = a. Nonetheless, since the graph G a is right-resolving even then, all of the proofs from [5, Section 3] go through in the same way. We therefore omit them here. Lemma 2.3. If c X fin a is admissible, then Φ a c) is admissible. Proof. This follows as in the proof of [5, Lemma 3.7]. Going forward, superscript indicates that the alphabet {0,1} is intended, i.e. M = 1. In [5, Proposition 3.5] it is shown that Φ a : X a X is a strictly increasing bijection. It induces a map ˆΦ a : q L a),q R a)] V V, q α ) 1 Φ a αq), where V := {q 1,M +1] : αq) V}, and V := V when M = 1. The map ˆΦ a is an increasing homeomorphism; see [5, Proposition 3.8]. Definition 2.4. For a A M and b A 1 we define the composition a b by a b := Φ 1 a b). Note that this is well defined since b is a prefix of a sequence in X. The composition a b should not be confused with the concatenation ab. Indeed, a b = a b, whereas ab = a + b. We emphasize furthermore that the composition of two words in A M is not defined when M 2. Example 2.5. Let M = 1 and take a = 10, b = 110. Then: 1. a b = Φ 1 a 110) = a+ aa + = ; 2. b a = Φ 1 b 10) = b+ b + = Example 2.6. Let M = 2 and take a = 1,b = Then a A 2, b A 1, and a b = a + a 2 a + = Lemma 2.7. If a A M and b A 1, then a b A M. Proof. Let a = a 1...a m, b = b 1...b n, and put c := c 1...c mn = a b. We must verify that c 1...c mn i c i+1...c mn c 1...c mn i 1 i < mn. 2.2) Since a A M, by Definition 2.1 it follows that a 1...a + m a i+1...a + m a 1...a i a 1...a + m 6

7 and a 1...a + m a i+1...a m a 1...a i a 1...a + m for all 1 i < m. Note that we can write c = d 1...d n, where d i { a,a +,a,a +} for each i. Since the block a + can only be followed by a or a + and the block a can only be followed by a or a +, it follows from the above inequalities that 2.2) holds whenever i is not a multiple of m. So it remains to verify that d 1...d n j d j+1...d n d 1...d n j 1 j < n. 2.3) But this follows from the admissibility of b, which implies b 1...b n j b j+1...b n b 1...b n j 1 j < n. For instance, since d 1 = a +, the second inequality in 2.3) is obvious if d j+1 a +, so let us assume d j+1 = a +. Then d j+1...d n is a prefix of a sequence in X a, so, since Φ a is strictly increasing on X a, d j+1...d n = Φ 1 a b j+1...b n ) Φ 1 a b 1...b n j ) = d 1...d n j. The first inequality in 2.3) follows similarly, by taking reflections. In view of the last lemma, the interval J a b = [q L a b),q R a b)] is well defined, and it is easy to see that J a b J a. Lemma 2.8. For a A M and b A 1, we have Φ a b = Φ b Φ a, ˆΦa b = ˆΦ b ˆΦ a, and as a result, Proof. If c X fin a Φ 1 a b = Φ 1 a Φ 1 b, is admissible, then ˆΦ a b = ˆΦ a ˆΦ b. Φ a c + ) = Φ a c) ) +, Φa c) = Φ a c), Φ a c + ) = Φ a c + ), as can be seen quickly from the definition of Φ a. In particular, setting c = a b, we have Φ a a b) = Φ a Φ 1 a b)) = b, Φ a a b) + ) = Φ a a b) ) + = b +, Φ a a b ) = Φa a b) = b, Φ a a b) + ) = Φ a a b) + ) = b ) Now let d be one of the blocks a b,a b) +,a b or a b) +. Since b A 1, we have b b so all four labels in L b := {b,b +,b,b + } are distinct. By the four identities above, Φ a d) L b, and therefore Φ b Φ a d)) is well defined. Note that Φ a b d) = 1 if and only 7

8 if d = a b) + or a b. Recalling the definition of Φ b and the identities 2.4), it follows that Φ a b d) = Φ b Φ a d)). This implies that Φ a b = Φ b Φ a. The corresponding identity for ˆΦ a b follows since ˆΦ b ˆΦ a = α ) 1 Φ b α ) α ) 1 Φ a α ) = α ) 1 Φ b Φ a ) α = α ) 1 Φ a b α = ˆΦ a b. The identities for the inverse maps are a direct consequence of the ones already proved. Proposition 2.9. The set A 1 with the operation is a non-abelian semigroup. That is, i) If a,b A 1, then a b A 1. ii) For any three words a,b,c A 1, a b) c = a b c). Proof. That A 1 is closed under is the content of Lemma 2.7. Associativity follows from Lemma 2.8, since a b) c = Φ 1 a b c) = Φ 1 a Φ 1 b That A 1, ) is non-abelian can be seen from Example 2.5. c)) = Φ 1 a b c) = a b c). Remark Note by Lemma 2.8 that the maps a Φ 1 a and a homomorphisms when M = 1. ˆΦ 1 a are semigroup Lemma Let a and b be distinct admissible words in A M such that J b J a. Then there is a word c A 1 such that b = a c. Proof. By [5, Lemma 3.2], b is a prefix of a sequence in X a, so we can take c = Φ a b). Then c A 1 by Lemma 2.3, and a c = Φ 1 a c) = b. Definition The unit lift is the word u = u M defined as follows: { k if M = 2k, u = u M = k +1)k if M = 2k +1. Observe that u A M and J u = [q G,q T ]. Definition Let a A M. i) Say a is irreducible if there do not exist c A M and d A 1 such that a = c d. ii) Say a is n-irreducible if a = u 10) n 1) b for some irreducible word b A 1. 8

9 iii) Say a is -irreducible if it is n-irreducible for some n N. Here by 10) k we mean the k-fold composition of 10 with itself. Definition Call the interval J a irreducible n-irreducible, -irreducible) if a is irreducible n-irreducible, -irreducible). Proposition Let a A M. Then a has a unique decomposition into irreducible words. That is, there is a unique k N and a unique k-tuple c 1,...,c k ) with c 1 A M, c 2,...,c k A 1, and each c i irreducible, such that a = c 1 c 2 c k. Proof. The existence of such a decomposition follows directly from Definition 2.13i). Uniqueness follows from the fact that J a b J a, plus induction, since Lemma 2.11 implies that any two distinct irreducible intervals are disjoint. Lemma Let q [q G,M + 1]. The sequence αq) is irreducible if and only if q q L,q R ] for any basic interval [q L,q R ]. Proof. Write αq) = a 1 a 2... Assume first that αq) is irreducible, and suppose q q L b),q R b)] for some admissible word b = b 1...b j. Then b 1...b j ) = αq L b)) αq) αq R b)) = b 1...b + j b 1...b j ). 2.5) So αq) begins with b 1...b + j, i.e. a 1...a j = b 1...b + j. But then a 1...a j = b 1...b j and so a 1...a j ) V. In view of 2.5), this contradicts 1.5). Conversely, suppose q q L,q R ] for any basic interval [q L,q R ]. We first verify that αq) V. Either q = q G and αq) V by 1.4); or else q > q T > q KL. In the second case, q U, because each connected component of q KL,M +1]\U is contained in the interior of a basic interval see [15]). But U V, so q V and hence αq) V. Now let j N be such that a 1...a j ) V. Consider the basic interval [q L,q R ] given by αq L ) = a 1...a j ), αq R ) = a 1...a j a 1...a j + ). Note that q > q L since αq) αq L ), so by our hypothesis, q > q R and so αq) αq R ). But this is equivalent to the consequent of 1.5). Hence, αq) is irreducible. Proposition Let a A M. Then a is irreducible in the sense of Definition 1.2) if and only if a is irreducible in the sense of Definition 2.13). Proof. Let q be the base with αq) = a ; then q is the left endpoint of J a. Suppose first that a is irreducible. Then by Lemma 2.11, J a is a maximal basic interval, so there is no basic interval [q L,q R ] such that q q L,q R ]. Hence, by Lemma 2.16, a = αq) is irreducible. Conversely, suppose a is irreducible. By Lemma 2.16, there is no basic interval [q L,q R ] such that q q L,q R ]. Hence J a is a maximal basic interval. This implies a is irreducible. 9

10 Remark Proposition 2.17 provides a natural algebraic interpretation of the notion of irreducible from Definition 1.2: a is irreducible if and only if a can not be written as the composition of two or more admissible words. 3 Irreducible intervals and entropy plateaus Now if we set a n := u M 10) n 1) for n N, then a n A M and the interval J an = [q L a n ),q R a n )] has right endpoint q R a n ) = q n. Note that q n ց q KL, and a n λ i ). Also set q 0 := M +1, and define the intervals I n := q n+1,q n ], n = 0,1,2,..., so n=0 I n = q KL,M +1], with the union disjoint. When M = 1 we write I n := I n. For the next lemma, recall that J u = [q G,q T ], that and all these bases belong to V. q G < q KL < < q n+1 < q n < < q 2 < q 1 = q T, Lemma 3.1. i) ˆΦ u is increasing and maps [q G,q T ] V bijectively onto V. ii) ˆΦ u q KL ) = q KL. iii) ˆΦ u I n+1 V ) = I n V for all n 0. Proof. The proof of i) is the same as the proof of [5, Proposition 3.5]. For ii) we must verify that Φ u λ i )) = τ i ). Consider first the case when M is even. We prove ii) for M = 2; the proof for other even values of M is the same modulo a renaming of the digits. We will show inductively that Φ u λ 1...λ 2 k) = τ 1...τ 2 k, for all k 1, 3.1) where u = 1 and λ i := λ i 2). For k = 1, we get Φ u λ 1 λ 2 ) = Φ u 21) = Φ u u + u) = 11 = τ 1 τ 2. Assuming 3.1) holds for some arbitrary k N, we use the relationship to obtain + λ 2 k +1...λ 2 k+1 = λ 1...λ 2 k Φ u λ 1...λ 2 k+1) = Φ u λ 1...λ 2 k)φ u λ 2 k +1...λ 2 k+1) = Φ u λ 1...λ 2 k)φ u λ 1...λ 2 k+ ) = Φ u λ 1...λ 2 k)φ u λ 1...λ 2 k) + = τ 1...τ 2 kτ 1...τ 2 k + = τ 1...τ 2 k+1. 10

11 Here the first equality is justified by the fact that λ 2 k +1 = λ 1 = 0 = u +, so the expressions on the right side are well defined. Consider next the case when M is odd. We prove ii) for M = 1; the proof for other odd values of M is the same modulo a renaming of the digits. Here we must prove that Φ u τ i )) = τ i ), where u = 10. We do this by induction, by showing that Φ u τ 1...τ 2 k) = τ 1...τ 2 k 1, for all k ) Note first that Φ u τ 1 τ 2 ) = Φ u u + ) = 1 = τ 1, so 3.2) holds for k = 1. The induction step proceeds essentially the same way as for the case M = 2 above, so we omit the details. To prove iii), it is sufficient to show that ˆΦ u q n+1 M)) = q n1) for all n 0. This means that for even M we have to show ) +) Φ u λ 1...λ 2 n λ1...λ 2 n = τ 1...τ 2 nτ 1...τ 2 n + ) n N, and for odd M we have to show ) +) Φ u λ 1...λ 2 n+1 λ1...λ 2 n+1 = τ 1...τ 2 nτ 1...τ 2 n + ) n N. These equations follow in the same way as in the proof of ii) above. Proposition 3.2. All irreducible intervals, except [q G,q T ], lie in I 0 = q T,M + 1]. All n-irreducible intervals, except the one with right endpoint q n+1, lie in I n, for n N. Proof. This follows directly from Definition 2.13 and Lemma 3.1. Having established the action of the map ˆΦ u, we now turn to investigate the entropy function H : q hu q ). We recall the following lexicographical characterization of U q see [7]): d i ) U q if and only if d i ) Ω M satisfies d n+1 d n+2... αq) if d n < M, d n+1 d n+2... αq) if d n > ) Motivated by this characterization, we define the simpler set { } Ũ q := d i ) Ω M : αq) σ n d i )) αq) n 0. Note that hu q ) = hũq) see [12]). Write H q) := hu q ), and let { 1 if M is even, c M := 1 2 if M is odd. Proposition 3.3. Let q q G,q T ] V, and put ˆq := ˆΦ u q). Then i) Φ u { xi ) Ũq : x 1...x u = u +}) = { y i ) Ũ ˆq : y 1 = 1 }. 11

12 ii) Hq) = c M H ˆq). Proof. Statement i) is a special case of [5, Proposition 3.8iii)]; ii) will follow from i) once we show that hũ ˆq ) = h{ y i ) Ũ ˆq : y 1 = 1 }) 3.4) and hũq) = h { x i ) Ũq : x 1...x u = u +}), 3.5) using that Φ u is a u -block map. The set { y i ) Ũ ˆq : y 1 = 1 } and its reflection, { y i ) Ũ ˆq : y 1 = 0 }, together make up Ũ ˆq. This gives 3.4). The proof of 3.5) is slightly more involved. Assume first that M is odd, and without loss of generality suppose M = 1. Then u + = 11. Let A kl := { x i ) Ũq : x 1 x 2 = kl } for k,l = 0,1. Since Ũq = A 11 A 10 A 01 A 00, it follows by symmetry that #B n Ũq) = 2#B n A 11 )+2#B n A 10 ). Every sequence in A 10 is either 10), or of the form 10) j x 1 x 2... with x i ) A 11, or of the form 10) j 1x 1 x 2... with x i ) A 00, for some j 0. Hence n 1 #B n A 10 ) #B j A 11 ) n#b n A 11 ), j=0 so that #B n A 11 ) #B n Ũq) 2n+2)#B n A 11 ). Taking logarithms, dividing by n and letting n, it follows that ha 11 ) = hũq), proving 3.5). If M is even, then u = 1 and the proof of 3.5) is basically the same as that of 3.4), since any sequence in Ũq begins with either u or u. Applying Proposition 3.3 repeatedly, we obtain Lemma 5.4 of [2]: Corollary 3.4. For each n N we have In particular, Hq T ) = c M log2. Hq n) = c M log2 2 n 1. Corollary 3.5. Let q [q G,q T ] V, and put ˆq := ˆΦ u q). Then dim H U q = c M log ˆq logq dim H U ˆq. Proof. This follows at once from Proposition 3.3 and 1.2). Lemma 3.6. i) The union of all irreducible intervals is dense in I 0 = [q T,M +1]. 12

13 ii) For each n N, the union of all n-irreducible intervals is dense in I n. Proof. i). Recall from [15] that q KL,M +1]\U = p 0,q 0 ), where each interval p 0,q 0 ) is of the form q L a),q c a)) for some admissible word a. Here q c a) := ˆΦ 1 a q KL ) J a is the de Vries-Komornik number associated with J a. Furthermore, U has Lebesgue measure zero. Hence the intervals p 0,q 0 ) are dense in q KL,M +1]. But then the intervals J a = [q L a),q R a)] are certainly dense in q KL,M + 1]. Since the irreducible intervals are the maximal basic intervals in q G,M +1], it follows that their union is dense in q T,M +1]. ii). By the same reasoning as above, the basic intervals inside I n are dense in I n. Since the n-irreducibleintervals in I n are the maximal basic intervals in I n, theresult follows. Theorem 3.7. i) The plateaus of H in q T,M +1] are exactly the irreducible intervals that lie inside q KL,M +1]. ii) The plateaus of H in I n are exactly the n-irreducible intervals that lie inside q KL,M+ 1], for each n N. Proof. Statement i) is proved in [2, Section 5.1], but see also Section 4 below. We show how ii) follows from i) and the ideas in this article. We proceed by induction. First, if we take 0-irreducible to mean irreducible, statement ii) holds for n = 0 by part i). Now let k N, and suppose ii) holds for all n < k. Let J = [q L,q R ] be a k-irreducible interval in q KL,M +1]. Then J I k by Proposition 3.2. Put ˆq L := ˆΦ u q L ) and ˆq R := ˆΦ u q R ). Then Ĵ := [ˆq L,ˆq R ] is a k 1)-irreducible interval which lies inside I k 1 by Lemma 3.1, so it is an entropy plateau by the induction hypothesis. In particular, H ˆq R ) = H ˆq L ). Then Proposition 3.3 implies that Hq R ) = Hq L ), hence H is constant on J. Next, take a point r > q R. Then by Lemma 3.6ii), there is a k-irreducible interval J = [q L,q R ] with q R < q L < r. Let ˆq L := ˆΦ u q L )and ˆq R := ˆΦ u q R ). ThenĴ := [ˆq L,ˆq R ]isanentropyplateau to the right of Ĵ, so H ˆq L ) > H ˆq R ). Hence, by Proposition 3.3 again, Hq L ) > Hq R). Thus Hr) > Hq R ). In the same way, we can show that Hp) < Hq L ) for every p < q L. Therefore, J is an entropy plateau. Vice versa, every entropy plateau in I n must be an n-irreducible interval, because the n-irreducible intervals are dense in I n. Proposition 3.3 gives new information about the entropy plateaus: Take M = 1 for the moment. Then for any entropy plateau in I n with n 1) there is a corresponding entropy plateau in I n 1 with twice the entropy. Vice versa, for any entropy plateau in I n 1 there is a corresponding entropy plateau in I n with half the entropy. The graph of H on I n looks much like a smaller version of the graph of H on I n 1, contracted vertically by a factor 2 but badly distorted horizontally, as the map ˆΦ u is far from being linear. By contrast, when M 2 the graph of H : q hu q ) over I n for n 1 looks more like a smaller copy of the graph of H : q hu q) over qt,2], rather than a smaller copy of the graph of H itself over q T,M +1]. In fact, when M is even, the values of H on the entropy plateaus of U q in I n are precisely the same as the values of H on the entropy plateaus of U q in In 1, for each n 1. When M is odd, they are half that big. 13

14 Italsofollows fromproposition3.3that thevaluesofthefunctionsh M : q hu q M)) for q q T M),M +1] and M 1 completely determine the entropy of U q for any M and any q 1,M +1]. 4 A shorter proof of irreducible plateaus In this section we give a more streamlined proof of Theorem 3.7i). We first introduce the sets V q := {x i ) Ω M : αq) σ n x i )) αq) for all n 0}. Note that Ũq V q. The point is that, while Ũq need not be a subshift of Ω M, V q always is. Moreover, V q \Ũq is countable, and hũq) = hv q ) see [4, Proposition 2.6]). The key is to prove that for any irreducible interval [q L,q R ] in [q T,M +1], the subshift V ql is transitive. Recall that a subshift X of Ω M is topologically) transitive if, for any two words u,v B X), there is a word w B X) such that uwv B X). Here B X) denotes the set of all finite words occurring in sequences from X, including the empty word. Proposition 4.1. Let q q T,M + 1]. If αq) is irreducible, then V q is a transitive subshift. Lemma 4.2. Let q > q T such that αq) = a 1 a 2... is irreducible, and assume a 1 = M. Then there is a strictly increasing sequence m j ) of positive integers such that for each j, a 1...a m j is admissible. Moreover, the sequence m j ) can be chosen so that m j+1 2m j for every j, and { 2, if M = 1, m 1 = 1, if M 2. Proof. When M = 1, q > q T implies that a 1 a 2 = 11, and 10 is admissible so we can take m 1 = 2. When M 2, the assumption a 1 = M implies that a 1 is admissible, so we can take m 1 = 1. We now proceed by induction. Suppose m 1,...,m j have been constructed satisfying the required properties. In particular, a 1...a m j is admissible. Let u = a 1...a m, where m := m j. Since a i ) is irreducible, a i ) uu + uu. Let k := min{i > m : a i > a i m }, so m < k 2m. It is easy to see using Definition 2.1 and Lemma 1.1 that a 1...a k is admissible. Thus, we can set m j+1 = k. The next lemma is a restatement of [2, Lemma 3.13]. Lemma 4.3. Let u = a 1...a m be a word such that u is admissible. Suppose for some i we have a m i+1...a m = a 1...a i. Then i m/2. Lemma 4.4. Let q > q T and suppose αq) = a 1 a 2... is irreducible, where a 1 = M. Then there does not exist a word b such that αq) begins with bb. Hence, for each m N, a 1...a 2m a 1...a m a 1...a m. 14

15 Proof. If αq) begins with bb, then in order for αq) V we must have αq) = bb ). This means bb is admissible, which implies b is admissible. Since q > q T, the possible exception M = b = 1 is ruled out.) But then bb = b 10), contradicting that αq) is irreducible in view of Proposition Proof of Proposition 4.1. It was shown in [12] that V q is a subshift of Ω M for every q 1,M+1]. Fix q q T,M+1] such thatαq) is irreducible. Write αq) = a 1 a 2... We may assume that a 1 = M, as otherwise sequences from V q use only the digits 1,2,...,M 1, and we are effectively in the case of a smaller alphabet. Let m j ) be the sequence given by Lemma 4.2. We will show by induction that ) for each j N and for each word v B V q ), there is a word w B V q ) such that a 1...a m j wv B V q ). This suffices to prove transitivity, for the following reason: Suppose u = u 1...u k is an arbitrary word in B V q ). If a 1...a k i u i+1...u k a 1...a k i for all 0 i < k, then u and v can be concatenated: uv B V q ). Otherwise, let i 0 be the smallest i such that u i+1...u k = a 1...a k i or a 1...a k i. Then the above inequalities hold for all i < i 0. We may assume by symmetry that u i u k = a 1...a k i0. Then u i u k can be extended to a word of the form a 1...a m j for some sufficiently large j. By ), this word can be connected to any v B V q ). Hence the original word u can be connected to any v B V q ). We now proceed to prove ). Take first j = 1. If M = 1, then m 1 = 2 and u := a 1 a 2 = 10. If v begins with 1, then uv B V q ); otherwise, u1v B V q ). If, on the other hand, M 2, then u := a 1 satisfies a 1 < u < a 1 since a 1 = M), and hence uv B V q ). This finishes the basis for the induction. Next, let k 2 and suppose ) has been proven for all j < k, so a 1...a m j can be connected to any word v, for all j < k. Consider u := a 1...a m k. If there is no l < m k such that a mk l+1...a m k = a 1...a l, then u and v can be connected directly: uv B V q ). Otherwise, let l 0 be the largest such l. Note by Lemma 4.3 that l 0 m k /2, and hence by Lemma 4.2 that l 0 m k 1. If M = 1 and l 0 = 1, then we can connect u and v very easily. Namely, if v begins with 1, then uv B V q ); whereas otherwise u1v B V q ). So we can assume that either M 2 or l 0 2. We claim that a 1...a l 0 is admissible. To see this, note first that a i+1...a l 0 a i+1...a l0 a 1...a l0 i for 1 i < l 0 by Lemma We must verify that Since a 1...a m k is admissible, we have that a i+1...a l 0 a 1...a l0 i, 1 i < l ) a i+1...a l0 a l a m k a 1...a mk i, 15

16 whence a i+1...a l0 a 1...a l0 i. Suppose equality holds. Then a 1...a l0 i = a i+1...a l0 = a mk l 0 +i+1...a m k, contradicting the admissiblity of a 1...a m k. Thus, we have 4.1). It now follows that a 1...a l 0 ) V. Since a i ) is irreducible, this implies a i ) a 1...a l0 a1...a l0 + ). Hence, there is an integer r 0 and a block C of length l 0 with C a 1...a l0 + such that a i ) begins with a 1...a l0 a1...a l0 + ) r C. Consider now the word ũ := a 1...a m k a1...a l 0 ) r+1, which is an extension of u. Note that ũ = m k +l 0 r+1) =: n. It is clear from Definition 2.1 that ũ i+1...ũ n a 1...a n i for each 0 i < n. We only need to show that ũ i+1...ũ n a 1...a n i 4.2) for all i < n l 0 ; the induction hypothesis will then imply that ũ can be connected to any word v, since l 0 m k 1 so a 1...a l 0 can be connected to any word v. We break the verification of 4.2) in two cases: a) i < m k. Supposea i+1...a m k = a 1...a mk i otherwisewearedone). Thenm k i l 0 by the definition of l 0. If m k i = l 0, then by the choice of r, ũ i+1...ũ n = a 1...a l0 a1...a l0 + ) r+1 a 1...a l0 a1...a l0 + ) r C = a 1...a n i, so 4.2) holds. Assume therefore that m k i < l 0. Then ũ i+1...ũ 2mk i = a 1...a mk ia 1...a mk i a 1...a 2mk i by Lemma 4.4, and again we obtain 4.2). b) m k i < n l 0. Observe this case only happens if r 1.) Write i = m k +tl 0 +j where t {0,1,...,r 1} and 0 j < l 0. Then ũ i+1...ũ n begins with a j+1...a l0 +, and is followed by at least one block a 1...a l0 +. Suppose a j+1...a l0 + = a 1...a l0 j otherwise we are done). We argue that j cannot be zero, in other words, that a 1...a l0 + a 1...a l0. This is clear if l 0 2 since a 1 < a 1 ; whereas if l 0 = 1 we have M 2 by our earlier assumption, so a 1 + = M + = 0 + = 1 < M = a 1. Thus, j 1. But then ũ i+1...ũ n begins with a 1...a l0 ja 1...a l0 j, which is smaller than a 1...a 2l0 j) by Lemma 4.4. Since we verified 4.2) for all i < n l 0, the proof is complete. 16

17 Remark 4.5. The definition of l 0 in the above proof is closely related to the reflection recurrence word introduced in [2]. Alcaraz Barrera et al. [2] use the reflection recurrence to directly construct the connecting word w between u and v. Their technique is very similar to ours. However, we prefer the above approach using induction, which allows us to keep technicalities to a minimum and bring the main ideas of the proof into better focus. From here, the proof goes essentially as in [2, Section 5.1]. We present it here with a few more simplifications. Proposition 4.6. Let [p L,p R ] be an irreducible interval in q KL,M +1]. Then Hp R ) = Hp L ). Proof. It is sufficient to show that Hp R ) Hp L ). Note that hv q ) = hu q ) for all q, so Hq) = hv q ). Let [p L,p R ] be generated by an admissible word a of length m, so αp L ) = a. We argue first that Hp L ) log2 m. 4.3) Since [p L,p R ] is irreducible and p L > q KL, we have in fact that p L > q T, and so Hp L ) Hq T ) log2)/2 by Corollary 3.4. This gives 4.3) when m 2. On the other hand, if m = 1, then we must have M 3 and a = a 1 > a 1, since p L > q T. This implies {a 1,a 1 } N V pl, so Hp L ) log2 which gives 4.3) for m = 1. Let hv pl ) = logλ. Fix ε > 0. By the definition of hv pl ), there is a constant C 1 such that #B n V pl ) C 1 λ+ε) n n ) Alcaraz Barrera et al. use the Perron-Frobenius theorem here, but this is not necessary.) On the other hand, if x i ) V pr \V pl, then there is an index j such that x j+1...x j+m = a 1...a m or a 1...a m. This implies that σ j x i )) X a see [5, Lemma 3.2]). From the definition of X a it follows that there is constant C 2 such that #B n X a ) C 2 2 n/m n ) In fact, one may take C 2 = 2.) By 4.3), λ 2 1/m. We thus obtain, using 4.4) and 4.5), #B n V pr ) n n #B j V pl )#B n j X a ) C 1 C 2 λ+ε) j 2 n j)/m j=0 j=0 n C 1 C 2 λ+ε) n = C 1 C 2 n+1)λ+ε) n. j=0 Hence, Hp R ) = hv pr ) logλ+ε). Letting ε 0 completes the proof. We now complete the proof of Theorem 3.7i). First, let [p L,p R ] be an irreducible interval in q KL,M + 1]. By Proposition 4.6, H is constant on [p L,p R ]. By Lemma 3.6, 17

18 the irreducible intervals are dense in q T,M +1]. Since irreducible intervals are mutually disjoint, this means that for every ε > 0 there is an irreducible interval [q L,q R ] such that p R < q L < p R + ε. Recall that V ql is a subshift of finite type, and by Proposition 4.1, it is transitive. Furthermore, V pl is a proper subshift of V ql. Thus, by [17, Corollary 4.4.9], Hp L ) < Hq L ). It follows that Hp R +ε) Hq L ) > Hp R ). By similar reasoning, Hp L ε) < Hp L ) for every ε > 0. Hence, [p L,p R ] is an entropy plateau. Vice versa, every entropy plateau in q T,M+1] must bean irreducibleinterval, because the irreducible intervals are dense in q T,M +1]. This completes the proof. Acknowledgment The author wishes to thank Derong Kong for helpful comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. References [1] R. Alcaraz Barrera, Topological and ergodic properties of symmetric sub-shifts, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., ), no. 11, [2] R. Alcaraz Barrera, S. Baker and D. Kong, Entropy, topological transitivity, and dimensional properties of unique q-expansions, arxiv: , To appear in Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., [3] P. C. Allaart, S. Baker and D. Kong, Bifurcation sets arising from non-integer base expansions, arxiv: , To appear in J. Fractal Geom., [4] P. C. Allaart and D. Kong, On the continuity of the Hausdorff dimension of the univoque set, Preprint, [5] P. C. Allaart and D. Kong, Relative bifurcation sets and the local dimension of univoque bases, Preprint, [6] S. Baker, Generalized golden ratios over integer alphabets, Integers ), Paper No. A15, 28 pp. [7] M. de Vries and V. Komornik, Unique expansions of real numbers, Adv. Math., ), no. 2, [8] P. Erdős, M. Horváth and I. Joó, On the uniqueness of the expansions 1 = q n i, Acta Math. Hungar., ) no. 3-4, [9] P. Erdős and I. Joó, On the number of expansions 1 = q n i, Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. Eötvös Sect. Math., ), [10] P. Erdős, I. Joó and V. Komornik, Characterization of the unique expansions 1 = i=1 q n i and related problems, Bull. Soc. Math. France, ), [11] P. Glendinning and N. Sidorov, Unique representations of real numbers in non-integer bases, Math. Res. Lett., ), [12] V. Komornik, D. Kong and W. Li, Hausdorff dimension of univoque sets and devil s staircase, Adv. Math., ), [13] V. Komornik and P. Loreti, Unique developments in non-integer bases, Amer. Math. Monthly, ), no. 7, [14] V. Komornik and P. Loreti, Subexpansions, superexpansions and uniqueness properties in non-integer bases, Period. Math. Hungar., ), no. 2,

19 [15] D. Kong and W. Li, Hausdorff dimension of unique beta expansions, Nonlinearity, ), no. 1, [16] D. Kong, W. Li and F. M. Dekking, Intersections of homogeneous Cantor sets and beta-expansions, Nonlinearity, ), no. 11, [17] D. Lind and B. Marcus, An introduction to symbolic dynamics and coding, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, [18] W. Parry, On the β-expansions of real numbers, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar., ), [19] A. Rényi, Representations for real numbers and their ergodic properties, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar., ),