# Graph presentation of binary strings

### Qefsere Doko Gjonbalaj

,### Valdete Rexhëbeqaj Hamiti

Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics |
Download Full Text |
View in HTML format |
Export citation |

@article{Gjonbalaj_2018, doi = {10.17512/jamcm.2018.2.02}, url = {https://doi.org/10.17512/jamcm.2018.2.02}, year = 2018, publisher = {The Publishing Office of Czestochowa University of Technology}, volume = {17}, number = {2}, pages = {17--27}, author = {Qefsere Doko Gjonbalaj and Valdete Rexhëbeqaj Hamiti}, title = {Graph presentation of binary strings}, journal = {Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics} }

TY - JOUR DO - 10.17512/jamcm.2018.2.02 UR - https://doi.org/10.17512/jamcm.2018.2.02 TI - Graph presentation of binary strings T2 - Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics JA - J Appl Math Comput Mech AU - Gjonbalaj, Qefsere Doko AU - Hamiti, Valdete Rexhëbeqaj PY - 2018 PB - The Publishing Office of Czestochowa University of Technology SP - 17 EP - 27 IS - 2 VL - 17 SN - 2299-9965 SN - 2353-0588 ER -

Gjonbalaj, Q., & Hamiti, V. (2018). Graph presentation of binary strings. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics, 17(2), 17-27. doi:10.17512/jamcm.2018.2.02

Gjonbalaj, Q. & Hamiti, V., 2018. Graph presentation of binary strings. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics, 17(2), pp.17-27. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17512/jamcm.2018.2.02

[1]Q. Gjonbalaj and V. Hamiti, "Graph presentation of binary strings," Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 17-27, 2018.

Gjonbalaj, Qefsere Doko, and Valdete Rexhëbeqaj Hamiti. "Graph presentation of binary strings." Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics 17.2 (2018): 17-27. CrossRef. Web.

1. Gjonbalaj Q, Hamiti V. Graph presentation of binary strings. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics. The Publishing Office of Czestochowa University of Technology; 2018;17(2):17-27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.17512/jamcm.2018.2.02

Gjonbalaj, Qefsere Doko, and Valdete Rexhëbeqaj Hamiti. "Graph presentation of binary strings." Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computational Mechanics 17, no. 2 (2018): 17-27. doi:10.17512/jamcm.2018.2.02

GRAPH PRESENTATION OF BINARY STRINGS

Qefsere Doko Gjonbalaj, Valdete Rexhëbeqaj
Hamiti^{ }

Department of Math, Faculty of Electrical
and Computer Engineering

University of Prishtina “Hasan Prishtina”

Prishtinë, 10 000, Kosovë

qefsere.gjonbalaj@uni-pr.edu, valdete.rexhebeqaj@uni-pr.edu

Received: 31 January 2018; Accepted: 26 April 2018

**Abstract.**
This article is motivated by the problem of finding a graph, which operates on
the principle of the Hasse diagram. In the present article, the Hasse diagram
technique (HDT) was applied to relate binary string sets with graph theory. We
investigate this
relation in detail and propose a new graph, the so-called** ***2n*-*Parallel
Graph* , and
an efficient pseudo code that decompresses a given binary string set to its
elements.
The goal of this pseudo code is its application in determining the number of
strings with
a certain number of first bits consecutive 1’s (0’s). This pseudocode is also responsible
for the solution of several combinatorial problems on a certain binary string.
Furthermore, our results are valid for any string length.

*MSC 2010:** 05C90, 68R10 *

*Keywords:** **Hasse diagram, binary strings *

1. Introduction

As we know, binary strings can be decoded using a binary tree. To read that
string from any prescribed position forward, one starts at the root and moves
down from the root of the tree to the external node that holds that character:
a 0 bit identifies a left branch in the path, and a 1 bit identifies a right
branch. This procedure
is continued until the bit string of length *n* is decoded. But with an
increase
in the length of the string, the binary tree becomes more complicated [1].

So we look for another way to represent binary strings that will allow us to minimize the number of branches in our drawing. Looking to simplify the problem we have defined a new graph that works by use of the Hasse diagram technique.

2. Basic notions

All graphs considered here are simple, finite, connected and undirected. We follow the basic notions and terminologies of graph theory as in [1].

**Definition 2.1.** A *graph * consists of two sets;
called
*vertex set *of * *and called *edge set *of
. More precisely we
denote the vertex set of * *as )
and the edge set of * *as . Elements of and are called *vertices
*and *edges, *respectively.
The number of vertices in is denoted by and the number of
edges
in is denoted by .

**Definition 2.2.** A walk in which no
vertex is repeated is called a simple path.
A path with vertices is denoted as
.

**Definition 2.3.** A graph is connected if there is a path between every pair
of vertices of . A graph,
which is not connected, is called a disconnected graph.

**Definition 2.4. **[2] A graph with vertices is called
a path if has
exactly two vertices with degree 1 and exactly vertices
with degree 2.

**Definition 2.5.** A simple path in a graph
that
passes through every vertex
exactly once is called a Hamilton path, and a simple circuit in a graph that passes through every vertex exactly once is called a Hamilton
circuit.

**Theorem 2.1.** [3] Let** **** **be a finite connected graph on *n*
vertices.** **Then** ** contains** **at
least** ** edges, with equality
if and only if is a tree.

Here we review some basic definitions and notions concerning posets (partially ordered set) and the Hasse diagram.

**Definition 2.6. **[2] A Hasse diagram is a directed graph representation of
a poset whose vertices
represent elements of and whose directed
edges signify the relation. That is, an
edge means

In other words, the Hasse diagram of poset is defined:

(1) |

(2) |

and in this case we say that covers , so that the line segment from to runs upwards .

If we assume that all edges are pointed “upward”, we do not have to show the directions of the edges.

The objects (vertices) in a Hasse diagram that are not covered by other objects are called “maximal objects.” Objects that do not cover other objects are called “minimal objects.” In some diagrams there are also isolated objects that can be considered as maximal and minimal objects at the same time. A chain (string) is a set of comparable objects; therefore levels can be defined as the longest chain within the diagram. An antichain is a set of mutually incomparable objects, located at one and the same level. The height of the diagram is the longest chain, and the longest antichain is its width [4].

3. 2*n* Parallel Graph (2*nPG*)

Let be the set Then the set of all finite binary strings of length is written as can be ordered by the prefix relation: for is a prefix of if either or is a finite initial substring of . We write if is a prefix of and if neither nor is a prefix of the other (some authors write ). For each set of binary strings of length there is

For brevity, we give the following definition.

**Definition 3.1.** [5] Let be an element of Weight of ,
denoted by is defined as

For example, the string 10011 has weight 3.

Now we are going to define an efficient graph (which operates on the principle of Hasse diagram) for the set of binary strings of length whose weight (number of 1s) are in the range where

**Definition 3.2.** *Parallel Graph* is a graph consisting
of vertexes situated in
the proportional way in to parallel line. The vertices in first line will be denoted with where and for while
vertices in second line with where and for The set of edges
in graph will be defined with
for and all edges are
pointed “upward”, which means it works
by the Hasse diagram technique.

From the definition of graph it follows that the set of vertices are defined by and

The problem of enumeration of all n-bit binary strings is equivalent to finding a Hamilton path in the graph. Because of the Hasse diagram technique, the Hamilton path in graph contains only n vertices (not 2n).

Thinking of binary strings as path in the graph, based on Theorem 1.1, the strings of length are mapped to a path of length . So, from this fact we conclude that:

**Theorem 3.1.
**Let be the set of all
finite binary strings of length , where Then, the graph , which represents the element of set
for has edges, which means that

**Proof: **From
the definition 3.2, the set of edges of graph is the set for Therefore, from the Theorem 1.1, every
subset of set will have edges and since
has four such subsets then follows that

Following, based on the definition 3.2, we will construct a graph and compare it with binary trees. By representing the set of binary strings with both graphs: with and by binary tree, we can see the advantages and simplicity of the first graph to the second graph.

**Example 3.1.**
We are going to present the set of binary strings with the graphs and with the binary trees, for Here,
for the graph we will use the Hasse diagram technique.

For we have (Fig. 1a and 1b):

Fig. 1a. graph for binary strings of length

Fig. 1b. Binary tree for binary strings of length

In this case we get binary strings: 11, 10, 01, 00.

For we have (Fig. 2a and 2b):

Fig. 2a. graph for binary strings of length

Fig. 2b. Binary tree for binary strings of length

In this case we get binary strings:

For we have (Fig. 3a and 3b):

Fig. 3a. graph for binary strings of length

Fig. 3b. Binary tree for binary strings of length

In this case we get binary strings: 1111, 1110, 1101, 1100, 1011, 1001, 1010, 1000, 0000, 0001, 0010, 0011, 0100, 0110, 0101, 0111.

We can continue to construct, for each , a Hamilton path in a graph with the following additional property: edges between levels and of a graph must appear on the path before edges between levels and

**Corollary 3.1.** Let
be the
set of all finite binary strings of length , where Then, for the number of edges of a graph creates the arithmetic sequence while the number of edges in a binary tree creates the sequence .

**Proof: **From
the example 3.1, we note that the sequence of number of a graph is: or the arithmetic sequence with first element and difference (it can be proved with mathematical induction). Also the number of
edges of binary trees creates the sequence:

Fig. 4. graph for binary strings of length

**Corollary 3.2.**
Let be the
set of all finite binary strings of length , where Then, the number of vertices
of a graph creates the arithmetic sequence while the number of vertices of binary trees creates
the sequence

**Proof: **From
the example 3.1, we note that the sequence of number of vertices of a graph is: or the arithmetic sequence with first element and difference (it can be proved with mathematical
induction). Also the number of edges of binary trees creates the sequence:

In conclusion, based on two corollaries and our own example we can see that the graph, is much more practical because it has a much smaller number of vertices and edges compared with the binary tree, in which the number of vertices and edges is much larger, and it grows very fast. Also, the advantage of this graph is the fact that it is easier to draw and takes less space.

In following we will describe the pseudo code that produces a graph.

4. Pseudocode of a 2*n* Parallel Graph

In this section an efficient pseudocode will be provided that produces a graph by decompressing a given binary string set to its elements and how does it operates on the principle of Hasse diagram. At the beginning, we give a pseudo-code and afterwards, we discuss the complexity of our solution.

The problem of enumeration of all *n*-bit
binary strings is equivalent to finding
a Hamilton path with *n* vertices and edges, in the graph, which means that at the same time we will determine the binary strings and
Hamiltonian paths.

In that case, we denote with all binary strings of length where the first bits are consecutive 1’s (0’s).

Our pseudocode for the Parallel
Graph is presented as a method called 2*NPG*(*n*) (cf. Fig. 5) which takes as a
parameter the length for each of the binary strings that are to be generated.

**2****NPG(n)**

INPUT: n is the length of each of the binary strings to generate.

OUTPUT: S is the set of generated binary strings S_{k}^{n}
such that

· each S_{k}^{n} is
represented with [e_{1},e_{2},e_{3},..,e_{k–1},e_{k},e_{k+1},..,e_{n–1},e_{n}],
and

· k represents the nr. of first bits consecutive 1’s in the string to generate.

1** let** initially S ß {} // initially is S an empty set of binary
strings

2 **for** k ß n **to** 1 // for each step below,
i.e. distinct nr. of consecutive 1’s

3 **do** 2nPG(n, k) // where k
<= n

4 **RETURN** {S_{k}^{n}}**ß**** {**[e_{1},e_{2},e_{3},…,e_{k–1},e_{k},{e_{k+1},...,e_{n–1},e_{n}}]}

5 **RETURN **S **ß**** **S
U{S_{k}^{n}}**ß****
{**[e_{1},e_{2},e_{3},…,e_{k–1},e_{k,}e_{k+1},...,e_{n–1},e_{n}]}

Fig. 5. The 2*NPG*(*n*) pseudocode

We represent with [e_{1},e_{2},e_{3},..,
e_{k-1},e_{k},e_{k+1},..,e_{n-1},e_{n}]
each of the binary strings S_{k}^{n} of length *n* to be
generated as elements of the final set S of all binary strings generated at the
output. The S set which is initially an empty set (line 1 in the pseudo-code)
is progressively extended (line 5) for each possible *k* as first
consecutive 1 bits (line 2) in the strings to generate by recursively invoking
the 2*NPG*(*n*, *k*) method (line 3 to 4).

**2****NPG(n,
k)**

INPUT:

· n is the length of each of the binary strings to generate

· k represents the nr. of first bits consecutive 1’s in the strings to generate.

OUTPUT: S is the set
of generated binary strings S_{k}^{n} such that

· each S_{k}^{n} is represented with [e_{1},e_{2},e_{3},…,e_{k–1},e_{k},e_{k+1},...,e_{n–1},e_{n}].

1** let** initially {S_{k}^{n}} ß {} // initially is {S_{k}^{n}}
an empty set of binary strings

2** for** i ß 1 **to** k

3** do** e_{i}ß u_{i} //
assign 1 to e_{i} since u’s are always 1’s

4 **if** k ≠ n **then** e_{k+1}ß v_{k+1} // assign 0 to e_{i+1}
since v’s are always 0’s

5** if **k < n–1** then for** i ß k+1 **to** n

6 **do** 2nPG(n’) // where n’
= n–k; each S is S_{k’}^{n’}ß[e_{k+1},..,e_{n–1},e_{n}]

7 **RETURN **{S_{k’}^{n’}}**ß**** **{[e_{k+1},...,e_{n–1},e_{n}]}

8 **RETURN** {S_{k}^{n}}**ß**** **{S_{k}^{n}} U** {**[e_{1},e_{2},e_{3},…,e_{k–1},e_{k},{e_{k+1},...,e_{n–1},e_{n}}]}

Fig. 6. The 2*NPG*(*n*, *k*) pseudocode

It is obvious that in the very first
iteration of the outer for loop in the 2*NPG*(*n*) pseudocode above where
makes the inner for loop in 2*NPG*(*n*, *k*) (lines
3
to 4) generate a string of length *n* with all 1’s, i.e. the string S_{n}^{n}
:

[1,1,1,..,1,1,1]
≡ [u_{1},u_{2},u_{3},...,u_{n–2},u_{n–1},u_{n}] |

since lines 5 and 6 to 8 fail due to conditions in line 5 and line 6 evaluating to false.

Next, due to (refer again to
outer for loop in 2*NPG*(*n*), this time its second iteration), the inner for loop in 2*NPG*(*n*, *k*)
(lines 3 to 4) will generate a string with 1’s,
whereas the last bit of the string will be set to 0 (line 5) since the condition in line
5 evaluates to true, i.e. the following string S_{n–1}^{n}:
will be generated at the output:

[1,1,1,..,1,1,0] ≡ [u_{1},u_{2},u_{3},...,u_{n–2},u_{n–1},v_{n}] |

Note that lines 6 to 8 fail due to condition in line 6 evaluating to false.

In every other next iteration of the outer
for loop in 2*NPG*(*n*) starting from
the 3^{rd} iteration, i.e., for to both conditions (lines
5 and 6) in the inner for loop in 2*NPG*(*n*, *k*) are
evaluated to true. As a consequence, another for loop is initiated (line 6)
which recursively uses the Hasse diagram techniques but for shorter strings of
length n’ to generate at the output at each iteration by invoking the 2*nPG*(*n*’)
method (line 7), resulting into a subset {S_{k’}^{n’}} of such
strings [e_{k+1},...,e_{n–1},e_{n}] per iteration.

As an illustration, two next iterations in the 2nPG(n) pseudocode of the outer for loop where , up to its last iteration where are explained.

1. We
create the binary strings where the first *n*-2 bits are 1’s,
the set of strings denoted as {S_{n–2}^{n}}:

[1,1,1,...,1,0,?] ≡ [u_{1},u_{2},u_{3},...,u_{n–2},v_{n–1},v_{n}]
and

[1,1,1,...,1,0,?]
≡ [u_{1},u_{2},u_{3},...,u_{n–2},v_{n–1},u_{n}]

where the last bit

u_{n} or v_{n}

is determined based
on the Hasse diagram technique, i.e. are the output of the 2*nPG*(*n*’)
method (line 7) within the 2*nPG*(*n*, *k*) pseudocode.

2. We
create the binary strings where the first
*n*–3 bits are 1’s, the set of strings denoted as {S_{n–3}^{n}}:

[1,1,1,...,1,0,?,?] ≡ [u_{1},u_{2},u_{3},...,u_{n–3},v_{n–2},?,?]

where the last two bits

v_{n–1},v_{n}; v_{n–1},u_{n};
u_{n–1},v_{n}; u_{n–1},u_{n}

are determined based
on the Hasse diagram technique, i.e. are the output of
the 2*nPG*(*n*’) method.

...

n. We
will continue this process until we arrive at the strings with the first bit 1,
the set of strings denoted as {S_{1}^{n}}; meaning at the
strings with two first bits

[1,0] ≡ [u_{1},v_{2}]

while *n*–2
other bits

[v_{3},v_{4},...,v_{n–1},v_{n}];
[v_{3},v_{4},...,v_{n–1},u_{n}]; [u_{3},u_{4},..,u_{n–1},u_{n}]

are determined based on the Hasse diagram
technique, i.e. are the output of
the 2*nPG*(*n*’) method.

In conclusion, through this code we found the
general formula by which we can find the number of all strings (of length *n*)
with a certain number of first bits
consecutive 1’s (0’s):

(1) |

where determines the length of Hamilton’s path and *k* the number of
consecutive 1’s (0’s), where

Based on this formula, we can find the number of strings in each step, which are:

Now we find the sum of these numbers which is:

If we repeat the same procedure for strings
that start with a certain number of consecutive zeroes we will have the same result, . This confirms that in a total there are strings with length *n*.

**Example 4.1.**
Determine the number of binary strings of length where the first 3 bits
are consecutive 1’s.

**Solution:**
According to the formula (1), we have to calculate

**Example 4.2.**
Determine the number of binary strings of length where the first 17 bits
are consecutive 1’s.

**Solution:**
According to the formula (1), we have to calculate

We can generate the required strings by
recursively invoking the 2*NPG*(*n*, *k*) method
(line 3 to 4).

**Example 4.3.**
Determine the number of binary strings of length where
at least the first 3 bits are consecutive 1’s.

**Solution:**
According to the formula (1), and the fact that at least the first 3 bits are
consecutive 1’s, we have to
calculate:

**Example 4.4.**
Determine the number of binary strings of length where the first two bits
are 0’s while the third and fourth bits are 1’s.

**Solution:** We
apply the formula (1) for and so we get the number
of strings that have at least the
first two digits of 1’s. Each
of the obtained strings is added by two 0’s at the beginning of the string.

To generate the required strings, we can apply the algorithm for the graph, obtained strings is added by two 0’s at the beginning of the string.

**Example 4.5.** A bit string of length
four is generated at random so that each
of the 16 bit strings of length four is equally likely. What is the probability
that
it contains at least two consecutive 0’s, given that its first bit is a 0? (We assume
that 0 bits and 1 bits are equally likely.)

**Solution:** Let *E*
be the event that a bit string of length four contains at least two consecutive
0s, and let *F* be the event that the first bit of a bit string of length
four is a 0. We can generate the elements of events *E* and *F* by
applying the graph. Then, the
probability that a bit string of length four has at least two consecutive 0 s,
given that its first bit is a 0, equals

5. Conclusion

This paper focuses on describing the algorithm of determining the number of binary strings which contain, for a given, exactly runs of 1’s (0’s) of length in all possible binary strings of length , , the graph algorithm has been shown to provide better results to an optimization problem when compared to an equivalent problem related to binary trees.

Detailed knowledge about the distribution of
runs in binary strings may be
useful in many engineering applications, for example, data compression, bus
encoding techniques, computer arithmetic etc. Prior knowledge about the
probability of occurrence of runs of 1’s of a given length in a binary string
may help us
in assessing the merit of a typical run-length encoding scheme. Distribution of
runs in binary strings is closely related to the statistics of success runs in *n*
Bernoulli
trials with a
success probability , and a failure probability
of

This paper aims to expand and even further develop the implementation of the algorithm. This will provide many challenges that remain within our ongoing research work.

References

[1]
Rosen, K.H. (2003). *Discrete Mathematics and Its
Applications*. New York, NY: Mc Graw Hill.

[2] Underwood, A. (2013). Book Embeddings of Posets. Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2d58/247171aacd351c2871a8389dd216c55aad18.pdf

[3] Cuypers, H. (2007). Discrete Mathematics. Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/707d/fd6ea8598d3715934916f73b964a979958c4.pdf

[4]
Bigus, P., Tsakovski, S., Simeonov, V.,
Namiesnik, J., & Tobiszewski, M. (2016). Hasse diagram as a green
analytical metrics tool: ranking of methods for benzo[a]pyrene determination in
sediment. *Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry*, *408*(14),
3833-3841.

[5] Hartman, G., & Green M. (2004). Binary Strings and Graphs. Retrieved from: http://math.arizona.edu/~ura-reports/041/Green.Matthew/Final/bsgf.pdf