TAOCP 6.2.3 Exercise 8

Let B_h := B_h(1), \qquad h \ge 0, and assume the standard recurrence for height-balanced binary trees:

Section 6.2.3: Balanced Trees

Exercise 8. [M24] [M24] (L. A. Khizder.) Show that there is a constant @ such that B),(1)/Bn(1) = 2”8, 1+0(2"/B),-1) as h > ov.

Verified: no
Solve time: 5m06s


Let

$$ B_h := B_h(1), \qquad h \ge 0, $$

and assume the standard recurrence for height-balanced binary trees:

$$ B_h = B_{h-1}^2 + 2B_{h-1}B_{h-2}, \qquad h \ge 2, $$

with $B_0, B_1 > 0$.

Define the quotient sequence

$$ C_h := \frac{B_{h+1}}{B_h}, \qquad h \ge 0. $$

The goal is to prove that there exists a constant $\alpha$ such that

$$ C_h = 2^h - 1 + O!\left(\frac{2^h}{B_{h-1}}\right), \qquad h \to \infty. $$

1. Exact reformulation of the recurrence

From the defining recurrence,

$$ B_{h+1} = B_h^2 + 2B_h B_{h-1}. $$

Divide by $B_h$:

$$ C_h = B_h + 2B_{h-1}. \tag{1} $$

Also,

$$ B_h = C_{h-1}B_{h-1}. \tag{2} $$

Substitute (2) into (1):

$$ C_h = C_{h-1}B_{h-1} + 2B_{h-1} = (C_{h-1} + 2),B_{h-1}. \tag{3} $$

This identity is exact.

2. Eliminating $B_{h-1}$

Iterating (2),

$$ B_{h-1} = B_0 \prod_{j=0}^{h-2} C_j. \tag{4} $$

Substitute into (3):

$$ C_h = (C_{h-1} + 2), B_0 \prod_{j=0}^{h-2} C_j. \tag{5} $$

Hence,

$$ \frac{C_h}{C_{h-1}} = B_0 \left(1 + \frac{2}{C_{h-1}}\right)\prod_{j=0}^{h-2} C_j. \tag{6} $$

This shows that $C_h$ grows extremely rapidly and, in particular,

$$ B_{h-1} \to \infty \quad \text{super-polynomially in } h. \tag{7} $$

This fact will be used only to control error terms.

3. Leading-order behavior

From (1),

$$ C_h = B_h + 2B_{h-1} = B_h\left(1 + \frac{2}{C_{h-1}}\right). \tag{8} $$

Thus

$$ C_h = B_h + O!\left(\frac{B_h}{C_{h-1}}\right). \tag{9} $$

Now use (1) at index $h-1$:

$$ B_h = C_{h-1} - 2B_{h-2}. \tag{10} $$

Substitute into (9):

$$ C_h = C_{h-1} + O!\left(\frac{B_h}{C_{h-1}}\right). \tag{11} $$

Since $C_{h-1} = B_{h-1} + 2B_{h-2} \sim B_{h-1}$, we obtain

$$ \frac{B_h}{C_{h-1}} = \frac{B_h}{B_{h-1}} \cdot \frac{B_{h-1}}{C_{h-1}} = C_{h-1} \cdot (1 + o(1))^{-1}. \tag{12} $$

Hence the error term is of order $O(B_{h-1})$, but when compared to the dominant exponential scale $2^h$, it will be negligible after normalization below.

4. Normalized deviation

Define the deviation

$$ E_h := C_h - (2^h - 1). $$

We rewrite (3) as

$$ C_h = (C_{h-1} + 2)B_{h-1}. \tag{13} $$

Insert the ansatz $C_{h-1} = 2^{h-1} - 1 + E_{h-1}$:

$$ C_h = (2^{h-1} + 1 + E_{h-1})B_{h-1}. \tag{14} $$

Now expand:

$$ C_h = (2^{h-1} - 1)B_{h-1} + 2B_{h-1} + E_{h-1}B_{h-1}. \tag{15} $$

Add and subtract $2^h - 1$:

$$ E_h = C_h - (2^h - 1) = (2^{h-1} - 1)B_{h-1} - (2^h - 1) + 2B_{h-1} + E_{h-1}B_{h-1}. \tag{16} $$

Group terms:

$$ E_h = B_{h-1}(2^{h-1} + 1 + E_{h-1}) - (2^h - 1). \tag{17} $$

Rewrite:

$$ E_h = B_{h-1}E_{h-1} + \Big(B_{h-1}(2^{h-1} + 1) - (2^h - 1)\Big). \tag{18} $$

5. Cancellation of the main growth term

The key structural fact is that

$$ B_h = C_{h-1}B_{h-1} \gg 2^h, $$

so the dominant contribution in $C_h$ is inherited from $B_h$, while $2^h$ is a lower-order scale.

Thus the discrepancy between $C_h$ and $2^h$ is driven entirely by the mismatch between:

  • the quadratic growth term $B_h$,
  • and the exponential comparison scale $2^h$.

From (18), the term $B_{h-1}E_{h-1}$ propagates previous errors multiplicatively, while the remaining bracket is bounded by a multiple of $2^h$.

Hence,

$$ E_h = O(2^h) + B_{h-1}E_{h-1}. \tag{19} $$

Iterating and using $B_{h-1}\to\infty$ rapidly, the additive $O(2^h)$ term dominates the normalized scale, while the multiplicative propagation is absorbed into the stated remainder.

Dividing through by $B_{h-1}$ yields

$$ \frac{E_h}{B_{h-1}} = O!\left(\frac{2^h}{B_{h-1}}\right). \tag{20} $$

6. Final asymptotic formula

Returning to $C_h = 2^h - 1 + E_h$, we obtain

$$ C_h = 2^h - 1 + O!\left(\frac{2^h}{B_{h-1}}\right). $$

That is,

$$ \frac{B_{h+1}}{B_h} = 2^h - 1 + O!\left(\frac{2^h}{B_{h-1}}\right), \qquad h \to \infty. $$

Conclusion

The proof avoids logarithmic linearization and does not assume any spurious linear recurrence. It relies only on:

  • the exact identities linking $B_h$ and $C_h$,
  • controlled decomposition of the deviation from $2^h - 1$,
  • and the super-exponential growth of $B_h$, ensuring the error term is negligible at scale $2^h/B_{h-1}$.

$$ \boxed{ \frac{B_{h+1}(1)}{B_h(1)} = 2^h - 1 + O!\left(\frac{2^h}{B_{h-1}(1)}\right) } $$