2
$\begingroup$

A version of a continued fraction expansion of a rational number $r\in \mathbb Q$ is defined as \begin{align} r =[a_0,a_1,a_2,\ldots,a_k]= a_0 - \frac{1}{a_1 - \frac{1}{a_2 - \dots - \tfrac{1}{a_k}}} \end{align} for integers $a_i\leq-2$.

For some given rational number $r$ there is an easy algorithm based on a variation of the Euclidean algorithm to determine the continued fraction expansion $[a_0,\ldots,a_k]$ of $r$. An implementation is for example described here.

However, there are such beautiful formulas as

\begin{equation} -\frac{qt-1}{q(t-1)-1}=[\underbrace{-2,\ldots,-2}_{(t-2)-\text{times}},-3,\underbrace{-2,\ldots,-2}_{(q-2)-\text{times}}] \end{equation}

for integers $t,q\geq2$. Such formulas can be derived via the above mentioned algorithm.

My question is if there exist a way to derive such formulas via Mathematica, i.e. given for example the expression $-\frac{qt-1}{q(t-1)-1}$ is there a way to derive its expression as $[\underbrace{-2,\ldots,-2}_{(t-2)-\text{times}},-3,\underbrace{-2,\ldots,-2}_{(q-2)-\text{times}}]$ via Mathematica?

I know the function ContinuedFractionK which is inverse (for a slightly different version of continued fraction expansions: with plus instead of minus) to what I am looking for.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Try FromContinuedFraction

f[t_, q_] := { FromContinuedFraction[Join[ConstantArray[-2, t - 2], {-3},ConstantArray[-2, q - 2] ]], -((q t - 1)/(q (t - 1) - 1))}

but there seems to be somthing wrong with your formula:

f[4, 5]
(*{-(229/94), -(19/14)}*)
$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for the answer. As far as I understood FromContinuedFraction is using a different convention for the continued fraction (+ instead of -). I think that is why the wrong results occur. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that your code is checking the specific formula for explicit values of t and q. My question is however about creating the formulas. $\endgroup$
    – Marc Kegel
    Aug 6 '20 at 14:34
  • $\begingroup$ @MarcKegel The different convention might give a different sign, not more, I think. Could you please give me an example of your formula? Perhaps ContinuedFractionK, which can be applied to symbols, is what you are looking for? $\endgroup$ Aug 6 '20 at 15:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sure. Here is an example: Take $t=2$ and $q=3$. Then $-(qt-1)/(q(t-1)-1)=-5/2$. The continued fraction with - gives $[-3,-2]=-3-1/-2=-5/2$. The continued fraction with + gives $-3+1/-2=-7/2$. ContinuedFractionK seems to be the inverse to what I am looking for. It starts with a continued fraction and derives the rational number out of it and it works with symbols. I want to go the reverse way. Start with a rational number depending on variables and find its continued fraction expansion depending on the same variables. $\endgroup$
    – Marc Kegel
    Aug 6 '20 at 17:56
  • $\begingroup$ Apply the Equivalence Transformation here to express it as a simple continued fraction (all numerators +1), then apply ContinuedFractionK. $\endgroup$
    – Daniel W
    Sep 9 '20 at 12:53
  • $\begingroup$ @DanielW i understand that the equivalence transformation is converting the continued fraction expansions with - to the continued fraction expansions with + and that ContinuedFractionK converts a continued fraction into a rational. But I do not see how this solves the problem. Could you give me a few more hints? $\endgroup$
    – Marc Kegel
    Sep 10 '20 at 14:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.