Kraft's Inequality - Proof of The General Case

Proof of The General Case

Consider the generating function in inverse of x for the code S

in which —the coefficient in front of —is the number of distinct codewords of length . Here min is the length of the shortest codeword in S, and max is the length of the longest codeword in S.

For any positive integer m consider the m-fold product Sm, which consists of all the words of the form, where are indices between 1 and n. Note that, since S was assumed to uniquely decodable, if, then . In other words, every word in comes from a unique sequence of codewords in . Because of this property, one can compute the generating function for from the generating function as

$G(x) = \left( F(x) \right)^m = \left( \sum_{i=1}^n x^{-|s_i|} \right)^m = \sum_{i_1=1}^n \sum_{i_2=1}^n \cdots \sum_{i_m=1}^n x^{-\left(|s_{i_1}| + |s_{i_2}| + \cdots + |s_{i_m}|\right)} = \sum_{i_1=1}^n \sum_{i_2=1}^n \cdots \sum_{i_m=1}^n x^{-|s_{i_1} s_{i_2}\cdots s_{i_m}|} = \sum_{\ell=m \cdot \min}^{m \cdot \max} q_\ell \, x^{-\ell} \; .$

Here, similarly as before, —the coefficient in front of in —is the number of words of length in . Clearly, cannot exceed . Hence for any positive x

$\left( F(x) \right)^m \le \sum_{\ell=m \cdot \min}^{m \cdot \max} r^\ell \, x^{-\ell} \; .$

Substituting the value x = r we have

$\left( F(r) \right)^m \le m \cdot (\max-\min)+1$

for any positive integer . The left side of the inequality grows exponentially in and the right side only linearly. The only possibility for the inequality to be valid for all is that . Looking back on the definition of we finally get the inequality.

$\sum_{i=1}^n r^{-\ell_i} = \sum_{i=1}^n r^{-|s_i|} = F(r) \le 1 \; .$

Read more about this topic: Kraft's Inequality

Famous quotes containing the words proof of the, proof of, proof, general and/or case:

“If we view our children as stupid, naughty, disturbed, or guilty of their misdeeds, they will learn to behold themselves as foolish, faulty, or shameful specimens of humanity. They will regard us as judges from whom they wish to hide, and they will interpret everything we say as further proof of their unworthiness. If we view them as innocent, or at least merely ignorant, they will gain understanding from their experiences, and they will continue to regard us as wise partners.”
—Polly Berrien Berends (20th century)

“To cease to admire is a proof of deterioration.”
—Charles Horton Cooley (1864–1929)

“If any doubt has arisen as to me, my country [Virginia] will have my political creed in the form of a “Declaration &c.” which I was lately directed to draw. This will give decisive proof that my own sentiment concurred with the vote they instructed us to give.”
—Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)

“The general Mistake among us in the Educating of our Children, is, That in our Daughters we take Care of their Persons and neglect their Minds; in our Sons, we are so intent upon adorning their Minds, that we wholly neglect their Bodies.”
—Richard Steele (1672–1729)

“If there is a case for mental events and mental states, it must be that the positing of them, like the positing of molecules, has some indirect systematic efficacy in the development of theory.”
—Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)