Method stop · When and why do we use it?

Changing the Statement

In the Chinese book: 对命题作恰当变化

Stuck? Prove more: a stronger claim gives a stronger hypothesis for n → n+1.

📖 Chapter 13 of 《数列与数学归纳法》M3 Mathematical Induction lineM15 Assigning Values line

Before this stop, visit:Choosing What to Induct On (Method)

One idea, one pictureStart with . is certainly true — so why is every inductive step in the table a ✗? Then slowly increase and find the one value that makes all three readouts ✓.

Loading figure…

In one sentence

In mathematical induction, the induction hypothesis is all the capital you have. The stronger the conclusion you set out to prove, the stronger the hypothesis. So when a direct proof gets stuck, deliberately make the statement stronger:

  • strengthen the statement: write the “room” into the conclusion, e.g. change into ;
  • use an auxiliary statement: first prove a property that carries over from step to step, and get the original statement as a corollary;
  • generalize the statement: put the special case inside a more general statement that is easier to induct on.

It sounds like asking for trouble — you have more to prove, and yet it gets easier.

Example: 1 + 1/4 + 1/9 + … + 1/n² < 2

Step 1 / 5
Loading figure…
  1. Straight induction

    Assume . Then . The bound got bigger, so does not follow. Every step in the table is ✗ — not because the statement is wrong, but because the hypothesis is too weak.

Predict first

To prove by induction, which strengthened statement lets the induction go through (base case and every step)?

Choose an answer first; then you can see the result.

Stop 1 · Sequences: an auxiliary statement

Example A sequence has and (). Prove that every term is an integer.

Straight induction: if are integers, is one integer divided by another, which is not necessarily an integer. The hypothesis lacks information like “ divides ”. Compute a few terms: — could it be that ?

Auxiliary statement: it satisfies a linear recurrence

Step 1 / 4
  1. Write two neighboring equations

    By definition ; replacing by gives .

Stop 2 · Combinatorics: generalize the statement

Example Remove a corner cell from a board. Prove that the rest can be tiled by L-trominoes (a square minus one cell).

Straight induction: cut the board into four quarters. The hypothesis handles the quarter with the missing corner — but the other three quarters are complete, with no cell missing, and the hypothesis says nothing about them.

Generalize: remove any one cell

Step 1 / 4
  1. Make the statement more general

    Prove: a board with any one cell removed can be tiled by L-trominoes. The corner cell is just a special case.

Proving only “corner removed”, the hypothesis is too narrow; generalize to “any cell removed” and the hypothesis is wide enough for the induction to turn. It is the same idea as in the first example.

Practice

Exercise 1Basic

Find .

Exercise 2Basic

Compute (as a fraction in lowest terms) and check that it really is at most the bound from the strengthened statement.

Exercise 3Advanced

For the sequence of Stop 1, find .

Exercise 4Challenge

Prove that for every positive integer , .

Mistake Museum · Exhibits from this stop

Before you leave, look at the traps other people fell into here.See every exhibit in the museum →

Exhibit

“The added term is tiny”, so it cannot go over

The wrong step: Suppose . Then , and is tiny, so .
What went wrong? Think first, then open

Diagnosis The induction hypothesis only tells you ; it says nothing about how far is from . If were exactly (the hypothesis allows that), adding any positive number would go over . “Tiny” is not a proof.

The right step: Write “how far from ” into the statement: prove . The inductive step then needs exactly , which is clearly true.

“Room that is not in the hypothesis cannot be used in the conclusion”

Exhibit

Strengthening too much

The wrong step: To be safe, prove the stronger . The inductive step holds, so the original statement is proved.
What went wrong? Think first, then open

Diagnosis The inductive step does hold, but the base case fails: for , while . The strengthened statement is simply false, so of course it cannot be proved.

The right step: A strengthening must satisfy both ends: the step must go through (enough room), and the base case must stand (not too much room). For , the step needs and the base needs : only works.

“The strengthened statement must, first of all, be true”