Advertisement

Substitutive Structure of Jeandel–Rao Aperiodic Tilings

  • Sébastien LabbéEmail author
Article
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

Jeandel and Rao proved that 11 is the size of the smallest set of Wang tiles, i.e., unit squares with colored edges, that admit valid tilings (contiguous edges of adjacent tiles have the same color) of the plane, none of them being invariant under a nontrivial translation. We study herein the Wang shift \(\Omega _0\) made of all valid tilings using the set \(\mathcal {T}_0\) of 11 aperiodic Wang tiles discovered by Jeandel and Rao. We show that there exists a minimal subshift \(X_0\) of \(\Omega _0\) such that every tiling in \(X_0\) can be decomposed uniquely into 19 distinct patches of size ranging from 45 to 112 that are equivalent to a set of 19 self-similar aperiodic Wang tiles. We suggest that this provides an almost complete description of the substitutive structure of Jeandel–Rao tilings, as we believe that \(\Omega _0{\setminus } X_0\) is a null set for any shift-invariant probability measure on \(\Omega _0\). The proof is based on 12 elementary steps, 10 of which involve the same procedure allowing one to desubstitute Wang tilings from the existence of a subset of marker tiles, while the other 2 involve addition decorations to deal with fault lines and changing the base of the \(\mathbb {Z}^2\)-action through a shear conjugacy. Algorithms are provided to find markers, recognizable substitutions, and shear conjugacy from a set of Wang tiles.

Keywords

Wang tiles Tilings Aperiodic Substitutions Markers 

Mathematics Subject Classification

Primary 52C23 Secondary 37B50 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Vincent Delecroix for many helpful discussions at LaBRI in Bordeaux during the preparation of this article, including some hints on how to prove Proposition 11.5. I am grateful to Michaël Rao for providing me with the first proof of Proposition 5.2. This contribution would not have been possible without the Gurobi linear program solver [17], which was very helpful in solving many instances of tiling problems in seconds (instead of minutes or hours), but it turns out that Knuth’s dancing links algorithm [22] performs well to find markers. I acknowledge financial support from the Laboratoire International Franco-Québécois de Recherche en Combinatoire (LIRCO), the Agence Nationale de la Recherche Agence Nationale de la Recherche through the project CODYS (ANR-18-CE40-0007), and the Horizon 2020 European Research Infrastructure project OpenDreamKit (676541). I am very grateful to the anonymous referees for their in-depth reading and valuable comments, from which I learned and that led to a great improvement of the presentation. The revision of the article benefited from the support of the Erwin Schrödinger International Institute for Mathematics and Physics during my stay at the conference Numeration 2019 (Vienna).

References

  1. 1.
    Akiyama, S., Tan, B., Yuasa, H.: On B. Mossé’s unilateral recognizability theorem (2017). arXiv:1801.03536
  2. 2.
    Audemard, G., Simon, L.: Glucose SAT solver (2019). https://www.labri.fr/perso/lsimon/glucose/
  3. 3.
    Baake, M., Grimm, U.: Aperiodic Order. Vol. 1. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications, vol. 149. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baake, M., Roberts, J.A.G., Yassawi, R.: Reversing and extended symmetries of shift spaces. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 38(2), 835–866 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berger, R.: The undecidability of the Domino Problem. Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University (1965)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berthé, V., Delecroix, V.: Beyond substitutive dynamical systems: \(S\)-adic expansions. In: Akiyama, S., et al. (eds.) Numeration and Substitution 2012. RIMS Kôkyûroku Bessatsu, vol. B46, pp. 81–123. Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences (RIMS), Kyoto (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berthé, V., Rigo, M. (eds.): Combinatorics, Automata and Number Theory. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications, vol. 135. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Berthé, V., Steiner, W., Thuswaldner, J., Yassawi, R.: Recognizability for sequences of morphisms (2017). arXiv:1705.00167
  9. 9.
    Boyle, M., Tomiyama, J.: Bounded topological orbit equivalence and \(C^*\)-algebras. J. Math. Soc. Jpn. 50(2), 317–329 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Charlier, E., Kärki, T., Rigo, M.: Multidimensional generalized automatic sequences and shape-symmetric morphic words. Discrete Math. 310(6–7), 1238–1252 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen, H.-H., Hu, W.-G., Lai, D.-J., Lin, S.-S.: Decidability of plane edge coloring with three colors (2012). arXiv:1210.6712
  12. 12.
    Culik II, K.: An aperiodic set of \(13\) Wang tiles. Discrete Math. 160(1–3), 245–251 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Frank, N.P.: Introduction to hierarchical tiling dynamical systems. In: Tiling and Recurrence. CIRM, Marseille (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frank, N.P., Sadun, L.: Fusion: a general framework for hierarchical tilings of \(\mathbb{R}^d\). Geom. Dedicata 171, 149–186 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gähler, F., Julien, A., Savinien, J.: Combinatorics and topology of the Robinson tiling. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 350(11–12), 627–631 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grünbaum, B., Shephard, G.C.: Tilings and Patterns. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York (1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gurobi Optimization, L.: Gurobi optimizer reference manual (2018). http://www.gurobi.com
  18. 18.
    Jeandel, E.: Undecidability of the domino problem. In: Tiling and Recurrence. CIRM, Marseille (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jeandel, E., Rao, M.: An aperiodic set of 11 Wang tiles (2015). arXiv:1506.06492
  20. 20.
    Kari, J.: A small aperiodic set of Wang tiles. Discrete Math. 160(1–3), 259–264 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Knuth, D.E.: The Art of Computer Programming. Vol. 1: Fundamental Algorithms. 2nd printing. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1969)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Knuth, D.E.: Dancing links. In: Millenial Perspectives in Computer Science, pp. 187–214 (2000). arXiv:cs/0011047
  23. 23.
    Labbé, S.: Optional SageMath Package slabbe (Version 0.6) (2019). https://pypi.python.org/pypi/slabbe/
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    Labbé, S.: A self-similar aperiodic set of 19 Wang tiles. Geom. Dedicata 201, 81–109 (2019)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lind, D., Marcus, B.: An Introduction to Symbolic Dynamics and Coding. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mossé, B.: Puissances de mots et reconnaissabilité des points fixes d’une substitution. Theor. Comput. Sci. 99(2), 327–334 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mozes, S.: Tilings, substitution systems and dynamical systems generated by them. J. Anal. Math. 53, 139–186 (1989)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ollinger, N.: Two-by-two substitution systems and the undecidability of the domino problem. In: Beckmann, A., et al. (eds.) Logic and Theory of Algorithms. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5028, pp. 476–485. Springer, Berlin (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Queffélec, M.: Substitution Dynamical Systems—Spectral Analysis. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1294, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Robinson, R.M.: Undecidability and nonperiodicity for tilings of the plane. Invent. Math. 12, 177–209 (1971)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sadun, L.: Topology of Tiling Spaces. University Lecture Series, vol. 46. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2008)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sage Developers. SageMath, the Sage Mathematics Software System (Version 8.9) (2019). http://www.sagemath.org
  34. 34.
    Schmidt, K.: Multi-dimensional symbolic dynamical systems. In: Marcus, B., Rosenthal, J. (eds.) Codes, Systems, and Graphical Models. The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and Its Applications, vol. 123, pp. 67–82. Springer, New York (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Siefken, J.: A minimal subsystem of the Kari–Culik tilings. Ergodic Theory Dyn. Syst. 37(5), 1607–1634 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Solomyak, B.: Dynamics of self-similar tilings. Ergodic Theory Dyn. Syst. 17(3), 695–738 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Solomyak, B.: Nonperiodicity implies unique composition for self-similar translationally finite tilings. Discrete Comput. Geom. 20(2), 265–279 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wang, H.: Proving theorems by pattern recognition. II. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 40(1), 1–41 (1961)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université Bordeaux, CNRS, Bordeaux INP, LaBRI, UMR 5800TalenceFrance

Personalised recommendations