We prove Kimberling's conjecture on greedy representations by Fibonacci and Lucas numbers: the ratio of the number of Zeckendorf summands of 1,…,n to the number of terms of their greedy representations tends to a limit in (1.2,1.4), and the limit is (5−5)/2. We also prove the conjectures of Greathouse and Kurkov on the number of terms of the greedy representation.
Introduction
Let Fk and Lk be the Fibonacci and Lucas numbers, F0=0, F1=1, L0=2, L1=1, let φ=(1+5)/2 and ψ=(1−5)/2, and let
S={1,2,3,4,5,7,8,11,13,18,21,29,…}
be the set of positive Fibonacci and Lucas numbers (A116470 in the OEIS [8]). For n≥1 let g(n) be the largest element of S that is at most n. The greedy algorithm subtracts g(n) from n and repeats; the number of terms it produces is
a(0)=0,a(n)=1+a(n−g(n))(n≥1),
which is A214973. Let z(n) be the number of terms in the Zeckendorf representation of n (A007895), and let
W(n)=i=1∑na(i),V(n)=i=1∑nz(i)
be A214981 and A179180. Representations by Lucas numbers go back to Carlitz, Scoville and Hoggatt [1]. Kimberling [3 Section 6] recorded the following conjecture, also stated in A214981.
Conjecture 1.1 (Kimberling). The limit of V(n)/W(n) exists and lies in the interval (1.2,1.4).
Two more conjectures, from 2021, are recorded in A214973. Let A049651(j) = (F3j+1−1)/2.
Conjecture 1.2 (Greathouse). For every j≥1, a(A049651(j))=j, and this is the first occurrence of j in A214973; that is, apart from its initial term, A049651 is the sequence of record positions of A214973.
The statement that A049651(j) is the least n with a(n)=j appeared earlier, without proof, in a 2012 comment by Kimberling in A049651.
Conjecture 1.3 (Kurkov). For every n≥1, a(n)=A329320(A048679(n)).
Here, if n=Fk1+⋯+Fks is the Zeckendorf representation of n, with k1>⋯>ks≥2 and ki−ki+1≥2, then A003714(n)=∑i2ki−2, whose binary word has no two adjacent ones. Preceded by a zero, such a word is a concatenation of the words 0 and 01 in exactly one way, and A048679(n) is the number whose binary word is obtained by replacing each factor 01 by 1. Finally A035263(m) is the parity of the 2-adic valuation ν2(2m), and
For x≥1 let K(x) be the index k≥2 with Fk≤x<Fk+1, and put K(0)=0. We prove the three conjectures.
Theorem 1.4. Let T(x)=W(x−1) and Z(x)=V(x−1) for x≥1, and let c=(5−5)/2=2+ψ. For every x≥1,
∣5T(x)−K(x)x∣≤19x,∣5Z(x)−cK(x)x∣≤13x.(1)
Consequently, for every n≥1,
W(n)−51nlogφn≤10n,V(n)−5cnlogφn≤10n,(2)
W(n)V(n)−c≤K(n+1)−1951whenever K(n+1)>19,(3)
and V(n)/W(n)→(5−5)/2=1.38196…, which lies in (1.2,1.4). In particular Conjecture 1.1 holds.
The formula for V(n) agrees with Lekkerkerker’s theorem on the average number of Zeckendorf summands [5, 4], since c/5=1/(φ2+1). Pihko [7] proved the analogues of that theorem for the minimal and maximal Lucas representations and the maximal
Image not extracted
Figure 1. The structure of the proof of Theorem 1.4. The greedy step splits the summatory functions over the blocks of [0,Fk+1); the values at Fibonacci numbers and the gap lemma then give the bounds {(xref}(1.1)} by induction on x, and these give {(xref}(1.2), (3)} and the limit.
Fibonacci representation. Theorem 1.4 shows that the greedy algorithm over S uses on average 51logφn terms.
Theorem 1.5. For every j≥1, a(A049651(j))=j and a(m)<j for 0≤m<A049651(j). Hence Conjecture 1.2 holds.
Theorem 1.6. For every n≥0, a(n)=A329320(A048679(n)). Hence Conjecture 1.3 holds.
The proof of Theorem 1.6 gives a(n) in terms of the Zeckendorf representation of n: if its indices form maximal chains k,k−2,k−4,… of lengths ℓ1,…,ℓt, then a(n)=∑i⌈ℓi/2⌉ (Corollary 5.1). The proofs are elementary, and every statement of Theorems 1.4–1.6 is also proved in the Lean 4 proof assistant (§ 6).
Figure 2. The greedy step on [Fk,Fk+1), drawn to scale for k=9. By Lemma 2.1 the block [Fk,Lk−1), of length Fk−2, is moved onto [0,Fk−2) by subtracting Fk, and the block [Lk−1,Fk+1), of length Fk−3, onto [0,Fk−3) by subtracting Lk−1. The same three blocks give the decompositions (3.1) and (3.2) of the summatory function.
Proof. The identities follow from Lk−1=Fk−2+Fk and Fk+1−Fk−Fk−2=Fk−1−Fk−2=Fk−3, and Fk−2,Fk−3≥1 gives the inequalities. The only Fibonacci number in [Fk,Fk+1) is Fk. For the Lucas numbers, L0=2<Fk, the sequence (Lm)m≥1 is increasing, Lk−2=Fk−3+Fk−1≤Fk−2+Fk−1=Fk, and Lk=Fk−1+Fk+1>Fk+1. So Lk−1 is the only Lucas number in (Fk,Fk+1).
For 1≤n≤2 we have a(n)=1. The Zeckendorf representation satisfies z(n)=1+z(n−Fk) for Fk≤n<Fk+1, k≥2, since its leading term is the largest Fibonacci number at most n.
Lemma 2.2. Let n=Fk1+⋯+Fks be the Zeckendorf representation of n≥1. If s≥2 and k2=k1−2, then a(n)=1+a(Fk3+⋯+Fks); otherwise a(n)=1+a(Fk2+⋯+Fks).
Proof. If k1≤3 then n∈{1,2}, s=1 and a(n)=1. Let k=k1≥4, so Fk≤n<Fk+1, and let r=n−Fk. If k2=k−2, then n≥Fk+Fk−2=Lk−1 and n−Lk−1=Fk3+⋯+Fks. Otherwise r=0 or r<Fk2+1≤Fk−2, so n<Lk−1. In both cases (2.1) gives the claim.
So the greedy algorithm over S is the Zeckendorf algorithm in which a leading summand Fk followed by Fk−2 is merged into Lk−1.
The summatory functions
Write T(x)=∑0≤i<xa(i) and Z(x)=∑0≤i<xz(i), so that W(n)=T(n+1) and V(n)=Z(n+1). If f(i)=1+f(i−b) for b≤i<d, then ∑i<xf(i)=∑i<bf(i)+(x−b)+∑i<x−bf(i) for b≤x≤d. With Lemma 2.1 this gives, for k≥4,
Lemma 3.1. Let ek=5T(Fk)−kFk. Then ek+1=ek+ek−2+ek−3 for k≥4, and ∣ek∣≤2Fk for k≥1.
Proof. Taking x=Lk−1 in (3.1) and x=Fk+1 in (3.2),
T(Fk+1)=T(Fk)+T(Fk−2)+T(Fk−3)+Fk−1(k≥4).
Multiplying by 5 and subtracting (k+1)Fk+1, the recursion for ek follows from
kFk+(k−2)Fk−2+(k−3)Fk−3+5Fk−1=(k+1)Fk+1,
which holds because Fk−2+Fk−3=Fk−1 reduces it to 5Fk−1−2Fk−2−3Fk−3=Fk+1, and both sides equal 2Fk−1+Fk−2. Since T(1)=0, T(2)=1 and T(3)=2, we get (e1,e2,e3,e4)=(−1,−2,−1,−2), so ∣ek∣≤2Fk for k≤4, and by induction ∣ek+1∣≤2(Fk+Fk−2+Fk−3)=2Fk+1.
Lemma 3.2. For k≥1, 5Z(Fk)=k(2Fk−Fk−1)−2Fk, and ∣5Z(Fk)−ckFk∣≤4Fk.
Proof. The formula holds for k=1,2,3, where Z(Fk)=0,0,1. Taking x=Fk+1 in (3.3) gives Z(Fk+1)=Z(Fk)+Fk−1+Z(Fk−1) for k≥2, and the formula for k+1 follows from the formulas for k and k−1 and the identity
in which, after Fk+1=Fk+Fk−1, the coefficients of k agree because Fk−1+Fk−2=Fk, and the remaining terms are −(2Fk−1−Fk−2)+3Fk−1−2Fk=−Fk on the left and (2Fk+1−Fk)−2Fk+1=−Fk on the right. For the bound, ψFk+Fk−1=ψk by induction on k (using ψ2=ψ+1), so
5Z(Fk)−ckFk=−k(Fk−1+ψFk)−2Fk=−kψk−2Fk,
and ∣ψ∣<1 and k≤2Fk give ∣5Z(Fk)−ckFk∣≤k+2Fk≤4Fk.
Lemma 3.3. If r≥0 and k≥K(r), then 0≤(k−K(r))r≤2Fk.
Proof. The claim is clear if r=0 or k=K(r). Otherwise let j=K(r)<k and d=k−j−1≥0. Then r<Fj+1, and Fk=FjFd+Fj+1Fd+1≥Fj+1Fd+1 together with d+1≤2Fd+1 gives (k−j)r≤(d+1)Fj+1≤2Fk.
Proposition 3.4. For every x≥0, ∣5T(x)−K(x)x∣≤19x.
Proof. By induction on x. For x=0,1,2 the left side is 0, 2 and 1. Let x≥3 and k=K(x)≥4.
If x≤Lk−1, let r=x−Fk. Then r≤Fk−2, so K(r)≤k, and by (3.1)
5T(x)−kx=ek+5r+(5T(r)−K(r)r)−(k−K(r))r.
By Lemmas 3.1 and 3.3 and the induction hypothesis, this lies between −4Fk−14r and 2Fk+24r. Since r≤Fk and x=Fk+r, both bounds are at most 19x in absolute value.
If x>Lk−1, let r=x−Lk−1<Fk−3. By (6) and (5) at x=Lk−1, and since x=Fk+Fk−2+r,
Since 0<c≤2, Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3 and the induction hypothesis place this between −8Fk−8r and 4Fk+18r, and both are at most 13x=13Fk+13r in absolute value.
Proof of Theorem 1.4. The bounds (1.1) are Propositions 3.4 and 3.5. Let x=n+1 and K=K(x). Then W(n)=T(x) and V(n)=Z(x), and
5V(n)−5cW(n)=(5Z(x)−cKx)−c(5T(x)−Kx)
has absolute value at most 13x+2⋅19x=51x, while 5W(n)≥(K−19)x. This gives (1.3), and K(n+1)→∞ gives the limit. Finally 6/5<(5−5)/2<7/5 because 121<125<169.
For (1.2), write λ(t)=logφt. Since Fk+1≤φk and φk−2≤Fk for k≥2, and FK≤x<FK+1, we have λ(x)<K≤λ(x)+2. Also K≤x+1, because Fk≥k−1 for every k≥1. Next,
xλ(x)−nλ(n)=λ(x)+nlogφlog(1+1/n),
and nlog(1+1/n)≤1<3logφ, because φ3=2φ+1>e. Hence 0≤xλ(x)−nλ(n)≤K+3≤n+5. In the identity
5W(n)−nλ(n)=(5T(x)−Kx)+(K−λ(x))x+(xλ(x)−nλ(n))
the three terms lie in [−19x,19x], [0,2x] and [0,n+5], so −19(n+1)≤5W(n)−nλ(n)≤21(n+1)+n+5≤48n for n≥1. In the same way, since 0<c≤2,
lies between −13(n+1) and 13(n+1)+4(n+1)+2(n+5)≤46n. Dividing by 5 gives (1.2).
The records
Let Rj=F2+F5+⋯+F3j−1=∑i<jF3i+2. Since F3j+1+2F3j+2=F3j+3+F3j+2=F3j+4, induction gives 2Rj+1=F3j+1, so Rj=A049651(j). Moreover Rj<F3j for j≥1, since 2Rj<F3j+1≤2F3j.
Proof of Theorem 1.5. First, a(Rj)=j. This holds for j=0,1. For j≥2 let k=3j−1≥5. Then Rj=Fk+Rj−1 and Rj−1<Fk−2, so Fk≤Rj<Lk−1, and (2.1) gives a(Rj)=1+a(Rj−1)=j.
Second, a(m)≥j implies m≥Rj. We use induction on m. The cases j≤1 and m≤2 are clear, so let j=t+2 with t≥0, and let m≥3 and k=K(m)≥4. By (2.1) there is r with a(r)=a(m)−1≥t+1, where either r=m−Fk<Fk−2 or r=m−Lk−1<Fk−3. By induction r≥Rt+1≥F3t+2, so F3t+2<Fk−2, hence 3t+2<k−2 and F3t+5≤Fk. In both cases m≥Fk+r≥F3t+5+Rt+1=Rt+2.
So a(m)<j for m<Rj, and a(Rj)=j. Thus Rj is the first occurrence of j, and since R1<R2<⋯, the records of A214973 occur exactly at $R_1, R_2, \ldots.
Kurkov's formula
Let n=Fk1+⋯+Fks be the Zeckendorf representation of n≥1. A chain is a maximal run ki,ki+1,…,ki+ℓ−1 of consecutive indices with kp−kp+1=2 for i≤p<i+ℓ−1; the indices split into chains of lengths ℓ1,…,ℓt, and consecutive chains are separated by gaps kp−kp+1≥3.
Corollary 5.1.a(n)=∑i=1t⌈ℓi/2⌉.
Proof. Apply Lemma 2.2 repeatedly. Along a chain it merges the first and second terms, the third and fourth, and so on, giving ⌈ℓ/2⌉ terms; it never merges the last term of a chain with the first term of the next, since they differ by at least 3.
Lemma 5.2.A048679(n)=∑i=1s2hi with hi=ki−2−(s−i). The exponents satisfy h1>⋯>hs≥0, and hi−hi+1=1 if and only if ki−ki+1=2.
Proof. The binary word of A003714(n), preceded by a zero, consists of the factors 01 occupying positions ki−1,ki−2 ($1 \le i \le s$; position 0 is the units digit), separated by zeros. These factors are disjoint because ki+1−1≤ki−3. Replacing each 01 by 1 moves the digit at position ki−2 down by one place for each of the s−i factors below it, so it lands at position hi. Finally hi−hi+1=ki−ki+1−1≥1 and $h_s = k_s - 2 \ge 0.
Lemma 5.3. For y≥0, A329320(y)=∑⌈ℓ/2⌉, the sum over the maximal blocks of consecutive ones in the binary word of y, of lengths ℓ.
Proof. Since ν2(2m)=1+ν2(m), we have 1−A035263(1+u)=ν2(u+1)mod2, and ν2(⌊y/2k⌋+1) is the number of consecutive ones of y starting at position k and going up. This number is 0 if the digit at position k is 0, and, along a block of ℓ ones, it takes the values ℓ,ℓ−1,…,1, of which ⌈ℓ/2⌉ are odd. The sum defining A329320(y) runs over the positions 0,…,⌊log2y⌋, which contain every block.
Proof of Theorem 1.6. For n=0 both sides are 0. For n≥1, Lemma 5.2 shows that the blocks of ones of A048679(n) correspond to the chains of the Zeckendorf representation of n, with the same lengths. Lemma 5.3 and Corollary 5.1 give A329320(A048679(n)) =∑i⌈ℓi/2⌉=a(n). Figure 3 follows the argument for n=595.
Image not extracted
Figure 3. Kurkov’s formula for n=595=F14+F12+F10+F7+F5+F2. The Zeckendorf indices form the chains 14, 12, 10, then 7, 5, then 2, and the greedy algorithm uses L13=F14+F12, F10, L6=F7+F5 and F2, so a(595)=4 (Corollary 5.1). The binary word of A003714(595), preceded by a zero, splits into the factors 01 and 0; replacing each 01 by 1 gives A048679(595) = 237, whose blocks of ones have the lengths of the chains (Lemma 5.2), and A329320(237) = 4 (Lemma 5.3).
Formal verification
Theorems 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 are formalized in Lean 4 [2] with Mathlib [6], version 4.34.1, and the formal proofs are checked by the Lean kernel. The formalization defines the sequences directly from their entries in the OEIS: a by the greedy recursion over the positive Fibonacci and Lucas numbers, z as the length of the Zeckendorf representation, W and V as sums over 1≤i≤n, A048679 by the rewriting of binary digits described in § 1, and A329320 by the displayed sum. It proves the bounds (1), the explicit formulas (2), the limit V(n)/W(n)→(5−5)/2 together with 6/5<(5−5)/2<7/5, Theorem 1.5 for every j, and Theorem 1.6 for every n≥0. In the formal proof of Theorem 1.6 the induction runs on the Zeckendorf representation through the recursion A329320(2Q+1+u) = A329320(2Q+1+2Q+u) = 1+A329320(u) for u<2Q, in place of Lemma 5.3. The proofs depend only on the axioms of Lean’s logic, namely propositional extensionality, choice and the soundness of quotients; they have no unproved step and add no axiom.
Independent computations in exact integer arithmetic, from the definitions of the sequences, confirm (1.1) for x≤108+1, Lemma 3.1 and the formula of Lemma 3.2 for Fk≤108+1, Theorems 1.5 and 1.6 and Lemma 2.2 for n≤108, and Lemmas 2.1, 3.1 and 3.2 for k≤400; they agree with the terms of the sequences recorded in the OEIS. The ratio V(n)/W(n) equals 1.3421 at n=106 and 1.3588 at n=108.
Acknowledgements
The authors used the generative AI tool Claude (Anthropic), through Claude Code, to assist with the proofs, the Lean formalization, the computations and the preparation of this article. The authors reviewed and edited the content and take full responsibility for it.
Disclosure statement
Competing interests: none.
Funding
None.
Data availability
Deep Bhattacharjee computed the Lean formalization and the Julia, C, C++, shell and Python computations with the help of AI assistance (Claude, Anthropic). The Lean formalization of the proofs in this paper is archived at Zenodo, doi:10.5281/zenodo.23385265. The paper is available at https://github.com/creelie/musical-rotary-phone/blob/main/preprintKimberlingConjecture/KimberlingConjecture.pdf.
[4]Koloğlu, M., Kopp, G. S., Miller, S. J., Wang, Y. (2011). On the number of summands in Zeckendorf decompositions. Fibonacci Quart. 49(2): 116–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/00150517.2011.12428056
[5]Lekkerkerker, C. G. (1952). Voorstelling van natuurlijke getallen door een som van getallen van Fibonacci. Simon Stevin 29: 190–195.
[6]The mathlib Community (2020). The Lean mathematical library. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Certified Programs and Proofs. New York: ACM, pp. 367–381. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372885.3373824