Page 360 - Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications
P. 360

5.2 Strong Induction and Well-Ordering  339





                                                                          Two different triangulations of a simple polygon with seven sides into five triangles,
                                                                            shown with dotted lines and with dashed lines, respectively








                                                     FIGURE 2 Triangulations of a Polygon.


                                                     polygon, as we state in Theorem 1. Furthermore, this theorem tells us that every triangulation
                                                     of a simple polygon with n sides includes n − 2 triangles.


                                     THEOREM 1        A simple polygon with n sides, where n is an integer with n ≥ 3, can be triangulated into
                                                      n − 2 triangles.



                                                        It seems obvious that we should be able to triangulate a simple polygon by successively
                                                     adding interior diagonals. Consequently, a proof by strong induction seems promising. However,
                                                     such a proof requires this crucial lemma.



                                        LEMMA 1       Every simple polygon with at least four sides has an interior diagonal.


                                                        Although Lemma 1 seems particularly simple, it is surprisingly tricky to prove. In fact, as
                                                     recently as 30 years ago, a variety of incorrect proofs thought to be correct were commonly seen
                                                     in books and articles. We defer the proof of Lemma 1 until after we prove Theorem 1. It is not
                                                     uncommon to prove a theorem pending the later proof of an important lemma.

                                                     Proof (of Theorem 1): We will prove this result using strong induction. Let T (n) be the
                                                     statement that every simple polygon with n sides can be triangulated into n − 2 triangles.

                                                     BASIS STEP: T(3) is true because a simple polygon with three sides is a triangle.We do not need
                                                     to add any diagonals to triangulate a triangle; it is already triangulated into one triangle, itself.
                                                     Consequently, every simple polygon with n = 3 has can be triangulated into n − 2 = 3 − 2 = 1
                                                     triangle.
                                                     INDUCTIVE STEP: For the inductive hypothesis, we assume that T(j) is true for all
                                                     integers j with 3 ≤ j ≤ k. That is, we assume that we can triangulate a simple polygon
                                                     with j sides into j − 2 triangles whenever 3 ≤ j ≤ k. To complete the inductive step, we
                                                     must show that when we assume the inductive hypothesis, P(k + 1) is true, that is, that every
                                                     simple polygon with k + 1 sides can be triangulated into (k + 1) − 2 = k − 1 triangles.
                                                        So, suppose that we have a simple polygon P with k + 1 sides. Because k + 1 ≥ 4, Lemma 1
                                                     tells us that P has an interior diagonal ab.Now, ab splits P into two simple polygons Q, with
                                                     s sides, and R, with t sides. The sides of Q and R are the sides of P, together with the side
                                                     ab, which is a side of both Q and R. Note that 3 ≤ s ≤ k and 3 ≤ t ≤ k because both Q
                                                     and R have at least one fewer side than P does (after all, each of these is formed from P
                                                     by deleting at least two sides and replacing these sides by the diagonal ab). Furthermore, the
                                                     number of sides of P is two less than the sum of the numbers of sides of Q and the number of
   355   356   357   358   359   360   361   362   363   364   365