1,618
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

An Algorithm to Find Ribbon Disks for Alternating Knots

&

Figures & data

Figure 1: The stevedore knot is algorithmically ribbon. Crossings which make each diagram nonalternating are marked with an asterisk.

Figure 1: The stevedore knot is algorithmically ribbon. Crossings which make each diagram nonalternating are marked with an asterisk.

Figure 2: Coloring conventions. An alternating and a nonalternating crossing.

Figure 2: Coloring conventions. An alternating and a nonalternating crossing.

Figure 3: Candidate algorithmic bands. For the length-one band, the twist is chosen such that the new crossing is non-alternating; for the length-two band, one of the two crossings will be non-alternating, depending on the chessboard coloring of the diagram and whether the band crosses over or under.

Figure 3: Candidate algorithmic bands. For the length-one band, the twist is chosen such that the new crossing is non-alternating; for the length-two band, one of the two crossings will be non-alternating, depending on the chessboard coloring of the diagram and whether the band crosses over or under.

Figure 4: Flype. Here v (resp., w) is a sum over all the white (resp., black) regions in the tangle. Vectors associated to white regions in the tangle are multiplied by 1 in this move; vectors associated to black regions in the tangle are unchanged. Note also that a special case of the flype is to move a connected summand past a crossing.

Figure 4: Flype. Here ∑v (resp., ∑w) is a sum over all the white (resp., black) regions in the tangle. Vectors associated to white regions in the tangle are multiplied by −1 in this move; vectors associated to black regions in the tangle are unchanged. Note also that a special case of the flype is to move a connected summand past a crossing.

Figure 5: Reidemeister moves preserving bifactorizability. Note that both moves preserve the sum of number of diagram components plus number of nonalternating crossings. Note also that Reidemeister 3 moves change the number of nonalternating crossings and do not preserve bifactorizability.

Figure 5: Reidemeister moves preserving bifactorizability. Note that both moves preserve the sum of number of diagram components plus number of nonalternating crossings. Note also that Reidemeister 3 moves change the number of nonalternating crossings and do not preserve bifactorizability.

Figure 6: Untongue move.

Figure 6: Untongue move.

Figure 7: Almost-alternating clasp move.

Figure 7: Almost-alternating clasp move.

Figure 8: Untongue-2 move.

Figure 8: Untongue-2 move.

Figure 9: The 3-flype move. Here v (resp., w) is a sum over all the white (resp., black) regions in the tangle. Vectors associated to white regions in the tangle are multiplied by 1 in this version of the move; black regions in the tangle are unchanged.

Figure 9: The 3-flype move. Here ∑v (resp., ∑w) is a sum over all the white (resp., black) regions in the tangle. Vectors associated to white regions in the tangle are multiplied by −1 in this version of the move; black regions in the tangle are unchanged.

Figure 10: Regions around a band.

Figure 10: Regions around a band.

Figure 11: Regions around bands of length three.

Figure 11: Regions around bands of length three.

Figure 12: An uninteresting band of length three.

Figure 12: An uninteresting band of length three.

Figure 13: Regions around a band of length one. The horizontal arc is the core of the band.

Figure 13: Regions around a band of length one. The horizontal arc is the core of the band.

Figure 14: Two-bridge links and ribbon surfaces. Here s and t can be any nonnegative integers, while [[INLINE GRAPHIC]] and m/(mq)=[b1,,bl].

Figure 14: Two-bridge links and ribbon surfaces. Here s and t can be any nonnegative integers, while [[INLINE GRAPHIC]] and m/(m−q)=[b1,…,bl].

Figure 15: Algorithmic ribbon surfaces for 2-bridge knots and links, family (d). For s even, there is a minor modification to make in the fourth diagram. Note that one can easily obtain the bifactorizations for each diagram by working back from the crossingless diagram at the bottom.

Figure 15: Algorithmic ribbon surfaces for 2-bridge knots and links, family (d). For s even, there is a minor modification to make in the fourth diagram. Note that one can easily obtain the bifactorizations for each diagram by working back from the crossingless diagram at the bottom.

Figure 16: An alternating diagram of L#L. The tangle marked Γ¯ is the image of the tangle marked Γ under reflection in a plane perpendicular to the plane of the diagram.

Figure 16: An alternating diagram of −L#L. The tangle marked Γ¯ is the image of the tangle marked Γ under reflection in a plane perpendicular to the plane of the diagram.

Figure 17: Local contributions to lattice embeddings. The orientation on the overcrossing comes from that on L#L.

Figure 17: Local contributions to lattice embeddings. The orientation on the overcrossing comes from that on −L#L.

Figure 18: A band move. This is equivalent to composing a length two algorithmic band placed above or below the horizontal strand with an untongue move.

Figure 18: A band move. This is equivalent to composing a length two algorithmic band placed above or below the horizontal strand with an untongue move.

Figure 19: The result of band moves on L#L. The tangle marked Γ¯ is the image of the tangle marked Γ under reflection in a plane. After n1 band moves, the tangles Γ and Γ¯ are crossingless.

Figure 19: The result of band moves on −L#L. The tangle marked Γ′¯ is the image of the tangle marked Γ′ under reflection in a plane. After n−1 band moves, the tangles Γ′ and Γ′¯ are crossingless.

Figure 20: The “floating loop” 3-flype move.

Figure 20: The “floating loop” 3-flype move.

Table 1: Computational results of the Algorithm.

Figure 21: Escape bands.

Figure 21: Escape bands.

Table 2: Escapees identified and unresolved knots remaining.