Paper detail

A look at generalized perfect shuffles

Standard perfect shuffles involve splitting a deck of $2n$ cards into two stacks and interlacing the cards from the stacks. There are two ways that this interlacing can be done, commonly referred to as an in shuffle and an out shuffle, respectively. In 1983, Diaconis, Graham, and Kantor determined the permutation group generated by in and out shuffles on a deck of $2n$ cards for all $n$. Diaconis et al. concluded their work by asking whether similar results can be found for so-called generalized perfect shuffles. For these new shuffles, we split a deck of $mn$ cards into $m$ stacks and similarly interlace the cards with an in $m$-shuffle or out $m$-shuffle (denoted $I_m$ and $O_m$, respectively). In this paper, we find the structure of the group generated by these two shuffles for a deck of $m^k$ cards, together with $m^y$-shuffles, for all possible values of $m$, $k$, and $y$. The group structure is completely determined by $k/\gcd(y,k)$ and the parity of $y/\gcd(y,k)$. In particular, the group structure is independent of the value of $m$.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.