Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2017/iii/paper-215/2/d/solution
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2017 iii Paper 215 2 d Solution by
Codex 0 Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
Use the ratio definition of cutoff from part (a), and write . In the reversible Markov chain setting of the preceding parts let and . In particular .
If did not tend to infinity, there would be a subsequence and for which . Along it part (c) implies, for every fixed ,Since , choose fixed so small that . The lower limit of this ratio is then greater than one, contradicting cutoff for Markov chains. Thus the Peres product condition holds:In fact the argument with proves the stronger absolute-gap product condition. Part (d) does not repeat the reversible Markov chain hypothesis; the ordinary real ordering of eigenvalues above uses that hypothesis. If arbitrary chains are intended, define the spectral gap explicitly: the eigenvalue lower bound for total variation mixing works for complex eigenfunctions too, and proves the same assertion for or for , which is at least . No real ordering of complex eigenvalues is implicit.
For the requested counterexample take nonlazy simple random walk on the complete graph , . Let have every row equal to the uniform distribution on a finite set, and let . ThenThus and : every fixed-level mixing time is eventually one. This is a bounded-time jump satisfying the ratio definition of cutoff. The ordinary spectral gap is and the absolute one is , so both products with tend to one, not infinity. The divergence assumption on is therefore essential under this convention.
New to topics? Read the docs here!