FIBER ENTROPY AND ALGORITHMIC COMPLEXITY OF RANDOM ORBITS ELIAS ZIMMERMANN ABSTRACT. We consider a finite set of transformations (T)∈Λ acting on a probability space (X, ), which are choosen randomly according to an ergodic stochastic process (Λℕ,,S). This describes a paradigmatic case of a random dynamical system (RDS). Considering a finite partition of X we show that the conditional algorithmic complexity of a random trajectory T (x),T ◦T (x), ... relative to the fiber = ... in Λℕ equals almost surely the fiber 0 1 0 0 1 entropy of the RDS with respect to , whenever the latter is ergodic. This extends a classical result of A. Brudnoconnectingalgorithmiccomplexityand entropy in deterministic dynamical systems. 1 Introduction Let Σ be a finite alphabet. In the theory of algorithmic complexity the randomness of a word v over Σ is quantified in terms of the Kolmogorov complexity C(v), which measures the length of a minimal description of v with respect to a universal Turing machine U. Based on this the upper and lower algorithmic complexity of an infinite sequence ! over Σ can be defined as (!) = −1 −1 lim sup n C(!0...!n−1) and (!) = lim inf n C(!0...!n−1) respectively. By Brudno’s theorem, upper and lower algorithmic complexity of a typical realization of a stationary stochastic process with state space Σ coincide and equal the entropy rate of the process, whenever the latter is ergodic, see [Whi91]. For the main part this result was proved by Brudno in [Bru82], where it is also stated in a version for general dynamical systems. Such a version is obtained as follows. Let (X, , T ) be a measure preserving dynamical system (MDS) and be a finite partition of X. The -name ! (x) ℕ of a state x ∈ X is defined as the unique sequence ! ∈ such that !n = P if and only if T n(x) ∈ P for all n ∈ ℕ. The upper and lower orbit complexity (x) and (x) of a state x with respect to may then be defined as the upper and lower algorithmic complexity of its -name. Denoting by ℎ(,T ) the entropy rate of T with respect to Brudno’s theorem reads as follows. arXiv:2108.13019v1 [math.DS] 30 Aug 2021 1.1 Theorem (Brudno-White). Let (X, , T ) be an ergodic MDS and be a finite partition of X. Then for -almost all x ∈ X we obtain (x) = (x) = ℎ ( ,T ). The above theorem is a remarkable statement for two reasons: On the one hand it connects two concepts of randomness (entropy and algorithmic complexity), which are defined in rather differ- ent ways, in a very close manner. On the other hand it provides a rigorous justification for the interpretation of entropy as a measure of orbit complexity. 1 Generalizations of Brudno’s theorem have been proposed for quantum statistics, see [BKM+06] and [Ben07], and, more recently, for actions of amenable groups, see [Sim15], [FT17], [Mor20] and [Alp20]. Further connections of entropy, computability and complexity are e.g. adressed in [Bru78]. [Whi91], [Whi93] and [GHR10]. In this paper we propose a generalization of Brudno’s result to the context of random dynamics. More specifically we shall consider random dynamical systems, which are given by a finite set of measure preserving transformations T ( ∈ Λ) on a standard probability space (X,), choosen randomly according to an ergodic stochastic process. While the process is specified by an ergodic shift (Λℕ,,S), the random dynamics are described by a skew-product T on the product space (Λℕ × X,⊗) taking the form T ( , x) = S , T x 0 for some pair , x ℕ X. Such skew-products are often called step skew-products. We will ( )∈Λ × therefore refer to the corresponding RDS (Λℕ ×X, ⊗, T ) as a step skew-product system (SSPS). To obtain a generalization of Brudno’s theorem to the random context we shall use a condi- tional version of algorithmic complexity, which is obtained in terms of oracle Turing machines. Let Σ and Λ be finite alphabets. For a word v over Σ and a sequence over Λ the conditional Kolmogorov complexity C(v ) of v relative to measures the length of a minimal description of v with respect to a universal oracle Turing machine U with oracle . (For more details see Sec- tion 2.) Based on this we defineð the upper and lower conditional algorithmic complexity of an −1 infinite sequence ! over Σ relative to as (! ) = lim sup n C !0...!n−1 and (! ) = n−1C ! ...! respectively. lim inf 0 n−1 Now consider an SSPS ℕ X, ⊗ , Tð together with a finite partitionð of X.ð For a (Λ × ) state x ∈ X we may defineð the - -name ! (x) of x as the unique sequence ! ∈ ℕ such that ! = P if and only if T ◦...◦T (x) ∈ P for all n ∈ ℕ. This allows us to introduce the upper n n−1 0 and lower conditional orbit complexities (x ) and (x ) of x relative to as the upper and lower algorithmic complexity of the - -name of x relative to . The entropy of an RDS is usually identified with the so called fiber entropyðof the the correspondingð skew-product. Denoting by h⊗(,T ) the fiber entropy of T with respect to , which will be introduced below, we may formulate our main result as follows. ℕ 1.2 Theorem. Let Λ × X, ⊗ , T be an ergodic SSPS and be a finite partition of X. Then for ⊗-almost all , x we obtain ( ) (x ) = (x ) = h ( ,T ). ⊗ Theorem 1.2 contains Brudno’sð classical theoremð as a special case. Moreover, it provides us with an interpretation of fiber entropy as a measure of conditional orbit complexity. It is easy to see that the unconditional algorithmic complexity of the - -name of x corresponds to the ℕ algorithmic complexity of the Λ × -name of ( , x) with respect to T and equals therefore the ℕ entropy ℎ(Λ × ,T ) for ⊗-almost all ( , x) by Theorem 1.1. Furthermore, denoting by the natural partition of Λℕ consisting of the cylindersets, which are specified in the first symbol, we obtain the following relation, which may be seen as an partitionwise analogue of the Abramov- Rokhlin formula for orbit complexities. 2 ℕ 1.3 Theorem. Let (Λ × X, ⊗ , T ) be an ergodic SSPS and be a finite partition of X. Then for ⊗-almost all ( , x) we have ( , x) = ( , x), (x ) = (x ) and ( ) = × × ( ). Denoting by × ( , x), (x ) and ( ) the respective common values we obtain the relation ð ð ð (x ) = × ( , x) − ( ). Organization. The paper is organizedð as follows: In Section 2 we discuss the relevant prelimi- naries from entropy theory of deterministic systems and algorithmic complexity. In Section 3 we develop the necessary entropy theory for step skew-products and apply it to some examples arising from actions of countable groups. Finally, Section 4 is devoted to the proof of our main results. Acknowledgements. The results of this paper extend results of the author’s diploma thesis. The author thanks his advisor Felix Pogorzelski for freely sharing his ideas on the topic and giving valuable hints in many stages of the work as well as for constant motivation and substantial support during the writing process. Moreover, he gratefully acknowledges financial support through a grant of the German-Israeli Foundation for Scientific Research and Development (GIF) (grant I-1485- 304.6/2019). 2 Preliminaries We set ℕ = {0, 1, 2,...}. In this paper an alphabet is always a finite, non empty set. Given an alpha- bet Σ we write Σ∗ for the set of (finite) words over Σ. The empty word is denoted by e. We say that ∗ ∗ a word v ∈ Σ is a prefix of a word w ∈ Σ in case v ≤ w and vi = wi for i ∈ {0,..., v −1}. By convention the empty word is a prefix of every word. A set B ⊆ Σ∗ is called prefix free in case v = w for any v, w ∈ B such that v is a prefix of w. ð ð ð ð ð ð Kolmogorov complexity. Kolmogorov complexity is usually defined in terms of Turing machines. A Turing machine (TM) is a mathematical model of a computer. Informally, it consists of a bi- infinite inscripted tape together with a device for reading and writing on it. At the beginning of a computation the input word is written to the right of the device, while the machine is in the start state. Now in every step of the following computation the device reads the inscription at its actual position, overwrites it and moves to the left or to the right as the machine changes into a new state. All this happens in accordance with a fixed program. If a so called stop state is reached, the machine halts and outputs the word written to the right of the device. The machine may also never reach a stop state, in which case it computes infinitely long. There are various equivalent formalizations of Turing machines, see e. g. [HU79]. However, we shall confine ourselves to the above informal description. In the following we will always consider Turing machines with input alphabet {0, 1} and assume an output alphabet Σ to be fixed. Given a TM M we shall write dom(M) for the set of words on which M terminates and M(u) for the output of M on some u ∈ dom(M). M is called prefix free in case dom(M) is a prefix free set. By a universal (prefix free) Turing machine we mean a (prefix free) TM U with the property 3 that for every TM M there is some word w ∈ {0, 1}∗ such that U terminates on wu if and only if M terminates on u and the outputs M(u) and U(wu) coincide for every u ∈ dom(M).