Talk:Approximation algorithm: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:32, 1 August 2007

There was an error on this page, specifically that the "dominance number" is made to sound as if it is a "replacement" for some other measure, whereas the reference I found calls it an orthoganal measure. There should probably still be a section about other measurements of approx. algorithms. The paper [1] I found that confirmed this error had some interesting contetnt that perhaps someone should write up. --NotQuiteEXPComplete 16:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An obvious problem: R_a is used to define R_a; whassup? Gritzko 06:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One is a function, the other is a set. You are right though, it'd probably be less confusing to use another variable.--NotQuiteEXPComplete 09:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 06:22, 31 July 2007 edit SatyrBot (talk \| contribs) Bots 121,099 edits m SatyrBot auto-adding tag to talk page. See User:SatyrBot/Current project ← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:32, 1 August 2007 edit undo David Eppstein (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Administrators 233,400 edits m rm inappropriate bot tag per discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Logic Next edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:

	{{Logic2}}

	There was an error on this page, specifically that the "dominance number" is made to sound as if it is a "replacement" for some other measure, whereas the reference I found calls it an orthoganal measure. There should probably still be a section about other measurements of approx. algorithms. The paper [http://www.springerlink.com/content/etkt6c2tl8a58tju/] I found that confirmed this error had some interesting contetnt that perhaps someone should write up. --[[User:NotQuiteEXPComplete\|NotQuiteEXPComplete]] 16:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)		There was an error on this page, specifically that the "dominance number" is made to sound as if it is a "replacement" for some other measure, whereas the reference I found calls it an orthoganal measure. There should probably still be a section about other measurements of approx. algorithms. The paper [http://www.springerlink.com/content/etkt6c2tl8a58tju/] I found that confirmed this error had some interesting contetnt that perhaps someone should write up. --[[User:NotQuiteEXPComplete\|NotQuiteEXPComplete]] 16:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)