Re: Complexity Theory for Simpletons

Craig Feinstein wrote:
I'm afraid you misunderstood the definition of "better". With respect
to the definition of "better" used in my paper, no algorithm has been
found that beats Meet-in-the-Middle.

I'm afraid I can't be bothered to read your paper. What is your
definition of "better"?

If you think I'm lying, then just
read Woeginger's 2003 article cited in my paper, the person who posted
in this thread. As you can see, 2003 was more recent than 2002, 2000,
1991, so your criticism is invalid - unless of course, you are claiming
that Woeginger somehow missed these papers.

I haven't read Woeginger's 2003 article. Sure, it's entirely possible
that Woeginger has somehow missed these papers. There are gazillions of
papers published each year; it's easy to miss some.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Complexity Theory for Simpletons
    ... Craig Feinstein wrote: ... # I'm afraid you misunderstood the definition of "better". ... # to the definition of "better" used in my paper, no algorithm has been ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Complexity Theory for Simpletons
    ... to the definition of "better" used in my paper, no algorithm has been ... found that beats Meet-in-the-Middle. ... 1991, so your criticism is invalid - unless of course, you are claiming ... I'm afraid I don't have time to respond to any more criticisms. ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Complexity Theory for Simpletons
    ... Craig Feinstein wrote: ... # I'm afraid you misunderstood the definition of "better". ... the running time of an algorithm A is its ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: factoring integers on a classical computer in polynomial-time
    ... Craig Feinstein wrote: ... > The algorithm that we present for factoring integers on a classical ... In order to settle the debate, would anyone like to try to code this up ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: factoring integers on a classical computer in polynomial-time
    ... Craig Feinstein wrote: ... > The algorithm that we present for factoring integers on a classical ... In order to settle the debate, would anyone like to try to code this up ...
    (sci.math)