Re: An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- From: "eKo1" <berndlosert@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 24 Sep 2006 14:17:51 -0700
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
L is a vertex cover, but not necessarily minimal.
Consider the single edge, two vertex, graph V={1,2}, E={{1,2}},
adjacency matrix:
0 1
1 0
L would be {1,2}, but {1} is also a vertex cover, as is {2}.
Perhaps I'm not understanding what a vertex cover is. I thought a
vertex cover was just the set of all vertices which are incident to
edges in E. I guess I'll have to research what a vertex cover is in
more detail.
Sorry...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- From: wtxwtx
- Re: An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- From: Patricia Shanahan
- Re: An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- From: wtxwtx
- Re: An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- From: eKo1
- Re: An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- From: Patricia Shanahan
- An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- Prev by Date: Re: On the complexity of determining whether n numbers are distinct
- Next by Date: Re: On the complexity of determining whether n numbers are distinct
- Previous by thread: Re: An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- Next by thread: Re: An algorithm with Minimum vertex cover without considering its performance
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|