Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- From: A.L. <alewando@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 08:16:12 -0600
On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 13:04:13 GMT, Patricia Shanahan <pats@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
Bryan Olson wrote:
...
What does that mean? "Can lead to a shorter path" does not...
necessarily mean that the immediately resulting path is shorter.
This is the essential problem, so far, with hill-climbing approaches to
NP-complete problems. They tend to have local optima, where any single
small change makes things worse, but improvement would be possible with
a large change.
Patricia
Don't pay attention, someone Booted Cat generates nonsense not only
in this thread but also in others
A.L.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- From: Booted Cat
- Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- References:
- A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- From: Booted Cat
- Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- From: Booted Cat
- Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- From: dfarr@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- From: Booted Cat
- Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- From: Bryan Olson
- Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- From: Patricia Shanahan
- A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- Prev by Date: Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- Next by Date: Flow Decomposition
- Previous by thread: Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- Next by thread: Re: A stupid thought about Hamilton Path problem
- Index(es):