Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk

From	Andrew Tomazos <andrew@tomazos.com>
Newsgroups	comp.programming, comp.theory, sci.math, comp.graphics.algorithms
Subject	Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk
Date	2011-11-01 12:41 -0700
Organization	http://groups.google.com
Message-ID	<d9a4376c-ed3f-408a-950c-e76e082e214a@s9g2000yqi.googlegroups.com> (permalink)
References	<10a6051c-903f-4fd4-95e9-15e90dee066c@m19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <20111031205413.D47073@agora.rdrop.com>

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Nov 1, 5:24 am, William Elliot <ma...@rdrop.com> wrote:
>> such that the total distance of the path traveled by starting at the
>> first point and moving directly to the nearest unvisited point (until
>> they have all been visited) is maximized
>
> That is ambiguous.  What if there is more than one "nearest" point?

Ok, in that case the algorithm can choose.  More formally make the set
of n points an n-tuple of points, and in the case of two or more
nearest unvisited points than the earlier one in the list is visited.
  -Andrew.

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Worst Case Greedy Walk Andrew Tomazos <andrew@tomazos.com> - 2011-10-31 08:11 -0700
  Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk William Elliot <marsh@rdrop.com> - 2011-10-31 21:24 -0700
    Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk Andrew Tomazos <andrew@tomazos.com> - 2011-11-01 12:41 -0700
      Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk William Elliot <marsh@rdrop.com> - 2011-11-01 20:32 -0700
  Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2011-11-01 07:21 +0000
    Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-01 00:45 -0700
      Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk Andrew Tomazos <andrew@tomazos.com> - 2011-11-01 13:02 -0700
        Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk mike fee <m.fee@irl.nospam.cri.nz> - 2011-11-02 09:57 +1300
          Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk mike fee <m.fee@irl.nospam.cri.nz> - 2011-11-03 10:55 +1300
            Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk "INFINITY POWER" <infinity@limited.com> - 2011-11-03 09:39 +1000
              Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk mike fee <m.fee@irl.nospam.cri.nz> - 2011-11-07 17:09 +1300
                Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk "INFINITY POWER" <infinity@limited.com> - 2011-11-08 04:04 +1000
                Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk mike fee <m.fee@irl.nospam.cri.nz> - 2011-11-08 09:54 +1300
                Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk seeWebInstead@rem.intarweb.org (Robert Maas, http://tinyurl.com/uh3t) - 2011-11-13 11:50 -0800
                Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk "INFINITY POWER" <infinity@limited.com> - 2011-11-14 06:58 +1000
                Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk seeWebInstead@rem.intarweb.org (Robert Maas, http://tinyurl.com/uh3t) - 2012-03-29 00:28 -0700
                Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk mike fee <m.fee@irl.nospam.cri.nz> - 2011-11-08 11:44 +1300
                Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk mike fee <m.fee@irl.nospam.cri.nz> - 2011-11-08 14:28 +1300
    Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk Andrew Tomazos <andrew@tomazos.com> - 2011-11-01 12:46 -0700
      Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2011-11-02 08:16 +0000
        Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-11-02 05:27 -0700
  Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 14:29 -0700
    Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk Graham Cooper <grahamcooper7@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 15:30 -0700
    Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk Steve Thompson <thomps2048@yahoo.ca> - 2011-11-01 20:56 -0400
  Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk quasi <quasi@null.set> - 2011-11-02 01:55 -0500
    Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk quasi <quasi@null.set> - 2011-11-02 18:24 -0500
  Re: Worst Case Greedy Walk "INFINITY POWER" <infinity@limited.com> - 2011-11-02 17:49 +1000

csiph-web