bio | website | |
---|---|---|
location | Delft, Netherlands | |
age | 35 | |
visits | member for | 4 years, 8 months |
seen | Jul 5 '11 at 22:13 | |
stats | profile views | 34 |
I'm a PhD student working on network theory in biological systems.
Sep 24 |
awarded | Autobiographer |
Jan 19 |
awarded | Scholar |
Jan 19 |
awarded | Supporter |
Jan 19 |
comment |
Rooks on a lifeline
Hope that you got the reputation boost with the acceptance of the answer! Thanks Orange. |
Jan 19 |
accepted | Rooks on a lifeline |
Nov 4 |
awarded | Student |
Oct 31 |
comment |
Rooks on a lifeline
That was my first guess too. But the fact that we're adding as many neighbors as possible with each "breadth-first search" step, means that we might commit ourselves to rook placements that would make us miss maximal configurations. If, instead of only adding as many neighbors as possible with each BFS step, we considered all possibilities of adding $\{1,\ldots,n\}$ neighbors (under our constraints), where $n$ is the maximum number of neighbors, then we would definitely find all maximal configurations. So, we're being "greedy" in a sense here. I am worried that this might bite us. |
Oct 30 |
awarded | Editor |
Oct 30 |
revised |
Rooks on a lifeline
Improved my short description to reference the "lifeline" in the title. |
Oct 30 |
asked | Rooks on a lifeline |