Timeline for A different criterion for equivalence of codes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 20, 2012 at 3:30 | history | edited | Gerry Myerson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
meeting objections
|
| Jul 20, 2012 at 3:25 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | @Jyrki, you're right about the distances in the first example. I'll have to check my notes to see what I really meant to say. But I think I got the distances right in the second example. And I did have Alexander's idea in mind for the lengths; take 0000, 1000, 0110, 1110 for Code A, and it's the same length as Code R. I don't know why you feel that a code with one component constant is cheating, but I'll edit in an example without that feature. | |
| Jul 19, 2012 at 15:42 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | Sorry about being a bit cranky here. I cannot get rid of my preconceived notion of the "correct" version of this question :-) | |
| Jul 19, 2012 at 8:43 | comment | added | Alexander Chervov | different length - may be add zeroes at the end will cure ? | |
| Jul 19, 2012 at 8:15 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | Hmm. Am I counting something wrong? I see $d(a,d)=d(b,d)=6$. Also using codes of different length feels like cheating, because the question of equivalence becomes meaningless. | |
| Jul 19, 2012 at 7:15 | history | edited | Gerry Myerson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 285 characters in body
|
| Jul 18, 2012 at 22:45 | history | answered | Gerry Myerson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |