Timeline for Is there an explicit linear extension for the subsequence partial order?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2021 at 15:20 | history | edited | Asaf Karagila♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Jan 5, 2021 at 8:07 | comment | added | Just Me | Awesome thanks! | |
| Jan 4, 2021 at 13:49 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila♦ | Done and done. I hope that helps. (Not sure what pareto fronts are, but if that's a weather thing, it sounds cold.) | |
| Jan 4, 2021 at 13:49 | history | edited | Asaf Karagila♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1428 characters in body
|
| Jan 4, 2021 at 13:32 | comment | added | Just Me | actually this might be useful too (I'm trying to save time in computing pareto fronts) - can you elaborate / provide ref's for this "diagonal way"? Thx... | |
| Jan 4, 2021 at 13:10 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila♦ | Yes, of course. Also, everyone who finished a masters degree should have seen that order at least once, I think. You can do fancier things as well by sorting in a "diagonal way" that puts a sequence "closer" to its subsequences. But why work so hard? :-) | |
| Jan 4, 2021 at 13:09 | comment | added | Just Me | Thanks! I feel quite silly, since I implemented this order in the past, but somehow managed to forget about it... btw this can also be adapted to solve the subset variant if we compare sizes and then the sorted elements lexicographically. | |
| Jan 4, 2021 at 12:37 | vote | accept | Just Me | ||
| Jan 4, 2021 at 11:55 | history | answered | Asaf Karagila♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |