summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorYigit Sever2020-11-15 03:43:42 +0300
committerYigit Sever2020-11-15 03:43:42 +0300
commit4e978accd53ca8e368bf6adf6200a73d7ac5e4e1 (patch)
tree780b783a4d52f73a6a1f4993484d09062e063eb0
parente307e8a490d7e28cb7397f7cda3043bf728eca7e (diff)
downloadhw2-4e978accd53ca8e368bf6adf6200a73d7ac5e4e1.tar.gz
hw2-4e978accd53ca8e368bf6adf6200a73d7ac5e4e1.tar.bz2
hw2-4e978accd53ca8e368bf6adf6200a73d7ac5e4e1.zip
Type the first draft of answer to question 1
-rw-r--r--main.pdfbin40691 -> 182748 bytes
-rw-r--r--main.tex49
2 files changed, 49 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/main.pdf b/main.pdf
index 43d9330..9427911 100644
--- a/main.pdf
+++ b/main.pdf
Binary files differ
diff --git a/main.tex b/main.tex
index fae7bf7..da46b2a 100644
--- a/main.tex
+++ b/main.tex
@@ -31,6 +31,55 @@
31\section{Checking Consistency of Judgements}% 31\section{Checking Consistency of Judgements}%
32\label{sec:checking_consistency_of_judgements} 32\label{sec:checking_consistency_of_judgements}
33 33
34Given the collection of $n$ butterflies and a potential judgement between every pair (or not if the judgement is ambiguous), we have a graph $G = (V, E)$ with $n = |V|$ vertices and $|E| = m \le \frac{n(n-1)}{2}$ edges, with every edge $(i, j) \in E$ labelled either \enquote{same} or \enquote{different}. At the end of our algorithm, the vertices should be \emph{consistently} labelled as either \texttt{A} and \texttt{B} or our algorithm should be able to prove that $G$ cannot be labelled as so.
35
36A modified graph traversal using either BFS or DFS (since a node can be discovered multiple times in both of them) will work. Here we will modify the graph traversal given on \emph{page 42} on our \nth{3} lecture slides that uses BFS. The input of the algorithm is a node $s \in E$. If, due to ambiguous (i.e.\ missing) nodes, the graph is not connected, the algorithm should be run until every connected component is discovered.
37% TODO: run until every cc is discovered is handwavey <15-11-20, yigit> %
38
39{\centering
40 \begin{minipage}{.7\linewidth}
41 \begin{algorithm}[H]
42 \SetKwProg{Fn}{function}{}{end}
43 \DontPrintSemicolon{}
44 \SetAlgoLongEnd{}
45 \Fn{consistency\_check(s: node)}{
46 \KwData{$K$ = data structure of discovered nodes}
47 \KwResult{boolean = whether $G$ is consistent or not}
48 \textbf{label} $s$ as \texttt{A} \tcc*[r]{the opposite label is B}
49 put $s$ in $K$\;
50 \While{$K$ is not empty}{
51 take a node $v$ from $K$\;
52 \If{$v$ is not marked \enquote{explored}}{
53 mark $v$ \enquote{explored}\;
54 \For{each edge $(v, w)$ incident to $v$}{
55 \uIf{$w$ is labelled}{
56 \If{the label of $w$ is not consistent with the label of $v$ with respect to the judgement $(v,w$)}{
57 terminate the algorithm; $G$ is \textbf{inconsistent}\;
58 }
59 }
60 \Else{
61 \uIf{$(v,w)$ is labelled \enquote{same}}{
62 \textbf{label} $w$ with the label of $v$\;
63 }
64 \Else(\tcc*[f]{$(v,w)$ is labelled \enquote{different}}){
65 \textbf{label} $w$ with the opposite label of $v$\;
66 }
67 }
68 put $w$ in $K$\;
69 }
70 }
71 }
72 the spanned connected component is \textbf{consistent}
73 }
74 \caption{Modified graph traversal algorithm so solve judgement consistency checking problem}%
75 \label{alg:question_1}
76 \end{algorithm}
77 \end{minipage}
78 \par
79}
80
81With the assumption that accessing the labels $(u, w)$ takes $\mathcal{O}(1)$ time this algorithm has the same running time as BFS; $\mathcal{O}(m+n)$.
82
34 83
35\section{Reachability}% 84\section{Reachability}%
36\label{sec:reachability} 85\label{sec:reachability}