#15514: adding option for computing a total dominating set
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: azi | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: graph theory | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/azi/adding_option_for_computing_a_total_dominating_set|
0659b10bdb7e08638936cd419963ce40aab8317b
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
Hello !
> I think its still fair to do such optimisations. They may come handy for
say graphs of order ~100 and high degree. But if its not an actually
improvement then ofc you're right and and my bad for not checking it!
Ahahah. Well, in that case with the cost of adding all constraints to the
LP this objective function may only be 1% of the total. And I am not
talking of solving the actual thing ! `:-P`
> Oooh, I was really wondering why we're using p.sum...
Plus it is hard to advertise, as "sum" works. I even cheat a bit by using
"sum" when I do a talk about that `^^;`
> Thanks for that remark. Let's see how the things I now pushed go..
It seems to be the same as before. And there is this comment about
Petersen's graph which is not followed by an example.
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15514#comment:26>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
