Timeline for Computing the equivalence classes of the symmetric transitive closure of a relation
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jun 29, 2012 at 21:14 | vote | accept | a06e | ||
Jun 29, 2012 at 11:14 | answer | added | user1066 | timeline score: 4 | |
Jun 29, 2012 at 7:36 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackMma/status/218608933919666176 | ||
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:57 | answer | added | Mr.Wizard | timeline score: 6 | |
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:39 | answer | added | Mr.Wizard | timeline score: 5 | |
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:38 | history | edited | a06e | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:34 | answer | added | a06e | timeline score: 2 | |
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:34 | answer | added | kglr | timeline score: 12 | |
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:32 | comment | added | a06e | @Jens Thanks for your comment. I see now. I did some drastic edits to the question (prior to seeing your comment). Now it's more to the point of what I want. Your comment now seems out of context, but it does answer the original question. | |
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:29 | comment | added | Jens |
From {13,10} and {10, 36} , you conclude that 10 and 13 belong together. But 13 also belongs with 1 because {1, 13} exists. However, there is no pair {1, 10} or {10, 1} , so 1 shouldn't be in the same group as 10 , which is in the same group as 13 which belongs with 1 . So the problem for Gather is that your identity relation is not transitive. As a result, you have to give up some conditions. Maybe you want all gathered groups to be numbers that are at least indirectly connected?
|
|
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:29 | comment | added | Mr.Wizard | Related: mathematica.stackexchange.com/q/3234/121 | |
Jun 29, 2012 at 5:25 | history | edited | a06e | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 414 characters in body; edited title
|
Jun 29, 2012 at 4:56 | history | asked | a06e | CC BY-SA 3.0 |