Content deleted Content added
m Maintain {{Vital article}}: The article is listed in the level 5 page: Graph theory (27 articles) |
→Animated example: new section |
||
Line 63:
Does the shortest path of the informational chunks always result in a mixed state? We want that because a pure state will lead to informational loss. One other option is that informational loss exists, but isn't fundamental, because it is the result of untangling a more fundamental field, and dissipating that infoloss into the same spacetime field as virtual particles. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2A02:587:4118:7CA3:2891:994B:40B:F97D|2A02:587:4118:7CA3:2891:994B:40B:F97D]] ([[User talk:2A02:587:4118:7CA3:2891:994B:40B:F97D#top|talk]]) 21:15, 7 August 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Whether this has anything real to do with shortest paths, or is just buzzword salad, I'm not sure, but it doesn't appear to have anything to do with this article, which is about a specific method for finding shortest paths and not on the general topic of shortest paths. And it also appears to be off-topic for this talk page, which is about improvements to the article based on published [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 21:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
== Animated example ==
The animated gif in the article, while it is a very good initiative, seems to be either wrong or at least confusing.
First of all, what do the numbers next to the vertices mean? If they're the estimated distances, then iiuc they're not supposed to increase. But they do: v4 changes from 6 to 4 between frame #4 and frame #5, just as v3 does between frame #5 and frame #6.
Also, aren't there supposed to be 5 frames instead of 6? That is, the initial state plus the |V|-1 = 4 steps of the algorithm.
And what do the thick arrows and grey vertices mean? Are they the vertices we already have the final distances of, and the shortest paths leading to them? The problem with this is that the algorithm is not supposed to "know" these at that point - if we stop there, we cannot be sure that we would not get better results (shorter paths) for these vertices in a later step.
| |||