graph - Directed Adjacency Lists -
I have asked this question in various ways, starting with:
When you have an adjacent list, what about the order? Say that I have a proximity list {1, 2, 5}, which is equivalent to {2, 1, 5}? Or does the order indicate something, and therefore these are not equivalent to the two lists?
I have received a lot of response in this, in which this is only the case if the graph is guided and the adjacent nodes of the order system clockwise ..? I have also been given the opinion that it does not make any difference, although it wants to place it on weight (if used) such as the Internet order - page ranking algorithm. I am not convinced to tell any of these responses properly, although I think I made the abstract known. Any idea is appreciated.
In addition to this, I have refined my question in such a way that if the answer is given, then I think that I give the correct answer to the following:
Proximity matrix for guided article:
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1
1 1 0 1
0 1 1 0
I have been told that the equivalent proximity list is as follows and my teacher believes that it deliberately listed it instead of some arbitrary rearrangement - has been especially noted in the previous list:
{2}
{2, 3}
{0, 1, 3}
{2, 1}
The last list is {2, 1}! What warning do I have in the equivalent proximity matrix that should be {2, 1} instead of {1, 2}?
Normally, no order does not matter in the proximity list.
... unless said explicitly.
The implementation can actually be listed for various reasons: how the graph is made as a result of this article, or you want to process neighboring neighbors in a sequence in a sequence. But perceptually, the order does not matter.
I believe that not is the answer in your case,
{2,1} is the same as
{1,2} Perhaps your teacher wrote it wrong first (like
{2,3} ) and after deciding it did not change the order or she / she wanted you to think that the order How is it. Surely you will not know, until you ask the teacher.
Comments
Post a Comment