Is solving the traveling salesman problem in O(n2) time and O(n2) space good?

is solving the traveling salesman problem in O(n2) time and O(n2) space good?
I think I might have done it this time guys

Other urls found in this thread:

math.uwaterloo.ca/tsp/data/ml/monalisa.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>But I'm not posting it for reasons

like hell I'm gonna give anyone here the chance to say my algorithem is his

lets just say I find all the possible edges for the TSP and then traverse them in O(n2) time

If its legit, its bretty gud. Youll probably get published, but im still waiting for proofs

You sure do, buddy, great work. Enjoy your million dollars.

gonna solve this in a couple of days one I finish adding concurrency to my algorithem and optimizing it
math.uwaterloo.ca/tsp/data/ml/monalisa.html

Congrats OP you just solved P = NP
Now you should claim that millennium prize before someone finds an error in your algorithm.

it's actually bound to be error free
and even if it has an errror it would still be less than a precent longer than the optimal path

actually the hardest part was getting it from a precent longer to be exactly it

Why are you bothered with the traveling salesman problem when we have quantum technology ?

human knowledge

why bother with anything if there could potentially be a neural network good enough to solve it once you train it enough?

Your either wrong or have solved a special case and didn't realize it. Given that you babble about approximations as your starting point, I bet it's the latter

I didn't talk about approximations at all
actually it's really general
no matter the arrangement of points the solution will still hold.

Post it on arxiv and then link it here.

Post a demo program where we can specify the parameters and see the result in O(n2).

What's your algorithm?

Literally nobody is going to take you seriously unless you actually tell us something about your algorithm aside from your assumed complexity. Until you give us something to analyze or consider, it's all hot air.

What about your algorithm allows it to run in quadratic time? What are you doing that other algorithms neglect to do?

This. Also, I try not to generalize, but someone who's never heard of arxiv, doesn't know how to [math]n^2[/math] use tex, and can't spell "algorithm" probably hasn't solved fuckall.

Double true if he's completely unwilling to post anything.

was at work so I typed fast and without spell checking
also English isn't my primary language
didn't know you could use latex in Veeky Forums
I know my latex
here are a set of equations to solve another [math]O(n!)[/math] problem in [math]O(n^2)[/math], this time with maximum space usage of [math]3n[/math]

for any given list of primes finding the fraction that represent how much of the entirety of the positive integer their multiples cover.
for example:
for 2 -> 1/2
for 2,3 -> 4/6 = 2/3
for 2,3,5 -> 22/30 -> 11/15

[math]f_m(S) = [/math] the sum of all products of all permutations of size [math]m[/math] of [math]S[/math].

[eqn]\frac{f_{n-1}(S)-f_{n-2}(S)+f_{n-3}(S)-f_{n-4}(S)+f_{n-5}(S)...\pm 1}{p_1\times p_2...\times p_n}[/eqn]

[eqn]f_{0}(S)=1[/eqn]

[eqn]f_{L}(S)=S_{1}\times S_{2}\times S_{3}\times S_{4}...\times S_{L}[/eqn]
where [math]L[/math] is the length of [math]S[/math]

[eqn]f_{n}(S)=S_1\times f_{n-1}(S-S_1) + f_{n}(S-S_1)[/eqn]
where [math]n\neq 0,L[/math] and [math]S-S_1[/math] denotes the removal of the first item of \(S\).

(I sure do hope the latex works or I made a mess haha)

forgot to post the table needed to make sense of it all
[math]\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
2&3&5&7\\
\hline f_{0}(2,3,5,7)&f_{0}(3,5,7)&f_{0}(5,7)&f_{0}(7)\\
\hline f_{1}(2,3,5,7)&f_{1}(3,5,7)&f_{1}(5,7)&f_{1}(7)\\
\hline f_{2}(2,3,5,7)&f_{2}(3,5,7)&f_{2}(5,7)&f_{2}(7)\\
\hline f_{3}(2,3,5,7)&f_{3}(3,5,7)&f_{3}(5,7)&f_{3}(7)\\ \hline
\end{array}[/math]

A few things:

(1) your phrasing of the problem is unclear. You didn't define what 'entirety of the positive integer' means, nor did you explain the significance of cover.

(2) You have given no proof that this problem is NP-hard, so it has no barring on the TSP.

Ask your adviser, but you should've done a proper survery to begin with (you will need to anyway since no journal will accept you without references), if it's unique it's probably publisable in any case.

Why the hell would he?

>someone who's never heard of arxiv, doesn't know how to n2 use tex, and can't spell "algorithm" probably hasn't solved fuckall.

I'd actually expect even decent computer scientists to hit all these marks to be honest.

Have you met computer scientists? Complete aspies, the lot of them.

Also, the crux of hardness of your problem lies in finding the sum-product of all subsets, which reduces to a form of elementary symmetric polynomials.

Congrats on re-deriving something, though.

I hate how you all think and reason.

What is the likelihood a p=np solution would lead to the end of human life or a bad outcome?

50%?

Guyz, if I ever solve P=NP what things can I do become filthy rich before publishing the solution?

>being smart enough to solve p=np
>caring about wealth

hey

Maybe I'll find a proof by Fermat in my attic or something, gotta exploit it.

>Why the hell would he?
I fucked your mom and I have evidence, but I won't post it, as I fear that your dad will beat me up.

Congratulations. So I take it you remain because you're a masochist?

It's just interesting how equations based most of the methods used are. The methodology is completely different than what I use. I just get disgusted at the way in which people solve or describe problems like this.

you get "disgusted" by it because it's actual computer science, and you only want to write nonsense and feel good

Considering comp sci's ability to solve p=np. I'm not exactly upset by that comparison.

>not understanding the P=NP problem

Considering your inability to solve anything at all, except shitposting on an anime board, you should kill yourself.

You are an admin or janitor on Veeky Forums

Is that solution correct?

>O(n2)
>not O(n^k)

Immediately knew this was fake fucking lmao!

I used this as an example to show to that guy I know latex, not so much as to show my abilities

1) you're correct
what I meant is that for every list of prime numbers all the possible multiples of all the primes in that list will "cover" only a fraction of all possible positive integers (since there would always be a new prime that wasn't covered before)
in that problem I ask you to find that fraction.

2)I don't think it's NP-hard, it's just that brute forcing it would take you O(n!) time


so that's how it's called!
thanks!


I'll solve the mona lisa TSP I linked to in a couple of days, this should make things interesting


I've heard of arxiv
I just solved the last problem that faced between me and the complete solution and then posted here
I've not written a single formal text as of yet