Talk:Dynamic programming

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Example[edit]

I (FvdP 21:51 Oct 22, 2002 (UTC)) had begun an example but do not feel the motivation to finish it cleanly right now (and perhaps not in the immediate future either). Here is it if anyone wants to complete it::

Suppose that we have to compute the product of n matrices A1.A2. ... .An, and we want to minimize the total number of operations by executing the matrix products in the best possible order.

The product of two matrices of size i × j and j × k

........


This example is published in Cormen's Introduction to Algorithms textbook. Will we run into copyright issues by putting it here?

Absolutely not! Ideas cannot be copyrighted, only a particular way of expressing those ideas. CLRS itself based this section on various papers. In other words, we can write an explanation of the problem and its solution in our own words, but should be careful not to copy text or even the precise presentation of the problem. Derrick Coetzee 20:09, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Confusion[edit]

The first paragraph of the second part and the article on algorithms states that dynamic programming is a bottom-up approach, but later this article says dynamic programming may use bottom-up or top-down approaches. --zeno 11:46, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I've revised that section. It was very vague and somewhat incorrect. I hope there's less confusion now. Derrick Coetzee 20:18, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Mild correction of pseudocode.[edit]

The article's pseudocode was inconsistent. At times, it used a Python-like indenting to represent the code structure. But it also included brackets at times. I have added brackets so that the pseudocode follows a C-like syntax: if the result of a loop, conditional, or whatnot is longer than one line, it is surrounded by brackets.

A more aggressive editor might prefer that no brackets be used. I don't know whether a bracket-less pseudocode would be clearer, but any consistent use of brackets would be clearer than what was there. (Would always using brackets be clearer -- for people who use a text-to-speech synthesizer, for example -- or would it just put in too much punctuation?) Chip Unicorn

In pseudocode I like to prefer indentation to braces where it's not unclear, to avoid eye-clutter, but I don't disagree with your changes - it's still sparse enough to be readable. Deco 01:10, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I tried it without braces, and it looks visually clearer. If Wikipedia gets complaints that this is un-understandable by some group. we can put in some way to distinguish the levels. Chip Unicorn 12:41, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Just to clarify, are there any set Wikipedia standards on formatting pseudocode? Neilc314 (talk) 04:00, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Weirdness[edit]

The page says "i dont know" in those terms, which is not only weirdly misplaced, but also improperly formatted. Someone check.

Smith-Waterman Algorithm[edit]

I don't see any mention of the Smith-Waterman algorithm, which is a dynamic programming algorithm just like the Needleman-Wunsch. Would it be appropriate to add that one as well? --scskowron 13:57 , 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I know this is an old post, but this problem has been resolved and there is now a mention of the Smith Waterman algorithm in the Sequence Alignment section. Neilc314 (talk) 03:58, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Misplaced section[edit]

The part following "The steps for using dynamic program goes as follows:" is out of place. Out of nowhere the article starts using terms like 'gap penalties' and 'sequence alignment.' Seems like this was copied from some article on a specific application, such as protien sequencing. Anon, Wed Jul 11 14:11:43 EDT 2007

too many examples[edit]

This is not a textbook. One good example would suffice. Even worse, many of them are just too long (and boring). Put them in wikibooks. Unfortunately, any attempt to fix this article would be blocked as "vandalism". Way to go, Wikipedia!

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dynamic programming. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Opening Summary[edit]

The summary of this article needs overhauled. The first paragraph and a half reads as if it's describing the concept of caching and it's not apparent that it's a different concept entirely. In particular the importance of subdivision of the cached solutions needs to be brought front and center, if indeed that's as crucial to the definition as the rest of the article seems to imply. Ketura01 (talk) 02:35, 19 September 2017 (UTC)