Timeline for Online sorting without modifications
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2017 at 5:12 | vote | accept | Erel Segal-Halevi | ||
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:48 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://cs.stackexchange.com/ with https://cs.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jun 30, 2016 at 11:00 | vote | accept | Erel Segal-Halevi | ||
| Jun 30, 2016 at 11:00 | |||||
| Jun 29, 2016 at 9:33 | comment | added | Erel Segal-Halevi | @D.w. The original numbers are arbitrary. | |
| Jun 27, 2016 at 18:03 | comment | added | D.W.♦ | Do your original numbers (before the permutation) come from some random process, e.g., some particular distribution? Or are they arbitrary (i.e., they could be chosen by an adversary, and we want to know about worst-case performance for the worst possible set of numbers)? This will lead to different answers. | |
| Jun 27, 2016 at 18:02 | answer | added | D.W.♦ | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jun 27, 2016 at 14:07 | answer | added | yoyo_fun | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jun 27, 2016 at 9:26 | comment | added | adrianN | Maybe minimizing the number of inversions is easier than maximizing the number of correct positions. | |
| Jun 27, 2016 at 8:12 | history | edited | Erel Segal-Halevi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 261 characters in body
|
| Jun 27, 2016 at 2:05 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackCompSci/status/747249377631211521 | ||
| Jun 26, 2016 at 11:50 | comment | added | Raphael | My gut says that nothing can be done if you can not estimate ranks. For the first element you have no chance. Knowing some elements already, better estimates may possible. | |
| Jun 26, 2016 at 6:59 | history | edited | Erel Segal-Halevi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 53 characters in body
|
| Jun 24, 2016 at 17:09 | comment | added | Evil | Do you have distribution of data? The running time depends on more than just perfectly hitting the proper placement of elements. | |
| Jun 24, 2016 at 16:45 | comment | added | D.W.♦ | 1. Have you tried working through small cases ($n=2$, $n=3$, ...) to see what you can say for small values of $n$? 2. Should we assume the $n$ numbers are unique? If not, I suggest editing the question to define "correct location" more carefully. | |
| Jun 24, 2016 at 16:44 | history | edited | D.W.♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fix apparent typo in title.
|
| Jun 24, 2016 at 11:48 | history | asked | Erel Segal-Halevi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |