[EM] Floyd algorithm? - peace

Ernest Prabhakar drernie at mac.com
Thu Dec 18 08:39:01 PST 2003

Hi guys,

On Dec 18, 2003, at 7:32 AM, Markus Schulze wrote:
> You wrote (18 Dec 2003):
>> Idiot, why don't you read the quoted passage above, from my e-mail. 
>> Did I
>> deny that I'd called my implementation the Floyd algorithm? The only 
>> thing
>> that I denied having called "the Floyd algorithm" was your 
>> poorly-copied,
>> line-truncated fragment of a Python program. You had posted that 
>> fragment
>> and said that I called it the Floyd algorithm.
> You are the idiot because you see no contradiction between the fact 
> that
> you call your implementation "Floyd algorithm" and the fact that you 
> have
> to admit that your Python program nowhere uses the Floyd algorithm.

Can we chill? We're all Condorcet-lovers, after all.   Mike probably 
used the term Floyd inappropriately.   Markus probably cited a poor 
example.   Everybody makes mistakes.    No injury, no foul.

> You wrote (18 Dec 2003):
>> You claim that  the  1-pass procedure that you posted finds the 
>> strongest
>> beatpaths. Let's check it out and find out if it does.  What was the 
>> year,
>> month, and day of  your posting in which you posted what you called 
>> the
>> Floyd algorithm?
> The Floyd algorithm has been proposed by Floyd (Robert W. Floyd, 
> "Algorithm 97
> (Shortest Path)," Communications of the ACM, vol. 5, p. 345, 1962).

I suspect that we're really experiencing a clash of cultures.  Markus 
appears to be operating from a math/compsci perspective, where terms 
mean something different than they do in Mike.  As a physicist, I'm 
used to abusing mathematical terminology, so I can appreciate the 
dilemma. :-)

I suspect part of the problem is that the term 'shortest path'  in the 
Flloyd algorithm is used for finding what Mike calls a BeatPath.   The 
comparison of such paths to find the strongest beatpath is actually 
after the Flloyd algorithm.

There are some interesting differences between the two approaches, such 
as the use of absolute vs. relative weights, which may or may not be 
significant.  I'd be interested in hearing more about that.

-- Ernie P.

RadicalCentrism.org is an anti-partisan think tank near Sacramento, 
California, dedicated to developing and promoting the ideals of 
Reality, Character, Community and Humility as expressed in our Radical 
Centrist Manifesto: Ground Rules of Civil Society 

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list