From: <HIDDEN>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: Fall 2012 MATLAB Contest: October 31 - November 7
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 19:10:12 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: The MathWorks, Inc.
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <k7ebmk$29t$>
References: <k4v77h$im6$> <k7e4uu$4tl$> <k7e6l8$b3l$>
Reply-To: <HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: 1352315412 2365 (7 Nov 2012 19:10:12 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 19:10:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: MATLAB Central Newsreader 2333247
Xref: comp.soft-sys.matlab:782260

"Nicholas Howe" wrote in message <k7e6l8$b3l$>...
> Results are not all processed yet but Raphael Candelier's entry looks fabulous 

Now there's the understatement of  the year ;-). 190 points at this stage of the contest is un-be-friggin-lievable. My first thought was that we had been Welched one last time (was toying with the idea of doing something with complex numbers myself. The contest machinery does not appear to check for this.). Also, there's no nanmin in cheeese and it runs perfectly here on my 2012a.

>a new process that makes a big difference.  Win or lose, well done!  Raphael, if you are reading ?>this, do you want to give us some insight about what your 'slipknot' code does?

+1. For that matter I'm still not sure about what most of Alfonso's code does either. Would love some pointers.

> On another note, I looked into the perfect plane-drawing algorithms suggested by Hannes.  Looking at the leading code as of last night on the test suite, a perfect planar solver would only offer a 14-knot improvement over the entire set.  And the algorithms are involved enough that you would pay much of that back in complexity penalty.  So I ended up abandoning my attempt to implement that approach.  But I'm curious -- did anyone else actually get a perfect solver working for planar graphs?

Not me. But I didn't even try. Knew I wouldn't get it done in time.