MHB Finding Shortest Path in G: Dijkstra's Algorithm

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algorithm Path
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around using Dijkstra's Algorithm to find the shortest path weights in a directed graph G with vertices {s, a, b, c, d} and specified edge weights. The user calculated the shortest path weights as d[s]=0, d[a]=5, d[b]=11, d[c]=9, and d[d]=3. Other participants confirmed the accuracy of these results, indicating agreement on the calculations. The focus remains on the application of Dijkstra's Algorithm for this specific graph scenario. The method and results were validated by the community.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Helloo!

I am asked to find the weights of the shortest path from s in a directed Graph G=(V,E), where V={s,a,b,c,d}, E={(s,a),(s,d),(a,b),(a,c),(a,d),(b,s),(b,c),(c,b),(d,a)} and their weights 5,3,6,4,1,3,7,2,2...
I used Dijkstra's Algorithm, and I found d=0,d[a]=5,d=11,d[c]=9,d[d]=3... Is this correct??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
Helloo!

I am asked to find the weights of the shortest path from s in a directed Graph G=(V,E), where V={s,a,b,c,d}, E={(s,a),(s,d),(a,b),(a,c),(a,d),(b,s),(b,c),(c,b),(d,a)} and their weights 5,3,6,4,1,3,7,2,2...
I used Dijkstra's Algorithm, and I found d=0,d[a]=5,d=11,d[c]=9,d[d]=3... Is this correct??


That's what I get as well.
 
Great...! :) Thank you!
 
I'm taking a look at intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL). Basically it exclude Double Negation Elimination (DNE) from the set of axiom schemas replacing it with Ex falso quodlibet: ⊥ → p for any proposition p (including both atomic and composite propositions). In IPL, for instance, the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM) p ∨ ¬p is no longer a theorem. My question: aside from the logic formal perspective, is IPL supposed to model/address some specific "kind of world" ? Thanks.
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...

Similar threads

Back
Top