Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a21ef2a6bb06cc78

Jump to content

Talk:Linear bottleneck assignment problem

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Klbrain in topic Merge proposal

Merge proposal

[edit]

I propose merging this page into Assignment problem. This page has existed since 2010, but it is a stub and seemingly, virtually all of the sections on this page are currently also found on the Assignment problem page. I do not think a merge would not cause any article-size or weighting problems. A mentally disabled mathematician (talk) 12:28, 12 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

  • Oppose merge. Funny you should talk about weighting problems. The weights are what make these two problems different. The assignment problem, when named without other qualification, always means the problem where one maximizes the total weight, the sum of the weights of all chosen pairs. The bottleneck assignment problem, on the other hand, uses a different optimization criterion of minimizing the maximum of the weights of all chosen pairs. Because it is a different problem it has different optimization criteria. I think that trying to talk about one problem with one formulation, on an article about a different problem with a different formulation, would overload the combined article and confuse readers trying to look up either problem. Neither article is actually very stubby and the bottleneck article could be expanded from many published sources, so I don't see what benefit would be obtained in exchange for this increased confusion. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:30, 20 March 2025 (UTC)Reply
Closing with no merge, given the uncontested objection and no support with stale discussion. Klbrain (talk) 14:47, 30 April 2025 (UTC)Reply