
Be the first to like this
Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Slideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.
Scribd will begin operating the SlideShare business on December 1, 2020 As of this date, Scribd will manage your SlideShare account and any content you may have on SlideShare, and Scribd's General Terms of Use and Privacy Policy will apply. If you wish to opt out, please close your SlideShare account. Learn more.
Published on
The famous Kruskal's tree theorem states that the collection of finite trees labelled over a well quasi order and ordered by homeomorphic embedding, forms a well quasi order. Its intended mathematical meaning is that the collection of finite, connected and acyclic graphs labelled over a well quasi order is a well quasi order when it is ordered by the graph minor relation.
Oppositely, the standard proof(s) shows the property to hold for trees in the Computer Science's sense together with an adhoc, inductive notion of embedding. The mathematical result follows as a consequence in a somewhat unsatisfactory way.
In this talk, a variant of the standard proof will be illustrated explaining how the Computer Science and the graphtheoretical statements are strictly coupled, thus explaining why the double statement is justified and necessary.
Be the first to like this
Login to see the comments