Re: Nested interval tree encoding
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:45:04 -0400
Message-ID: <g4jh90$k0l$1_at_fred.mathworks.com>
Ah, I hadn't quite put that together, thanks.
-Eric
"Tegiri Nenashi" <TegiriNenashi_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a87d7bbe-1100-4fb3-8b00-9df75b9e743b_at_z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 3, 2:01 pm, Tegiri Nenashi <TegiriNena..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 3, 10:04 am, "Eric DeCosta" <edeco..._at_mathworks.com> wrote:
>> Would using reversed continued fractions avoid this?
> Then, there is matrix encoding which is essentially the same as
> continued fractions but IMO provide more
> insight:http://www.sigmod.org/sigmod/record/issues/0506/p47-article-tropashko...
Oh, as you are asking about reversed continued fractions, you are certainly aware of the above article. To expand the answer, a version of matrix encoding with atomic matrices of the kind:
[n -1] [ ] [1 0]
correspond to reverse continued fractions. Details are in chapter 5 of “SQL Design Patterns” book. Received on Thu Jul 03 2008 - 23:45:04 CEST