User talk:Thore Husfeldt

Hi, Thore, and welcome to Wikipedia. Below is the standard welcome message:

Welcome!

Hello, Thore Husfeldt, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! —David Eppstein (talk) 19:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for history section

Hi Thore, I just wanted to thank you for contributing the first draft of the history section in Graph coloring‎. It's well-written and the interlinking to related topics is excellent. Keep up the good work. :-) Dcoetzee 22:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Longest path

I don't know what is your definition of "a longest path in a graph". Please clarify. In my world a path in a digraph is a sequence of edges sharing target-source vertexes. The question of the maximum weight of a path in a digraph (eventually between two vertexes) is the dual to the problem of the shortest path (between the two vertexes) but where edge weights are negated. The maximum (and in fact minimum) weight of a path may not exists due to (negative) loops, but identifying it and finding the weight if it exists can be done very efficiently. In my opinion by "longest path" you mean something more than that, don't you? If so, please explain on the wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.46.210.178 (talk) 18:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Your definition is correct, your algorithm isn’t. No shortest algorithm exits that works in the presence of negative cycles, and your faulty “dual” construction would construct just these. The easiest way to see the NP-hardness is to say that if you had an algorithm that find a longest path, this algorithm would especially find a Hamiltonian path (if one exists), which is a very basic NP-complete problem. Thore Husfeldt (talk) 19:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

WF: No, the algorithm wouldn't find any Hamiltonian path (unless it is the longest path) since it doesn't restrict that you can pass many times by a vertex (or even edge). Please correct the wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.46.210.178 (talk) 21:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, you’re certainly persistent. (Also, please remember to sign your comments using four tildes.) As for your questions: are you merely confused about the longest path being implicitly simple, i.e., not containing repeating vertices? I’ve made that explicit on the article page now, I hope it’s clearer now. Thore Husfeldt (talk) 22:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

No FPRAS for \chi at integer points (what's a good ref for that?)

There's a #P-hardness result for integer-point evaluation of chromatic polynomials of planar graphs (or more generally Tutte polynomials) in D. J. A. Welsh's 1993 book Complexity: Knots, Colourings and Counting (Theorem 6.2.10, p.100). I don't know about inapproximability, though. From the material on pp. 138–141 it seems to have been open at the time he wrote the book. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The “No FPRAS for NP-hard problems unless NP=RP” seems to be folklore (or is it?) But after some soul-searching, I think a recent Goldberg-Jerrum paper gives a stronger result and is more citable. Thore Husfeldt (talk) 21:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Potts and Ising in the Tutte plane.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Potts and Ising in the Tutte plane.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

{{helpme}} I’m not sufficiently invested in these questions to have an opinion on this. I guess I want some cc-by-something, but would appreciate comments. Thore Husfeldt (talk) 12:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, if the image is your own work and you want to release it under CC-BY-SA, please add the template {{CC-BY-SA}} to the image page. (and simultaneously remove the {{nolicense}} tag) -Unpopular Opinion (talk · contribs) 12:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Chromatic in the Tutte plane.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Chromatic in the Tutte plane.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 11:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to thank you for your recent edit to travelling salesman problem - it takes no small expertise to write about the state of the art in approximability of this problem, complete with references. Thanks for contributing your time. Dcoetzee 18:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Well... provided it still is the state of the art. I took the information from Kann and Crescenzi’s compendium. Thore Husfeldt (talk) 19:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:ESA 2009 coffee break.JPG

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:ESA 2009 coffee break.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 16:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

TeX

This edit introduced a very weird way of using TeX:

$\{1,2,3,$…$\}$

I changed it to this:

$\{1,2,3,\dots \}$

That is standard in TeX. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Monotone_circuit_for_3-clique.svg

Hi, if I understand the circuit diagram correctly, the second AND gate from the left seems incorrect. --Robin (talk) 22:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! New version uploaded, I think I got it fixed now. Thore Husfeldt (talk) 22:43, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Looks good to me! Thanks. --Robin (talk) 23:00, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Chromatic polynomial of all 3-vertex graphs.pdf listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chromatic polynomial of all 3-vertex graphs.pdf, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Dharwadker

Hi could you please please please verify that this algorithm or at least it's implementation (http://www.dharwadker.org/vertex_coloring/ , you have the source and the exe in http://www.dharwadker.org/vertex_coloring/vertex_coloring.zip )

fails to properly color the following graph(depending on your CPU alg will end in aprox 5 or more hours-if you compile it in VS please don't run debug version or release version from VS- it will last for days): (formatting is awful, but when you click edit it looks like it should ) 52 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oh, and please verify that chromatic number is 4, that matrix is "legit". Proper coloring: 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 3 2 1 3 2 0 0 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 2 1 3 3 2 1 0 2 0 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 0 0 2 3 1 2 0 3 1 3 3

P.S. You may wonder why I have a such a weird request. First of all algorithm is very popular(at least among people i know),Dharwadker claims that there are no known graphs that alg can't colour in a optimal way. Secondly IMHO alg is very very very good. Finally Dharwadker won't reply to my e-mails, so I'm interested in a independent confirmation. BTW I run alg 2x to rule out HW errors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Voyager2378 (talk • contribs) 02:44, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Michael Mitzenmacher

This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Michael Mitzenmacher, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~michaelm/bio.txt.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 19:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 26

Hi. When you recently edited Mihai Pătraşcu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Graduate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Shouryya Ray

Hi Just read your message about Shouryya Ray someone deleted the page earlier today:)

I thought it was a reasonably notable acheivement since I understand the Physics, and it got a lot of press coverage in Germany, UK and Worldwide once picked up.

There are very few problems in Physics and Mathematics that go unsolved for 100's of years and can be solved by a school child.

Going to post a message on the page that deleted it.

RonaldDuncan (talk) 20:19, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Thore Husfeldt. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Thore Husfeldt. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

On the Parameterized Complexity page

Hi Thore,

I was looking at the parameterized complexity page, and realized that the section "W hierarchy" defines the circuit satisfiability problem as requiring "at most k inputs", whereas I believe it should be "exactly k inputs". That seems to be the standard definition (cf. Parameterized Algorithms, the original papers by Downey, Fellows, et al., etc).

The equivalence of these definitions for even levels (W[t] when t is even) can be obtained through to a monotony result (Theorem 7.1 in Parameterized Complexity, Flum and Grohe, 2006), as a satisfying assignment of at most k inputs would imply the existence of one with exactly k. For the odd case, the same Theorem says we can consider only anti-monotone circuits, and thus there is a trivial fpt-reduction between the problem of having an assignment of weight <= k over an anti-monotone circuit to that of having an assignment of weight = k, just output a constant YES-instance, as an anti-monotone circuit is always satisfied by assignment of weight 0 (<= k).

Still, I'd suggest sticking to the definition that seems to be more widely used,

Thanks! Bernardo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsubs (talk • contribs) 03:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:ESA 2009 coffee break.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:ESA 2009 coffee break.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 13:28, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I created this picture/file (I organised ESA 2009 at ITU) and uploaded it. (I’m not sure we didn’t also make an entire gallery of ESA pictures at IT University of Copenhagen, and if so I honestly can’t remember which was uploaded first. In any case, I can’t find it online anymore.)

I’m not sure which of the options above applies. Please tell me what to do. Thore Husfeldt (talk) 17:59, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, kindly take a look at Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2022_September_18#File:ESA_2009_coffee_break.JPG. Thanks. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:13, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

File:ESA 2009 coffee break.JPG listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ESA 2009 coffee break.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 07:38, 18 September 2022 (UTC)