On another book I've read, a path is defined as a sequence of vertices which none repeat. Here, the definition is replacing vertices with edges. With the book definition, making a path would disregard any multiple edges as both vertices connected to the edge would be taken, but with the video definition, the multiple edges are regarded as separate. Which one is right?
On the way to the exam, having attended no graph theory lectures but instead watching this. Wish me luck
Damn, same thing here
Thank you so much my year 12 class just introduced graph theory and I had trouble understanding it until now !!!
On another book I've read, a path is defined as a sequence of vertices which none repeat. Here, the definition is replacing vertices with edges. With the book definition, making a path would disregard any multiple edges as both vertices connected to the edge would be taken, but with the video definition, the multiple edges are regarded as separate. Which one is right?
Awesome presentation! Thanks!
Can I download the PowerPoint that was used in this video?
I assume when we speak of graph theory we are not talking about graphs of quadratic functions etc etc etc? That would be continuous maths yes?
Absolutely stunning, thank you so muxh
Nice explanation
the planarity website does not work anymore :(
anyone know if it is at all possible to get access that NYC subway problem?
Appreciated 👏 thank you man
Thank you.
very much helpful
Thank you!
thank u
thank you
Thank youuu
Thanks again
Thanks 👍👍
This is awesome!
Shouldn't a path not repeat vertices.
Thanks 😀
thanks
🖒
Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me.
João 14:6
@tucan sam In other words, man must go the path of Jesus in order to reach Father. Thus considering only man, Father has degree 1.
Not very accurate
@scott boswell, please describe what part is not accurate.
thank u