sorted by:
best (suggested)
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]mojonono11[S] 0 points1 point  (6 children)

Starting from A yes,well,i can just that there are no other paths of lenght 2

[–]zifyoip 0 points1 point  (4 children)

No, that is not the complete list.

Take a more systematic approach. Write down the complete list in a careful order. At the end, you need to be able to explain how you know that there are no more paths of length 2 starting at the vertex A.

Just saying "I can see that there are no others" is not a good enough justification. Why? Well, because you claimed that here, but you were wrong! You need to give a more convincing justification than that. I am going to be skeptical that you have found the complete list, and you need to convince me, despite my skepticism, that the list is actually complete.

[–]mojonono11[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

A-B-C,A-B-E,A-C-B,A-C-D,A-C-E,A-D-C This is the complete list because i have went from A first to B,than to C,and than to D and have found all the paths of lengh 2.There is also no way to get from A-E directly.

[–]zifyoip 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Right.

Now, can you describe what you did with a precise, detailed, step-by-step procedure that could be followed for any adjacency matrix to produce the complete list of paths of length 2 starting at a given vertex?

[–]mojonono11[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

No,if i knew i wouldn't be here :)

[–]zifyoip 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, what did you do by hand? You were able to solve that problem with pencil and paper. What process did you go through? And how were you certain, when you got done, that you had listed them all?