Corpus ID: 15688462

Dancing links

@inproceedings{Knuth2000DancingL,
  title={Dancing links},
  author={D. Knuth},
  year={2000}
}
will put x back into the list again. This fact is, of course, obvious, once it has been pointed out. Yet I remember feeling a definite sense of “Aha!” when I first realized that (2) would work, because the values of L[x] and R[x] no longer have their former semantic significance after x has been removed from its list. Indeed, a tidy programmer might want to clean up the data structure by setting L[x] and R[x] both equal to x, or to some null value, after x has been deleted. Danger sometimes… Expand
207 Citations
Comparing and evaluating extended Lambek calculi
  • 3
  • PDF
Dancing with Decision Diagrams: A Combined Approach to Exact Cover
  • 1
  • Highly Influenced
Relaxations of the 3-partition problem
  • 3
  • PDF
Semi-persistent Data Structures
  • 20
  • PDF
Algorithms for classification of combinatorial objects
  • 16
  • Highly Influenced
  • PDF
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 50 REFERENCES
The n-Queens Problem
  • 44
Increasing Tree Search Efficiency for Constraint Satisfaction Problems
  • 1,443
  • PDF
A Trilogy on Errors in the History of Computing
  • 33
Estimating the efficiency of backtrack programs.
  • 307
  • PDF
Backtrack Programming
  • 474
Nondeterministic Algorithms
  • 312
  • PDF
Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays
  • 1,593
  • Highly Influential
  • PDF
Understanding Line drawings of Scenes with Shadows
  • 1,220
  • PDF
Scott,“Programming a combinatorial puzzle,
  • 1958
...
1
2
3
4
5
...