Move over Dijkstra: New algorithm just rewrote 70 years of computer science • Hacker News Board

Re: Move over Dijkstra: New algorithm just rewrote 70 years of computer science

#31

Post by cindyllm » Sat, Oct 04, 2025, 4:36 PM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #30

twojacobtwo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to take a break from the internet for a while. You're getting far too worked up over a passing comment. It clearly wasn't dismissive of the content and, as pointed out, OP immediately followed the comment by talking about the content (I.e. saying it's a decent summary). Some of us think that anything created by an AI should be labeled as such. Is that an inherently evil belief? It is a little dumbfounding to…

Your gaslighting comment is clearly written by AI even if it has some points that might appear to be valid at first glance. Given its authorship, it doesn't merit a response from a human. You need to take a break from the internet instead of continuing to spread your AI generated spam!

[dead]

Re: Move over Dijkstra: New algorithm just rewrote 70 years of computer science

#32

Post by n4r9 » Sat, Oct 04, 2025, 10:26 PM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #29

n4r9 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I see it, AI is a tool. Using that tool can speed up production but compromise quality and depth. Much like handcrafted furniture is higher quality than factory-produced. It's not unfair or biased to make people aware that a piece furniture is factory-produced. Likewise with AI content.

Firstly you have no hard evidence. People like you often make up that bad faith assertion to attack authors unfairly. Secondly, almost all content is going to be produced in part with assistance from AI tools, not necessarily to write the content, but at least to discover and understand source materials for it. Would you say that a search engine was used? AI is the new search engine too. Your assertion that using AI…

I think there's a good chance that human-crafted content by experts will have the kind of reputation that high-quality artisanal goods have today. But I'm not exactly fighting for anything, it really was an offhand comment that made up a tiny part of my take on the article.

Re: Move over Dijkstra: New algorithm just rewrote 70 years of computer science

#33

Post by n4r9 » Sun, Oct 05, 2025, 2:05 PM UTC

DennisL123 wrote: post #28

n4r9 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi! If I remember rightly, you can run contraction hierarchies but stop short of the full contraction, and use the core vertices as "hubs"? Hope you don't mind but I took a little look at your posting history and saw this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41954120 I've been researching this lately, as we've recently implemented traffic patterns in our routing model and are just now working on live traffic updates…

I was referring to variants of Customizable Route Planning. Easiest to implement is likely the partitioner of Sommer et al, and a unidirectional multi-level dijkstra.

Ah, I guess you mean this paper then: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...

There are many similarities between this approach and customisable contraction hierarchies. The latter allows a particularly elegant query-time algorithm involving only a couple of linear sweeps, I suspect even in the many-many scenario.

Re: Move over Dijkstra: New algorithm just rewrote 70 years of computer science

#34

Post by DennisL123 » Sun, Oct 05, 2025, 6:24 PM UTC

n4r9 wrote: post #33

DennisL123 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was referring to variants of Customizable Route Planning. Easiest to implement is likely the partitioner of Sommer et al, and a unidirectional multi-level dijkstra.

Ah, I guess you mean this paper then: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/... There are many similarities between this approach and customisable contraction hierarchies. The latter allows a particularly elegant query-time algorithm involving only a couple of linear sweeps, I suspect even in the many-many scenario.

Yep, that’s the one. There are a number of follow-up papers that engineer individual aspects of the implementation.