tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post2439086647085735095..comments2024-03-18T23:13:09.570-05:00Comments on Computational Complexity: FOCS AcceptsLance Fortnowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06752030912874378610noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-82171745542931764052008-06-26T13:32:00.000-05:002008-06-26T13:32:00.000-05:00Isn't it that both STOC and FOCS have always been ...Isn't it that both STOC and FOCS have always been mostly about approximations and bounds...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-30774955749764334042008-06-25T14:22:00.000-05:002008-06-25T14:22:00.000-05:00As a follow-up, in a idle moment I looked for the ...As a follow-up, in a idle moment I looked for the most <I>common</I> words -- the non-rigorous result was a tie between "approximate" (with variants) and "bounds" (with variants) -- each with fourteen instances (never adjacently).<BR/><BR/>Has FOCS therefore become a conference mainly about approximations and bounds?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-49607134543183077862008-06-24T12:55:00.000-05:002008-06-24T12:55:00.000-05:00try searching google.try searching google.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-89666678308211819912008-06-24T11:18:00.000-05:002008-06-24T11:18:00.000-05:00I'm curious. Anyone knows what are almost-natural ...I'm curious. Anyone knows what are almost-natural proofs?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-25075063631565804772008-06-24T08:13:00.000-05:002008-06-24T08:13:00.000-05:00Algorithm is still somewhat an exception as Lance'...Algorithm is still somewhat an exception as Lance's list was for complexity and not focs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-91934240833719020462008-06-24T08:06:00.000-05:002008-06-24T08:06:00.000-05:00What a great opportunity to test Lance's previous ...What a great opportunity to test Lance's previous (exceedingly funny) post "the seven dirty words you cannot say at the Complexity Conference."<BR/><BR/>The number of times each word (or a variant) from Lance's List appears in a FOCS title:<BR/><BR/><B>1. Constants:</B> twice<BR/><B>2. Algorithm:</B> nine times<BR/><B>3. Application:</B> once<BR/><B>4. Heuristic:</B> never<BR/><B>5. Competitive:</B> never<BR/><B>6. Implementation:</B> never<BR/><B>7. Wolfram:</B> never<BR/><BR/>Obviously Lance's List is strongly predictive -- with the striking exception of the still-popular word "algorithm".<BR/><BR/>Why is "algorithm!" the exception? Does this mean that algorithm papers are on their way out, but are not extinct yet? Like pandas? :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com