Talk:CYK algorithm
![]() | Computer science Unassessed Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||||||
|
Explain practical parse tree generation!
Original threadstarter did not title this thread. Also: linebreaks added to original threadstarter's post. --131.234.234.12 (talk) 11:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
anyone please help
is there any proper algorithm to show that how the string is enabled .
Example:
given a string,the algortithm could give how it comes from the start S,
show how many ways it can be ,or even give the shortest way.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.7.20.106 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 21 July 2003
- It sounds like you're asking about parse trees... the page mentions that the algorithm is easy to modify to find a parse tree (or several). This would show you how to construct the string from the rules. I *think* that with Chomsky normal form, all derivations are the same length, but I'm not really an expert...
- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.186.8 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 9 July 2004
Give examples!
Original threadstarter did not title this thread. --131.234.234.12 (talk) 11:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
This page is great. However - it would incredible with a few examples to lead readers through the process.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.134.42.169 (talk • contribs) 13:01, 10 May 2007
Another article on CYK
There is another, almost empty article on the CYK parser: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYK_%28algorithm%29
The two should be merged (the former should be deleted.)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.133.45.42 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 21 June 2007
What does C stand for in CYK?
So far, I have come across three different names for letter C:
- Cook
- Cocke
- Coke
Which one is correct?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.133.45.42 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 21 June 2007
- Cocke, according to the Jurafsky and Martin book. Ealdent 15:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Mistake in the Algorithm?
I'm almost sure there is a mistake in the algorithm,
but I'll write it here first just in case...
The line:
"Let the grammar contain r terminal and nonterminal symbols R1 ... Rr."
should be:
"Let the grammar contain r nonterminal symbols R1 ... Rr."
There is no need to consider the terminals also.
Sararkd (talk) 02:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Change algorithm indexing
Is there any objection to changing the algorithm indexing from 1-indexed to 0-indexed? This would make converting from pseudocode to real code much easier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhm718 (talk • contribs) 11:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Why "Carlos"
Is there any good reason for naming the input string Carlos? It seems silly and irrelevant to me. Sigurdmeldgaard (talk) 08:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Seems to be corrected - thanks Sigurdmeldgaard (talk) 19:08, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Citation from 2009?
Is that paper from 2009 really notable enough to warrant a citation in Wikipedia? It is used to make a fairly technical point. Since all other sources (besides Knuth, which is a reference work) are from the 60s, 70s, it makes the impression as if the latest paper would be the only continuation of the study of this algorithm, which is difficult to believe... that is, IMO it inflates the importance of the paper and the reference should be removed.
- While I understand your feelings about giving undue weight to that paper, I would suggest to add more references of recent date about the CYK algorithm. For instance, the CYK algorithm, as well as Valiant's improvement have been recently generalized from context-free grammars to the case of Boolean grammars. Removing content from the article would certainly be a step into the wrong direction, given the size of the article. If there are any recent papers that deserve to be included, please be bold and just go ahead. I am confident that the article will further expanded over time, given that the article's subject is covered in many textbooks and courses on automata theory. Hermel (talk) 21:29, 20 July 2010 (UTC)