Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

4
  • Are you intending edge weightings to be multiplicative? Commented Dec 6, 2011 at 10:59
  • Additive. The theory being this will allow it to be defined such that the higher the definition of the signal path, the lower the weighting. Edges which connect nodes that perform format conversion would then be given a weighting higher than that assigned to edges which connect non-conversion nodes. This would route the signal in it's native format if possible, only involving format conversion (and associated signal degradation and equipment utilisation) when necessary. Commented Dec 6, 2011 at 12:57
  • 1
    @PeterTaylor: Would it matter if they were multiplicative? They have exact same semantics as additive (provided they are positive) by applying a logarithm. Or is it something more complicated behind it? Commented Dec 8, 2011 at 8:00
  • @herby, good point, hadn't thought of that. hangs head in shame Commented Dec 8, 2011 at 9:09