On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 6:05 AM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Right, but his problem is equivalent to bounded-weight, not constant-weight > codes... >
Why? Bounded-weight codes are upper-bounded by Hamming weight, which corresponds to cell assemblies having size of S or less, whereas in Ed's problem assemblies have fixed size of S, which corresponds to constant Hamming weight. >From the article, http://www.jucs.org/jucs_5_12/a_note_on_bounded/Bent_R.html "The weight, w, of a binary word, x, is equal to the number of 1s in x. For a constant-weight (w) code, every word in the code has the same weight, w. In a bounded-weight (w) code, every word has at most w ones." -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://causalityrelay.wordpress.com/ ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
