Talk:Decomposition method (constraint satisfaction)

To do:

• condition equivalent to hypergraph acyclicity this is said in tree clustering; move above?
• clique-width
• computing width and decomposition (cost, LOGCFL)
• other structural restrictions: anything to add?
• algorithms for the resulting acyclic problems: something else to be mentioned here?

- Liberatore(T) 19:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Is the decomposition-example correct? "For every edge of the original graph, there is a node that contains both its endpoints": z,w are connected in the original graph, but no node exists in the decomposed graph that contains both z and w. Also, shouldn't it be "u,x,y" on the left side? Perhaps I misunderstood hypertree decomposition, it would be nice if someone else could take a look at this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.142.164.236 (talk) 11:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the example was wrong and took the liberty to change the image. --84.114.18.215 (talk) 21:03, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, just scrap the subpoint about Hypertree Decompositions and start from scratch. It is sure to confuse anyone who is unfortunate enough to stumble across it (and doesn't even feature the proper definition) Even just literally copying and quoting the papers from Gottlob, Leone and Scarcello would be huge improvement, and more legible as well. 128.131.196.163 (talk) 11:29, 8 March 2019 (UTC)