List Of All Algorithims For Everything
What would be a website that lists all real algorithms. Yes, I know the term algorithm is a very vague topic which is why I want A full list of probably at least several ten-thousand entries.
What I mean by real is that the algorithms must really be algorithms. Like, for example, on the Wikipedia page for category algorithms, it shows these medical procedures as algorithms when in fact they're not relay algorithms.
The kinds of algorithms I am looking for are ones that can be reasonably be classified as algorithms like things regarding data such as mathematical equations, contextual comparison of lingual text, compression, etc.
To clarify what I define as a genuine algorithm:
* There must be at least 1 page somewhere on the internet solely devoted to it. This means that if an algorithm is a derivation of another algorithm, then that derived algorithm will be considered part of the algorithm it was derived from until there is at least one page solely devoted to that derivation, after which that derived algorithm becomes classified as its own independent algorithm.
* The algorithm cannot be vague in any way. It must be able to be calculated/programmed with no iffy.
Thank you everyone who responds.
What I mean by real is that the algorithms must really be algorithms. Like, for example, on the Wikipedia page for category algorithms, it shows these medical procedures as algorithms when in fact they're not relay algorithms.
The kinds of algorithms I am looking for are ones that can be reasonably be classified as algorithms like things regarding data such as mathematical equations, contextual comparison of lingual text, compression, etc.
To clarify what I define as a genuine algorithm:
* There must be at least 1 page somewhere on the internet solely devoted to it. This means that if an algorithm is a derivation of another algorithm, then that derived algorithm will be considered part of the algorithm it was derived from until there is at least one page solely devoted to that derivation, after which that derived algorithm becomes classified as its own independent algorithm.
* The algorithm cannot be vague in any way. It must be able to be calculated/programmed with no iffy.
Thank you everyone who responds.
Last edited on
Are you referring to this, for example? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Assessment_and_treatment_algorithm_for_overweight_and_obesity.png
What makes this not a "real" algorithm?
Any finite list of instructions is an algorithm, so the set of all algorithms is on a 1-to-1 correspondence with the set of all natural numbers
What makes this not a "real" algorithm?
Any finite list of instructions is an algorithm, so the set of all algorithms is on a 1-to-1 correspondence with the set of all natural numbers
Counting the number of distinct possible finite lists is uncountably infinite. Especially considering that any given instruction could be possibly an infinite number of different things. http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/77656/is-the-power-set-of-the-natural-numbers-countable
Setting that aside, I think the OP was most likely interested in a subset of all possible algorithms. Specifically the subset relating to algorithms that are commonly used in programming languages.
Rosetta Code: http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Rosetta_Code
Algorithm textbooks:
https://www.amazon.com/Algorithm-Design-Manual-Steven-Skiena/dp/1849967202/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1297127794&sr=8-1
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Design-Analysis-Algorithms-2nd/dp/0321358287
Setting that aside, I think the OP was most likely interested in a subset of all possible algorithms. Specifically the subset relating to algorithms that are commonly used in programming languages.
Rosetta Code: http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Rosetta_Code
Algorithm textbooks:
https://www.amazon.com/Algorithm-Design-Manual-Steven-Skiena/dp/1849967202/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1297127794&sr=8-1
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Design-Analysis-Algorithms-2nd/dp/0321358287
Last edited on
I believe that the set of all algorithms is countably infinite, because for example, the number of Turing machines is countable. And I believe formally, an algorithm must be finite. As much as it seams that the power set of N is the same, it's not quite the case. While difficult to explain why, it can/has been proven.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sci.crypt/l16qzYOxvBo
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sci.crypt/l16qzYOxvBo
Last edited on
@htirwin: That google groups conversation was an interesting read. I am inclined to agree with it. All computable algorithms should be a countably infinite set.
closed account (48T7M4Gy)
What would be a website that lists all real algorithims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_algorithms
Donald Knuth has a series of 4 or 5 volumes on algorithms related to computing too.
Of course there are plenty of other types of algorithms in the general sense, some are call cooking books.
Whether any of this can be directly related to Turing machines, Cantor diagonals ax or otherwise, countable sets, or even dear old Godel is very dubious thinking when the OP might (?) be looking for a simpler answer, but none really know until the question is put forward, I certainly don't.
Last edited on
OP said that the Wikipedia category "algorithms" contains things that he doesn't consider algorithms. What do you say when someone asks "I want the list of all things, except those things I'm currently thinking about"?
closed account (48T7M4Gy)
| What do you say when someone asks "I want the list of all things, except those things I'm currently thinking about"? |
Beyond that, in acceptable discourse it is impudent, naive and crass to redefine terms when communication is by way of accepted (dictionary, in this case) norms, otherwise we might as well confine ourselves to primeval grunts however much some here haven't advanced beyond. :)
Last edited on
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| kemort wrote: |
|---|
| Daniel Knuth has a series of 4 or 5 volumes on algorithms related to computing too. |
closed account (48T7M4Gy)
Donald, I did that as an exercise to make sure somebody was concentrating, well done GW.
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.