![[next]](go_next_btn.gif) 
![[prev]](go_prev_btn.gif) 
![[up]](go_up_btn.gif) Date: Sun, 03 Aug 80 02:20:00 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 80 02:20:00 -0400 (EDT)![[next]](go_next_btn.gif) 
![[prev]](go_prev_btn.gif) 
![[up]](go_up_btn.gif) From: Alan Bawden <ALAN@MIT-MC
>
From: Alan Bawden <ALAN@MIT-MC
>![[up]](go_up_btn.gif) Subject: more on metrics
Subject: more on metrics
Yes, it is true that the four conditions I gave for twist measures
don't guarentee that the function will behave anything like the kind
of complexity measure we are looking for.  I was only trying to show
how some of the properties you might expect of a twist measure could
be used to generate a metric, so I didn't actually need strong enough
properties to ensure reasonable twist measures.  The additional property
I have been using to assure reasonability is the following:
5) For all M, if T(M) > 1, then there exists an N such that 0 < T(N) < T(M) and T(N) + T(N'M) = T(M).
Note that N'M has the property that 0 < T(N'M) < T(M) (easy to show)
so the two manipulations N and N'M are both "simpler" than M.  We can
thus easily show that any manipulation M can be expressed as the
product of T(M) twists (where a twist is defined as a manipulation
such that T(N) = 1).
![[next]](go_next_btn.gif) 
![[prev]](go_prev_btn.gif) 
![[up]](go_up_btn.gif) 
![[top]](go_top_btn.gif) 
![[help]](help_btn.gif)