Talk:Binary decision diagram

message: "The resulting BDD is shown in the right figure." -- eh? What right figure?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.188.209.86 (talk) 03:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

message: Should all of those links be removed?  Seems like it goes against WP:NOTLINK.  LogicalFinance33 (talk) 22:55, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The policy states that at Wikipedia we don't allow collection of links as that may dwarf the page but this could be one of those borderline cases where the number of links might be high but each of them quite important from the article's perspective. Any ideas?--Wikishagnik (talk) 18:19, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I removed the 404 and ones requesting contact by email to get program, others had like 32 downloads or were not even full releases. I kept the best looking ones and removed the tag. Its not really a problem I think. They are different and don't dwarf the article. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:50, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Some (like CMU, CAL and CUDD) are included for historical reasons but some others are actually used by people. I added back JDD and BuDDy and removed some others I felt could be left out instead. Behandeem (talk) 16:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ext links 

message: The lead currently begins:
:In the field of computer science, a binary decision diagram (BDD) or branching program, like a negation normal form (NNF) or a propositional directed acyclic graph (PDAG), is a data structure that is used to represent a Boolean function. 
I don't understand why the lead is mentioning NNF and PDAG here. Yes, they are other representations of Boolean functions, but there are many others. Why mention them at all? And why in the lead? --Macrakis (talk) 22:56, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Binary decision diagram. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111101143950/http://myvideos.stanford.edu/player/slplayer.aspx?coll=ea60314a-53b3-4be2-8552-dcf190ca0c0b&co=18bcd3a8-965a-4a63-a516-a1ad74af1119&o=true to http://myvideos.stanford.edu/player/slplayer.aspx?coll=ea60314a-53b3-4be2-8552-dcf190ca0c0b&co=18bcd3a8-965a-4a63-a516-a1ad74af1119&o=true
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:32, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the section "Variable ordering", the shown diagrams do not correctly calculate the stated function f(x_1,\ldots, x_8) = x_1x_2 + x_3x_4 + x_5x_6 + x_7x_8.  For example, f(1,1,1,1,0,0,0,0) = 0, yet the diagrams both show f(1,1,1,1,0,0,0,0) = 1.  The file pages for the diagrams contain helpful explanations for how the diagrams were generated, with RML/CrocoPath/GraphViz, and it appears that the function was incorrectly defined there as:
F(x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6,x7,x8) :=  (x1="1" & x2="1") 
                             | (x3="1" & x4="1")
                             | (x5="1" & x6="1")
                             | (x7="1" & x8="1");
The binary addition operators in the sum have been translated to boolean OR operators, which is incorrect; binary addition is equivalent to boolean XOR.
User4096 (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the source of my confusion.  In Boolean logic theory it is common to use the + operator to stand for Boolean OR, not addition modulo 2. User4096 (talk) 22:31, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with Variable ordering section diagram 

message: Seems there's an "improvement" on BDDs called SDDs, but wiki has no mention of these. FYI 
https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=Sentential%20Decision%20Diagrams
79.79.253.53 (talk) 19:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentential Decision Diagrams 

message: The -11, -3, -5 on the nodes make no sense. Feydun (talk) 22:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, it seems this picture is a DOT file from the python dd package which also includes debug information. In particular, these values are their indices in the unique node table (fun fact). I have created a replacement by hand that also better aligns with the other figures. Soelvsten (talk) 09:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  complemented edges diagram