Skip Navigation

The Computer Journal 2002 45(3):285-292; doi:10.1093/comjnl/45.3.285
© 2002 by British Computer Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Farr, G. E.
Right arrow Articles by Wallace, C. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The Complexity of Strict Minimum Message Length Inference

G. E. Farr1 and C. S. Wallace1

1 School of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Monash University (Clayton Campus), Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia Email: gfarr@csse.monash.edu.au

Strict Minimum Message Length (SMML) inference is an information-theoretic criterion for inductive inference introduced by Wallace and Boulton and is known to possess several desirable statistical properties. In this paper we examine its computational complexity. We give an efficient algorithm for the binomial case and indeed for any SMML problem that is essentially one-dimensional in character. The problem in general is shown to be NP-hard. A heuristic is discussed which gives good results for binomial and trinomial SMML inference. The complexity of the trinomial case remains open and is worth further investigation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J Philos SciHome page
D. L. Dowe, S. Gardner, and G. Oppy
Bayes not Bust! Why Simplicity is no Problem for Bayesians
Brit J Philos Sci, December 1, 2007; 58(4): 709 - 754.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.