Abstract
AbstractAn extensive literature survey reveals that computational analyses of pure minimumcost‐network algorithms do not address the use of dual incremental codes. Previous studies only compare dual‐arc‐infeasible‐, primal‐dual‐, and primal‐type network codes. Of these three types, the primal method has been shown to be computationally superior to the other methods. This paper surveys the historical development of the dual incremental method up to and including the code DUALINC. Following a comprehensive description of DUALINC, a computational comparison is made with three other recently publicized codes, two primal codes and a dual‐arc‐infeasible code. The results of this comparison reveal that the new dual incremental code is much more efficient than the dual‐arc‐infeasible code and that it is competitive with the primal codes.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
