From b43dc33a304037bf4c0d916ca706fa1a14cbb8cf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matt McCutchen <matt@mattmccutchen.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 17:27:16 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] Standardize on "q" for the number of reviews per paper.

Inconsistency noticed by Dr. Khuller.
---
 paper/flow.fig  | 4 ++--
 paper/paper.tex | 8 ++++----
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/paper/flow.fig b/paper/flow.fig
index ef3359a..937c49f 100644
--- a/paper/flow.fig
+++ b/paper/flow.fig
@@ -155,7 +155,6 @@ Single
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 195 720 5925 1725 $p^1_1$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 195 720 5925 2400 $p^2_1$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 195 720 5925 3000 $p^3_1$\001
-4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 180 540 7200 4275 $(r,0)$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.5236 6 180 1710 3375 3225 $(1,(10+d_{21})^2)$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.7854 6 180 1710 3525 4950 $(1,(10+d_{31})^2)$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 2 180 570 2400 3975 \\eg{C}\001
@@ -165,10 +164,11 @@ Single
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 2 180 570 975 1350 \\eg{A}\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 195 1515 5850 2025 \\eg{F} $(\\infty,0)$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 195 2820 5925 2700 \\eg{G} $(1,-c_2)$ and $(\\infty, 0)$\001
-4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 195 1155 7200 3375 \\eg{H} $(r,0)$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 180 840 4725 4875 $(1,-c_1)$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 2 180 555 4950 4650 \\eg{E}\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 5.8469 6 195 2325 3225 975 \\eg{D} $(1,(10+d_{11})^2)$\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 2 180 1995 5925 7275 with the implementation\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 2 180 2370 5925 7050 Edge groups cross-referenced\001
 4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 2 180 570 5550 7050 \\eg{A}\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 195 1200 7200 3375 \\eg{H} $(q,0)$\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 6 195 585 7200 4275 $(q,0)$\001
diff --git a/paper/paper.tex b/paper/paper.tex
index 088ca17..a332681 100644
--- a/paper/paper.tex
+++ b/paper/paper.tex
@@ -139,8 +139,8 @@ Flow can pass from $s$ through one or more of the nodes $r^t_i$ and
 one or more of the nodes $p^t_j$ to the sink to represent a review
 by reviewer $i$ of paper $j$.
 
-Each paper has an edge of capacity $r$ to
-the sink, indicating that it needs $r$ reviews.  In general, these
+Each paper has an edge of capacity $q$ to
+the sink, indicating that it needs $q$ reviews.  In general, these
 edges will constitute the min cut, so any max flow will saturate them
 and thereby provide all the required reviews.  We take the min-cost
 max flow in order to provide the reviews in the ``best'' possible way.
@@ -204,8 +204,8 @@ unit-capacity edge of cost $-c_1$ from $p^1_j$ to $p^3_j$.
 In addition to the bonus edges,
 there are edges of zero cost and unlimited capacity that reviews can follow
 from $p^1_j$ to $p^2_j$ and from $p^2_j$ to $p^3_j$ in order to reach the sink.
-The choice to offer bonuses for two reviews was based on the value $r = 3$;
-this would be easy to change for other values of $r$.
+The choice to offer bonuses for two reviews was based on the value $q = 3$;
+this would be easy to change for other values of $q$.
 
 In the example in Figure~\ref{flow-fig},
 paper 1 is interesting to reviewer 1 and boring to reviewers 2 and 3.
-- 
2.34.1

