1
$\begingroup$

Edit: I take back this proposal. See Suresh’s answer.


I think that the tags and have no distinction and should be merged. Also, they can be renamed to a new tag for clarity. Therefore, I propose the following:

Note. This is a retag request, and it will be considered to be approved when it reaches the score of +4.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ I think the tag [prg] (and [pseudorandom-generators]) is used for questions about generators and [pseudorandom] as more general, but don't know if what I said makes much sense. If we are going to keep only one, I would prefer to keep [pseudorandomness] more than [pseudorandom-generators] because it is (seems) more general. $\endgroup$
    – Kaveh
    Dec 11 '10 at 19:40
  • $\begingroup$ @Kaveh: If you can see any distinction between the two tags in the actual usage on cstheory.stackexchange.com, please tell me. I cannot find any distinction. $\endgroup$ Dec 11 '10 at 19:42
  • $\begingroup$ I agree with Kaveh: while there may not be a distinction in the question, pseudorandomness is the broader notion that can cover generators as well as tools for testing randomness, and complexity-related topics like the hardness vs randomness tradeoff, and so on. $\endgroup$ Dec 11 '10 at 19:45
  • $\begingroup$ @Suresh: Fine. Please post it as an answer so that I can accept it. $\endgroup$ Dec 11 '10 at 19:46
  • $\begingroup$ @Tsuyoshi: I think right now the sample is too small to show any meaningful distinction. Btw, we also have the related tags: derandomization, randomness, randomized-algorithms. $\endgroup$
    – Kaveh
    Dec 11 '10 at 20:09
  • $\begingroup$ @Kaveh or anyone other than me: Please post it as an answer!! I cannot accept an answer posted by myself without waiting for 2 days or so, and I do not want to do that anymore. $\endgroup$ Dec 11 '10 at 20:13
3
$\begingroup$

While there may not be a distinction in the question, pseudorandomness is the broader notion that can cover generators as well as tools for testing randomness, and complexity-related topics like the hardness vs randomness tradeoff, and so on. I support changing prg to pseudorandomness-generator, but not any of the other recommendations.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I take my proposal back. Needless to say, if anyone is willing to write a new proposal based on this, I am fine with that. $\endgroup$ Dec 11 '10 at 20:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .