Talk:Run of a sequence

reverted an edit I made, stating > this made it inconsistent with the lead; if both <-runs and ≤-runs can be sourced, this should be done ("strict run" vs. "weak run" or similar?))

I am following it in the talk page, as it will be far easier to discuss.

I have no doubt some author add to use «weak run» instead of «struct run», and that both makes sens. Actually, I started working on this because I was studying the notion of pre sorterdness, and the weak run seems far more interesting that the strict one as far as sorting is concerned. However, I have yet to find a publish article I can quote which formalize this difference, which introduce those names and which defines "weak run". So I can't actually use it in the wikipedia article, even if I would love to as soon as I find this article

--Arthur MILCHIOR (talk) 05:39, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * My only concern is consistency of the article with itself, and with its references. It should use "<" everywhere and provide appropriate references (or a tag as a reminder to search for them), or it should use "≤" everywhere and provide references for that. If both version exists in the literature, it should mention both. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 10:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)