User talk:134.191.232.81

EDIT: this is irrelevant. As was pointed out on SE, my proof only showed that a specific automaton cannot be converted from Rabin to Parity by changing the condition, but it is possible that a different automaton with parity condition could be built that accepts the same language.

I think I've found a problem in the Parity (or Rabin) acceptance condition definitions.
Hi, I think I've found a way to prove that the currently defined Rabin and Parity acceptance conditions are not equivalent. Here's my proof on SE: https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/48505/is-wikipedias-definition-of-parity-acceptance-condition-for-omega-automaton-cor

Can anyone confirm/reject my proof?