## Does a Split Party Gain XP Evenly?

I’m running a campaign with six player characters. Since it’s a larger group, they occasionally split up. During these times, individual groups have gotten into encounters and been awarded XP.

My question is, does this XP get split evenly among the group present at the encounter or does the entire party, including the non-present group, receive XP evenly across the board?

## Independent sets into which all the vertices of the graph can be split

How to prove that if $$G$$ is an acyclic transitive digraph, then the least independent sets into which all vertices of G can be divided is equal to the size of the longest paths to $$G$$?

## Problem using ‘Regular expression’ in order to split characters of a column when there is no delimiter between them

I have a table with below structure:

create table TBL_TEST (   col_id   NUMBER,   col_name VARCHAR2(500) ) 

Some example data :

col_id | col_name    -----------------   1    | aetnap           2    | elppa          3    | ananab        

What I need to do is to split characters of column col_name for each col_id for example for col_id=1 we must have :

col_id | col_name    -----------------   1    | a   1    | e   1    | t   1    | n   1    | a   1    | p 

this query is fine when there is only one record in the table :

SELECT col_id, REGEXP_SUBSTR(col_name, '[a-z]{1}', 1, LEVEL) AS VAL   FROM tbl_test t CONNECT BY REGEXP_SUBSTR(col_name, '[a-z]{1}', 1, LEVEL) is not null 

but as soon as I insert another record in the table (say col_id=2 and col_id=3) I can not have the desired result. I want to know two things:

1. Why is this query works fine for one record and it does not for more ?
2. what is the best way to split the characters when there is no delimiter between them?

## Multi-level paging where the inner level page tables are split into pages with entries occupying half the page size

A processor uses $$36$$ bit physical address and $$32$$ bit virtual addresses, with a page frame size of $$4$$ Kbytes. Each page table entry is of size $$4$$ bytes. A three level page table is used for virtual to physical address translation, where the virtual address is used as follows:

• Bits $$30-31$$ are used to index into the first level page table.
• Bits $$21-29$$ are used to index into the 2nd level page table.
• Bits $$12-20$$ are used to index into the 3rd level page table.
• Bits $$0-11$$ are used as offset within the page.

The number of bits required for addressing the next level page table(or page frame) in the page table entry of the first, second and third level page tables are respectively

(a) $$\text{20,20,20}$$

(b) $$\text{24,24,24}$$

(c) $$\text{24,24,20}$$

(d) $$\text{25,25,24}$$

I got the answer as (b) as in each page table we are after all required to point to a frame number in the main memory for the base address.

But in this site here it says that the answer is (d) and the logic which they use of working in chunks of $$2^{11} B$$ I feel ruins or does not go in with the entire concept of paging. Why the system shall suddenly start storing data in main memory in chucks other than the granularity defined by the page size of frame size. I do not get it.

## Split a JWT between payload and signature

Context: I’m looking at storage solutions for JWT tokens on a single page application.

1. Storing the JWT in the local storage is unsafe and prone to XSS attacks.
2. Storing the JWT in a secure / HTTP only cookie is safer, but prone to CSRF attacks.

I’m studying the following scenario:

Upon authentication, a refresh token is stored in an http only secure cookie. It can only be used to get an access token.

Upon authorisation, the backend responds with a JWT access token. The header and payload part of the JWT are inside the response body. The token signature is not sent and is set in an http only secure cookie (same-site strict if possible, but let’s assume it’s not the case). The header + payload is stored in memory.

When making requests, the header + payload is sent via XHR/fetch by the SPA in an Authorisation header. The signature is sent along with the cookies. The backend concatenates both and verify the signature.

Would such a mechanism be safe from XSS and CRSF attacks, or is it just adding un-necessary complexity ? Since the cookie does not contain the full JWT, this seems like a CSRF attack would not be able to make requests. And an XSS attack would at least (this is a mild protection at this point since an XSS attack is possible, but still), not be able to retrieve the full token.

Note: I’ve read this question which is similar, but overly broad so I’m posting this to get a more precise answer.

## Split a array with range conditions

I have an array like following:

    sortedransam={{0.105328, -0.0291632}, {0.253571, 0.00498561}, {0.410887,    0.171317}, {1.45579, 0.300952}, {2.56002, -0.0599007}, {3.67651,    0.0913857}, {4.44773, -0.21599}, {4.68098, 0.0766649}, {5.20004,    0.0153934}, {5.31011, 0.157674}, {6.25626, -0.119345}, {6.35928,    0.145992}, {6.52711, -0.0163245}, {7.44436, 0.0334628}, {7.8401,    0.305493}, {8.18541, 0.0712892}, {8.21423, -0.0325363}, {9.0921, -0.0242404}, {9.3285, 0.035512}} 

sortedransam‘s first colume has been sorted. I would like to split this array with conditions that the first column into range ex. 0-2, 2-4, 4-6… Then the sortedransam should be like

    {{{0.105328, -0.0291632}, {0.253571, 0.00498561}, {0.410887,    0.171317}, {1.45579, 0.300952}},   {{2.56002, -0.0599007}, {3.67651, 0.0913857}},   {{4.44773, -0.21599}, {4.68098, 0.0766649}, {5.20004, 0.0153934}, {5.31011, 0.157674}},   {{6.25626, -0.119345}, {6.35928, 0.145992}, {6.52711, -0.0163245}, {7.44436, 0.0334628},    {7.8401,0.305493}},   {{8.18541, 0.0712892}, {8.21423, -0.0325363}, {9.0921, -0.0242404}, {9.3285, 0.035512}}} 

Should I use SplitBy or something else? I don’t know how to get conditions implemented.

## Optimal way to split a array

Consider a array $$a$$ with $$n$$ elements .the goal is to divide the array into segments ,which are continuous,formally from $$1$$ to $$i$$ ,then $$i+1$$ to $$j$$ and $$j+1$$ to $$k$$ and so on .Cost for making a new segment is $$x$$ and also if a segment has a element that occurs $$i,i>1$$ times then final cost increases by $$i$$ .Find the minimum possible cost.

My idea is that at first i would need a segment so for $$a[0]$$ i will make one and then i will proceed in array and add current element greedily and by greedily by adding $$a[i]$$ the cost may not increase if it never occurred in current segment or if it has occurred then i will check if cost increased by this element and cost for a new segment ,if cost is minimum in adding this element to current segment i will do this or else i will make a new segment starting with $$a[i]$$. But my greedy algorithm is wrong ,can anyone help me why my algorithm is worng?

## Metamind under effects of Font of Power and Split Mind, can both minds utilize Font of Power?

A10th level Metamind has the class feature Font of Power, which produces endless power points for one minute. If the Metamind manifests Split Mind, can both minds access the power points from Font of Power?

The Font of Power ability limits metaconcert, but does not mention Split Mind

## Can the sorcerer’s Twinned Spell metamagic and the Enchantment wizard’s Split Enchantment feature be used at the same time?

The Twinned Spell option for the sorcerer’s Metamagic feature says (PHB, p. 102):

When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn’t have a range of self, you can spend a number of sorcery points equal to the spell’s level to target a second creature in range with the same spell (1 sorcery point if the spell is a cantrip).

To be eligible, a spell must be incapable of targeting more than one creature at the spell’s current level. For example, magic missile and scorching ray aren’t eligible, but ray of frost and chromatic orb are.

Similarly, the School of Enchantment wizard’s Split Enchantment feature says (PHB, p. 117):

Starting at 10th level, when you cast an enchantment spell of 1st level or higher that targets only one creature, you can have it target a second creature.

If a character with access to both Twinned Spell and Split Enchantment casts a spell that fulfills the requirements for both, can both features be used at the same time?

## Why are these BVH split heuristic formulas different?

I’ve been doing some research into changing the split heuristic I use for a work project comprised of a BVH binary tree.

The heuristic I currently use is centroid median as described here, but I seek to use the surface area heuristic (SAH) now. Several papers denote the cost function for determining the split as:

$$c(A, B) = t_{trav} + p_{A}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{A}}t_{isect}(a_{i}) + p_{B}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{B}}t_{isect}(b_{i})$$

Notionally it is described in detail here, but to summarize, it is the cost of a ray intersect of primitives at this split.

However, I’ve seen an optimization technique, described as "binning", where $$K$$ pre-determined bins are computed and therefore the cost function for determining the split is:

$$c(A, B) = A_{a}N_{a} + A_{b}N_{b}$$

This is outlined here in Section 3.1, as well is several other documents (1, 2, 3).

What’s the rational/reasoning behind these two different cost models?