Their use of “QR Code” is mighty confusing. QR (Quick Response) Codes are something specific that people are familiar with. These don’t share any characteristics apart from being images which represent something else. They’re not even the same colour or shape. Just call them “knot codes” or something.
I mean... There is a 1-1 mapping, and they look kinda like QR codes. so technically, you can make an app that scan it and it will show you the corresponding polynomial.. It could even be useful for fast checking knots
Which I not only mentioned in my comment, it is not even slightly unique to QR codes.
> they look kinda like QR codes
In what way? QR Codes are black and white, square, and asymmetrical. These are colourful, hexagonal, and symmetrical. By that token, a 16th century tile also “looks kinda like a QR Code”.
I very much doubt you could show one of these to someone, ask them what they are, and that they would answer “QR Code”. They don’t look alike at all.
A QR codes encode data to be scanned and converted for the convenience of the user.
These knot graphics encode data to be scanned and converted for the convenience of the user.
It is strong, but not 1 to 1:
> Tubbenhauer computed, for instance, that the invariant uniquely identifies more than 97% of the knots with 18 crossings.
Which I not only mentioned in my comment, it is not even slightly unique to QR codes.
> they look kinda like QR codes
In what way? QR Codes are black and white, square, and asymmetrical. These are colourful, hexagonal, and symmetrical. By that token, a 16th century tile also “looks kinda like a QR Code”.
I very much doubt you could show one of these to someone, ask them what they are, and that they would answer “QR Code”. They don’t look alike at all.
“Whoa! Some article said this mail app is an ‘Outlook’ for TempleOS! Better call the Microsoft lawyers.”
No, you’re allowed to compare products and ideas and mention their trademarked names without fear of legal issues.
Did the researchers name these “QR codes?”