Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #7670
| From | Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming |
| Subject | Re: on 2^O(lg n) being a polynomial |
| Date | 2017-03-28 20:28 -0300 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <86vaqtasm5.fsf@toledo.com> (permalink) |
| References | <86lgrudu6c.fsf@toledo.com> <87vaqtwn2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes: > Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> writes: > >> Here's an argument to prove that 2^O(lg n) is a polynomial. > > You are tripping up over your terminology. 2^O(lg n) is a set of > functions ans do can't be polynomial. You can't even say that the What was supposed to be written here? ``ans do''? If this is latin, I need help. I assumed it was a typo, but can't fix it myself. > member function are polynomials. What you can say (if it's true) is > that the functions in it are asymptotically bounded above by a > polynomial. In other words, you are trying to prove that > > if f(n) in 2^O(lg n) the there exists k such that f(n) in O(n^k). That makes a lot of sense now. I understand the point of the statement now. They didn't mean it'd be a polynomial, but that it would essentially be like one for the context where such topic arises --- complexity theory. If f(n) is bounded above by a polynomial, then we can consider the algorithm being of the order of polynomial time. I see. That clarifies everything. Thanks for your lecture! >> Fact. f(n) in 2^O(lg n) is a polynomial. > > This is not going to be a theorem! f(n) might be bounded above by some > polynomial (for sufficiently large n) but it is not guaranteed to be one > itself. Agreed.
Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
on 2^O(lg n) being a polynomial Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-03-24 22:25 -0300
Re: on 2^O(lg n) being a polynomial Kaz Kylheku <336-986-7787@kylheku.com> - 2017-03-25 02:39 +0000
Re: on 2^O(lg n) being a polynomial Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-03-28 14:25 +0100
Re: on 2^O(lg n) being a polynomial Kaz Kylheku <336-986-7787@kylheku.com> - 2017-03-28 17:45 +0000
Re: on 2^O(lg n) being a polynomial Daniel Bastos <dbastos@toledo.com> - 2017-03-28 20:28 -0300
Re: on 2^O(lg n) being a polynomial Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-03-29 14:12 +0100
csiph-web