Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #3739
| From | blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming |
| Subject | Re: algorithm analysis Big-O |
| Date | 2013-09-15 18:09 +0000 |
| Organization | None |
| Message-ID | <b9mbemFdvqaU2@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <25bf7834-1bb1-4702-9e18-0bd691958ec8@googlegroups.com> <O90Zt.29906$sr1.508@en-nntp-04.dc1.easynews.com> |
In article <O90Zt.29906$sr1.508@en-nntp-04.dc1.easynews.com>, Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> wrote: > On 9/14/13 9:32 AM, gdotone@gmail.com wrote: > > O(log n) < O(n) < O(nLog n) < O(n^2) < O(n^3) < O(2^n) in running time. > > > > Only for n large. Isn't that part of the def .... Oh. Well, maybe not exactly: The formal definition of what it means for a function to be O(f(n)) does include a notion of "for sufficiently large n", but I'm not finding, in a quick Web search, a formal definition of what "O(f(n)) < O(g(n))" means. But I'm inclined to think that it's something along the lines of "if function f1(n) is O(f(n)), and function g1(n) is O(g(n)), then for sufficiently large n, f1(n) < g1(n)". Maybe someone who knows this off the top of his/her head, or has the right books nearby, can fill in the details. > It is quite possible for a O(2^n) algorithm to be much faster than a > O(log n) algorithm for small n, primarily because the purpose of the O() > notation is to look at scaling at large values of n. But this part I agree with! > When determining the O() value for an algorithm, you look at how much of > something (time, memory, or what ever) the algorithm uses as n > increases. At some point, the amount of that stuff that an O(x(n)) > algorithm uses will be approximately k*x(n) for all n sufficiently > large. We ignore the k factor, as that becomes a function of the units > we are using, and as long as k is "reasonable" it doesn't normally > affect our decisions as to which algorithm to use. There can be cases > though, where n doesn't really get extremely large, where the the scale > factor may make a "larger" O() be better than the lower O(), or you need > to look at "smaller" growth terms as they have a significant scale > factor and there contribution isn't negligible. To the OP: I don't have a specific book or other resource to recommend, but a search term that may be useful is "analysis of algorithms". -- B. L. Massingill ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
algorithm analysis Big-O gdotone@gmail.com - 2013-09-14 06:32 -0700
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Johann Klammer <klammerj@NOSPAM.a1.net> - 2013-09-14 16:50 +0200
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com - 2013-09-14 08:45 -0700
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-09-14 12:29 -0400
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com - 2013-09-14 11:12 -0700
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Willem <willem@turtle.stack.nl> - 2013-09-14 19:21 +0000
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-09-14 23:12 -0400
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Willem <willem@turtle.stack.nl> - 2013-09-15 08:16 +0000
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-09-22 19:04 -0400
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-09-23 02:32 +0100
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com - 2013-09-17 15:07 -0700
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-09-14 20:27 +0100
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 18:09 +0000
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-09-15 20:47 +0100
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 20:42 +0000
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-09-16 00:56 +0100
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 20:26 +0000
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2013-09-14 11:08 -0700
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-09-14 13:43 -0500
Re: algorithm analysis Big-O Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-09-14 21:01 +0100
csiph-web