-notation For a given function , denoted by the set of functions. = { : there exist positive constants and such that for all }. -notation For a given function , denoted by the set of functions. = { : there exist positive constants and such that for all }. -notation For a given function , denoted by the set of functions. = { : there exist positive constants , , and such that for all }. -notation For a given function, , we denote by the set of functions. { : for any positive constant , there exists a constant such that for all }. The implication of this, is that becomes insignificant relative to as approaches infinity:
-notation For a given function, , we denote by the set of functions. { : for any positive constant , there exists a constant such that for all }. The implication of this is that becomes insignificant relative to as approaches infinity:
The difference between and is that represents an upper bound of the solution for a problem, which may also be the tight bound of solving that problem, while clearly indicates that it is an upper bound but definitely not the tight bound. For example, but . For the Omegas... For example but .
First, work out that the following is actually a constant...
Note that "Log star of n" is iterated logarithm.
(5) (4) (6) (8) (2) (1) (7) (3)
The four techniques for bounding summations are as follows.
- Mathematical induction What is mathematical induction? For example, binding the series:
If is true, is true?
Therefore . Now, show our base case. is true because . And since is true, must be true, so is true, and so on...- Splitting summations For example, finding the lower bound. We can change to and find the upper bound:
To find the lower bound we split the summation:
- Approximation by integrals For example, if we have , then the sum really is the area under the curve for . We can use integration to find the area under a curve. Thus the summation is approximately equal to .
- Bounding terms We now apply the bounding terms to show the upper bound of
Let Then...
This is maximum when , so...
Given that the first term , can be bounded by the sum to infinity of the geometric series.
Using the iterative method...
Let constant
If you want to find k...
Using the substitution method, first...
Since when , will dominate when . So we simplify the recurrence into:
GUESS 1: Now we guess that the solution is:
Assuming that this holds for :
Substitute this into our original :
This doesn't agree with our guess. GUESS 2: Revise our guess to Assume Substitute:
Still doesn't agree with our guess. GUESS 3: Revise our guess to Assume Substitute:
Since this is the same form as our guess, we solve for and .
Thus, the inequality holds when and . For all , let the be bounded by a constant . Solve for when :
Thus, when for all
Using the iterative method...
An alternative method is to use "changing variables" together with the iterative method. Let . Substituting this into the recurrence, we get:
Rename :
This is possible because now we have changed the "problem size" variable to . Note that work done at each level of the recursion is still . So using the iterative method to solve ...
Find :
Since the biggest element in the summation is when , we can bind the summation by replacing with .