I'm following along much better now with printed slide.
This week we are continuing with big-O and big-Omega. Yesterday, instead of proving whether function f is in big-O of function g, we worked from the assumption that it is and proved other claims. For example, the claim f is in O(g) and g is in O(h) implies f is in O(h). The values for c and B for the consequent are generally dependent on the c and B values from the antecedent rather than being precise numbers. After all, we assume that a positive real number c and a natural number B exist which fulfill f in O(g) without needing to specify what those numbers are.
No comments:
Post a Comment