Lower semicomputable function: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
The definition says nothing about the rate of convergence, so for instance if we want <math>g(x,n)</math> to be within <math>1/1000</math> of the value of <math>f(x)</math>, there is not in general some way to find a large enough <math>n</math>. | The definition says nothing about the rate of convergence, so for instance if we want <math>g(x,n)</math> to be within <math>1/1000</math> of the value of <math>f(x)</math>, there is not in general some way to find a large enough <math>n</math>. | ||
If we do not know the value of <math>f(x)</math> in advance, it is not possible to tell in general how far away <math>g(x,n)</math> is from <math>f(x)</math>. We would know that <math>g(x,1000)</math> is at least as close to <math>f(x)</math> as <math>g(x,100)</math>, but it's not clear how much closer. | |||
Revision as of 05:53, 25 July 2019
A function is lower semicomputable iff there exists a computable function such that:
- for all and all natural numbers , we have
- for all we have
The way to think of this is that given some fixed , the values are successive approximations of the value , and we have .
The definition says nothing about the rate of convergence, so for instance if we want to be within of the value of , there is not in general some way to find a large enough .
If we do not know the value of in advance, it is not possible to tell in general how far away is from . We would know that is at least as close to as , but it's not clear how much closer.