User:IssaRice/Little o notation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Can we write just <math>f \in o(g)</math> or <math>f = o(g)</math> or <math>f(x) \in o(g(x))</math> or <math>f(x) = o(g(x))</math>? | Can we write just <math>f \in o(g)</math> or <math>f = o(g)</math> or <math>f(x) \in o(g(x))</math> or <math>f(x) = o(g(x))</math>? | ||
{{Collapsiblesolution|In general we can't because for this notation to make sense, we also need to know where the argument <math>x</math> is going. In algorithms, we have <math>x \to \infty</math>, but in analysis (e.g. in some definitions of differentiability) we have <math>x \to 0</math>.}} | |||
Revision as of 02:43, 27 November 2018
Definition
Definition (little o near a point). Let and be two functions, and let . We say that is little o of near iff for every there exists such that implies .
Definition (little o at infinity). Let and be two functions. We say that is little o of at infinity iff for every there exists such that for all , implies .
Can we write just or or or ?
Expand to see solution:
In general we can't because for this notation to make sense, we also need to know where the argument is going. In algorithms, we have , but in analysis (e.g. in some definitions of differentiability) we have .