User:IssaRice/Little o notation: Difference between revisions

From Machinelearning
No edit summary
Line 39: Line 39:


'''Proposition'''. we can replace the <math><</math> in the definition with <math>\leq</math>, right?
'''Proposition'''. we can replace the <math><</math> in the definition with <math>\leq</math>, right?
'''Exercise'''. Let <math>c, x_0 \in \mathbf R</math> be constants. Interpret the statement "<math>o(c(x-x_0) + o(x-x_0)) \in o(x-x_0)</math> as <math>x \to x_0</math>".


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 16:24, 29 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 . Some equivalent ways to say the same thing are:

Notation Comments
is little o of near
as In this notation, we think of as a set.
as
near
near

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 .

Exercise. 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 .

Exercise. If we are being a little pedantic, what is wrong with saying " as "?

Expand to see solution:

We are saying , but we haven't clarified what is. Instead, we are relying on the reader to assume that is an argument to and .

Exercise. Interpret the meaning of .

Expand to see solution:

It depends on where is going. We want whenever , so this is only true when .

Properties

Proposition. Let and be two functions, and suppose for all . Then f is little o of g near a if and only if .

Proposition. transitivity

Proposition. we can replace the in the definition with , right?

Exercise. Let be constants. Interpret the statement " as ".

References

[1]

[2]