I am doing an introductory course on algorithms. I've come across this problem which I'm unsure about.
I would like to know which of the 2 are dominant
f(n): 100n + log n or g(n): n + (log n)^2
Given the definitions of each of:
Ω, Θ, O
I assumed f(n), so fn = Ω(g(n))
Reason being that n dominates (log n)^2, is that true?
In this case,
limn → ∞[f(n) / g(n)] = 100.
If you go over calculus definitions, this means that, for any ε > 0, there exists some m for which
100 (1 - ε) g(n) ≤ f(n) ≤ 100 (1 + ε) g(n)
for any n > m.
From the definition of Θ, you can infer that these two functions are Θ of each other.
In general, if
limn → ∞[f(n) / g(n)] = c exists, and
0 < c < ∞,
then the two functions have the same order of growth (they are Θ of each other).
n dominates both log(n) and (log n)^2
A little explanation
f(n) = 100n + log n
Here n dominates log n for large values of n.
So f(n) = O(n) .......... [1]
g(n) = n + (log n)^2
Now, (log n)^2 dominates log n.
But n still dominates (log n)^2.
So g(n) = O(n) .......... [2]
Now, taking results [1] and [2] into consideration.
f(n) = Θ(g(n)) and g(n) = Θ(f(n))
since they will grow at the same rate for large values of n.
We can say that f(n) = O(g(n) if there are constants c > 0 and n0 > 0 such that
f(n) <= c*g(n), n > n0
This is the case for both directions:
# c == 100
100n + log n <= 100(n + (log n)^2)
= 100n + 100(log(n)^2) (n > 1)
and
# c == 1
n + (log n)^2 <= 100n + log n (n > 1)
Taken together, we've proved that n + (log n)^2 <= 100n + log n <= 100(n + (log n)^2), which proves that f(n) = Θ(g(n)), which is to say that neither dominates the other. Both functions are Θ(n).
g(n) dominates f(n), or equivalently, g(n) is Ω(f(n)) and the same hold vice versa.
Considering the definition, you see that you can drop the factor 100 in the definition of f(n) (since you can multiply it by any fixed number) and you can drop both addends since they are dominated by the linear n.
The above follows from n is Ω(n + logn) and n is Ω(n + log^2n.
hope that helps,
fricke
Related
I've tried calculating this function and I am a bit unsure of my result. I set it to True. Can anyone explain if my answer is correct and why?
(3 log 2 n + 55 log(n 10 ) + 8 log n) · log n = Ω(log 10 n)
I set it to True
Your result is correct, but can be further simplified to Ω(log(n)) as log(10n) + log(10) + log(n) and log(10) is a constant.
To prove that f(n) = Ω(g(n)) you need to show that g(n) is a "lower bound" asymptotically of f(n).
The formal definition is that f(n) = Ω(g(n)) is there exists some c, n0 > 0 s.t. for all n > n0 it holds that f(n) >= g(n).
Recall that for every natural integer bigger than 2 it holds that log(n) > 1 so
(3log(2n) + 55log(10n) + 8log n) · log n > 3log(2n) + 55log(10n) + 8log(n) > 8log(n) > log(n).
Choose c = 1, n0 = 2 and we got that for all n > n0: (3log(2n) + 55log(10n) + 8log n) · log n > log(n), thus (3log(2n) + 55log(10n) + 8log n) · log n = Ω(log(n).
log n^2 is equivalent to 2logn which grows at the same rate as logn, as I disregard the factors and constants. but if I was to square the whole term so that I end up with (logn)^2 is it also big theta of logn?
No. If f is any unbounded function then f(n)^2 is not O(f).
Because f(n)^2 = O(f) means there's a c and N such that n > N implies f(n)^2 <= cf(n). Which implies f(n) <= c, and so f is bounded.
log(n) is unbounded, so log(n)^2 is not O(log(n)).
log (n^2) = 2 log(n)
and as you know x^2 is not in thetha(x).
Think this way: let N=log(n). Then f1(N)=N^2 where f2(N)=N, obviously,
N=o(N^2)!=theta(N^2), i.e., log(n)=o((log(n))^2)!=theta((log(n))^2).
Also, lim {n->inf} f2(n) / f1(n) = lim {n->inf} 1 / log(n) = 0, by definition of small o (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation) it implies f2(n)=o(f1(n)).
So I'm struggling with proving (or disproving) the above question. I feel like it is true, but I'm not sure how to show it.
Again, the question is if g(n) is o(f(n)), then f(n) + g(n) is Theta(f(n))
Note, that is a little-o, not a big-o!!!
So far, I've managed to (easily) show that:
g(n) = o(f(n)) -> g(n) < c*f(n)
Then g(n) + f(n) < (c+1)*f(n) -> (g(n) + f(n)) = O(f(n))
However, for showing Big Omega, I'm not sure what to do there.
Am I going about this right?
EDIT: Everyone provided great help, but I could only mark one. THANK YOU.
One option would be to take the limit of (f(n) + g(n)) / f(n) as n tends toward infinity. If this converges to a finite, nonzero value, then f(n) + g(n) = Θ(f(n)).
Assuming that f(n) is nonzero for sufficiently large n, the above ratio, in the limit, is
(f(n) + g(n)) / f(n)
= f(n) / f(n) + g(n) / f(n)
= 1 + g(n) / f(n).
Therefore, taking the limit as n goes to infinity, the above expression converges to 1 because the ratio goes to zero (this is what it means for g(n) to be o(f(n)).
So far so good.
For the next step, recall that in the best case, 0 <= g(n); this should get you a lower bound on g(n) + f(n).
Before we begin, lets first state what little-o and Big-Theta notations means:
Little-o notation
Formally, that g(n) = o(f(n)) (or g(n) ∈ o(f(n))) holds for
sufficiently large n means that for every positive constant ε
there exists a constant N such that
|g(n)| ≤ ε*|f(n)|, for all n > N (+)
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_O_notation#Little-o_notation.
Big-Θ notation
h(n) = Θ(f(n)) means there exists positive constants k_1, k_2
and N, such that k_1 · |f(n)| and k_2 · |f(n)| is an upper bound
and lower bound on on |h(n)|, respectively, for n > N, i.e.
k_1 · |f(n)| ≤ |h(n)| ≤ k_2 · |f(n)|, for all n > N (++)
From https://www.khanacademy.org/computing/computer-science/algorithms/asymptotic-notation/a/big-big-theta-notation.
Given: g(n) ∈ o(f(n))
Hence, in our case, for every ε>0 we can find some constant N such that (+), for our functions g(n) and f(n). Hence, for n>N, we have
|g(n)| ≤ ε*|f(n)|, for some ε>0, for all n>N
Choose a constant ε < 1 (recall, the above holds for all ε > 0),
with accompanied constant N.
Then the following holds for all n>N
ε(|g(n)| + |f(n)|) ≤ 2|f(n)| ≤ 2(|g(n)| + |f(n)|) ≤ 4*|f(n)| (*)
Stripping away the left-most inequality in (*) and dividing by 2, we have:
|f(n)| ≤ |g(n)| + |f(n)| ≤ 2*|f(n)|, n>N (**)
We see that this is the very definition Big-Θ notation, as presented in (++), with constants k_1 = 1, k_2 = 2 and h(n) = g(n)+f(n). Hence
(**) => g(n) + f(n) is in Θ(f(n))
Ans we have shown that g(n) ∈ o(f(n)) implies (g(n) + f(n)) ∈ Θ(f(n)).
Consider I get f(n)=log(n*log n). Should I say that its O(log(n*log n)?
Or should I do log(n*log n)=log n + log(log n) and then say that the function f(n) is O(log n)?
First of all, as you have observed:
log(n*log n) = log(n) + log(log(n))
but think about log(log N) as N->large (as Floris suggests).
For example, let N = 1000, then log N = 3 (i.e. a small number) and log(3) is even smaller,
this holds as N gets huge, i.e. way more than the number of instructions your code could ever generate.
Thus, O(log(n * log n)) = O(log n + k) = O(log(n)) + k = O(log n)
Another way to look at this is that: n * log n << n^2, so in the worse case:
O(log(n^2)) > O(log(n * log n))
So, 2*O(log(n)) is an upper bound, and O(log(n * log n)) = O(log n)
Use the definition. If f(n) = O(log(n*log(n))), then there must exist a positive constant M and real n0 such that:
|f(n)| ≤ M |log(n*log(n))|
for all n > n0.
Now let's assume (without loss of generality) that n0 > 0. Then
log(n) ≥ log(log(n))
for all n > n0.
From this, we have:
log(n(log(n)) = log(n) + log(log(n)) ≤ 2 * log(n)
Substituting, we find that
|f(n)| ≤ 2*M|log(n))| for all n > n0
Since 2*M is also a positive constant, it immediately follows that f(n) = O(log(n)).
Of course in this case simple transformations show both functions differ by a constant factor asymptotically, as shown.
However, I feel like it is worthwhile remind a classic test for analyzing how two functions relate to each other asymptotically. So here's a little more formal proof.
You can check how does f(x) relates to g(x) by analyzing lim f(x)/g(x) when x->infinity.
There are 3 cases:
lim = infinty <=> O(f(x)) > O(g(x))
inf > lim > 0 <=> O(f(x)) = O(g(x))
lim = 0 <=> O(f(x)) < O(g(x))
So
lim ( log( n * log(n) ) / log n ) =
lim ( log n + log log (n) ) / log n =
lim 1 + log log (n) / log n =
1 + 0 = 1
Note: I assumed log log n / log n to be trivial but you can do it by de l'Hospital Rule.
I want to prove the following statement
2^(⌊lg n⌋+⌈lg n⌉)∕n ∈ Θ(n)
I know that to prove it, we have to find the constants c1>0, c2>0, and n0>0 such that
c1.g(n) <= f(n) <= c2.g(n) for all n >= n0
In other words, we have to prove f(n) <= c.g(n) and f(n) >= c.g(n).
The problem is how to prove the left hand side (2^(⌊lg n⌋+⌈lg n⌉)∕n)
Thank you
You can start by expanding the exponential. It is equal to n1*n2/n, where n1<=n<=n2, 2*n1>n and n*2>n2. The rest should be easy.
Here's a derivation for the upper bound:
2^(⌊lg n⌋+⌈lg n⌉)/n
= 2^(2⌊lg n⌋+1)/n
<= 2^(2 lg n + 1)/n
= 2^(2 lg n) 2^(1) / n
= 2 n^2 / n
= 2 n
= O(n)
So we know your function can be bounded above by 2*n. Now we do the lower bound:
2^(⌊lg n⌋+⌈lg n⌉)/n
= 2^(2⌈lg n⌉ - 1) / n
>= 2^(2 lg n - 1)/n
= 2^(2 lg n) 2^(-1) / n
= 1/2 n^2 / n
= 1/2 n
= O(n)
We now know that your function can be bounded below by n/2.
Checked on gnuplot; these answers look good and tight. This is a purely algebraic solution using the definition if floor() and ceiling() functions.