2/23 In the CLR book, chap 4.1-4.3, there are 3 basic ways of solving
recurrence. The first way, 4.1, is the substitution method, which
I think is straightforward and simple (albeit sometimes time
consuming). The second way, 4.2, is the tree method, which I
think is great, but a bit too informal as a proof. The last
one, 4.3, master's theorem, is GREAT. Now suppose you're taking
a test and forgot your master's theorem, can you actually get
prove everything using 4.1? In another word, are there recurrences
that can't be derived using 4.1, but can using 4.2 or 4.3? ok thx
\_ Hey are you the 'contiguous sequence sum' guy? Why do you feel
the need to get the motd to solve your 170 for you?
\_ this is kind of embarrassing but it's for the quals and since
I haven't done this in ages (several years) I've pretty much
forgotten everything.
\_ Isn't this the case with math in general? I am having
a hard time remembering some things if I haven't used them
for about year, although the knowledge seems to come
back quicker than when learning things for the first time.
\_ Just curious, which class is this for? |
http://csua.com/feed/