3 ms·
> No, we know the exponent is at least 2, not that it is 2. From the article: "bringing it closer to the ideal value of 2, which represents the theoretical min
by SeanAnderson 3y ago
> No, we know the exponent is at least 2, not that it is 2.
From the article: "bringing it closer to the ideal value of 2, which represents the theoretical minimum number of operations needed."
It's fine if the article is wrong. You sound informed. Just wanted to highlight the difference.
- kadoban 3y agoThe nuance here is that the best _proven_ lower bound is n^2. ~Everybody suspects that the real lower bound is higher, but nobody seems to know how to prove it.