4 ms·
"This illustrates a difficulty naive backwards-error analysis" It's not naive. It's conservative, the exact opposite.
by ambrop7 13y ago
"This illustrates a difficulty naive backwards-error analysis"
It's not naive. It's conservative, the exact opposite.
- stephencanon 13y agoI pointed part of this out: > it provides reasonable conservative bounds It is the technique of backwards-error analysis that is naive, not the resulting bound. A “naive” method is not “simple” or “dumb” (or “aggressive” or whatever you think the opposite of “conservative” might be). It is simply a method that doesn’t use some a priori knowledge that’s available for the specific problem at hand. Backwards-error analysis is a naive technique in that it doesn’t benefit from specialized theorems of floating-point that allow one to establish tighter bounds, like the one I proved.