3 ms·
It's easy to say "1000x" when they don't mention the reference :) Actually even reading the article I'm not completely certain where that 1000x comes from, I s
by simias 12y ago
It's easy to say "1000x" when they don't mention the reference :)
Actually even reading the article I'm not completely certain where that 1000x comes from, I suppose it's when compared to the naive approach.
- gorhill 12y agoI think it's compared to Peter Norvig's approach: > This is three orders of magnitude less expensive (36 terms for n=9 and d=2) Three orders of magnitude is 1000. Peter Norvig's approach was described above with: > still expensive at search time (114,324 terms for n=9, a=36, d=2) So 114,324 / 36 = 3,175, so "three orders of magnitude", and I suppose he went conservative by saying "1000x" rather than "3000x".