Re: Proof factoring solution is closed form
From: Timothy Little (tim-via-n.i.net_at_little-possums.net)
Date: 02/09/05
- Next message: Rory Parle: "Re: juggling's combinatorics problem with siteswap"
- Previous message: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Mark Nudelman: "Re: Proof factoring solution is closed form"
- Next in thread: Rick Decker: "Re: Proof factoring solution is closed form"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 9 Feb 2005 22:23:48 GMT
Mark Nudelman wrote:
> This is not just an arbitrary definition -- a poly-time algorithm
> MIGHT be able to factor a large integer in a reasonable amount of
> time (depending on the degree of the polynomial), but an
> non-poly-time algorithm (e.g. exponential time) simply will not.
In theory, for large enough N, sure. In practice, I'd much rather
have a 1.001^N exponential factoring algorithm than N^5 polynomial.
There's also the question of the domain over which the
characterization is defined. Worst-case? Average-case? Only numbers
with just two prime factors?
- Tim
- Next message: Rory Parle: "Re: juggling's combinatorics problem with siteswap"
- Previous message: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Mark Nudelman: "Re: Proof factoring solution is closed form"
- Next in thread: Rick Decker: "Re: Proof factoring solution is closed form"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]