153 reputation
7
bio website
location
age
visits member for 2 years, 8 months
seen Jun 24 at 17:41

Jul
2
awarded  Curious
Jun
15
comment Refresh summation formulas
@xuwicha:You are right.I did not put an index k in my OP
Jun
14
awarded  Editor
Jun
14
revised Refresh summation formulas
added 419 characters in body
Jun
14
comment Refresh summation formulas
The result of your answer is O(N^4) while three nested loops are always O(N^3). Something is wrong here. Am I messing up something in my OP?
Jun
14
comment Refresh summation formulas
The result of your answer is O(N^4) while three nested loops are always O(N^3). Something is wrong here. Am I messing up something in my OP?
Jun
14
comment Fundamental confusion on set theory and permutations
@user18921: So bijection creates an ordering?So a bijection is a "random" ordering of a set?
Jun
14
comment Fundamental confusion on set theory and permutations
@user18921: What does the arrow represent if not the order?
Jun
14
comment Fundamental confusion on set theory and permutations
I am sorry for the question but I am not sure what you mean by a set having a particular structure.I am thinking of a set in the terms of just being a container where an element either is or is not part of the set and order is irrelevant.Can you please explain this one?
Jun
14
asked Fundamental confusion on set theory and permutations
Jun
14
comment Refresh summation formulas
I am confused now. I always knew that 3 nested for loops is O(N^3). The outer loop is executed N-1 times and the inner loop is executed N(N-1)/2 times because I verified plugin in small numbers and N(N-1)/2 gives the correct result. I could not derive the inner-inner most loop. So now I am lost with the N^4 answer
Jun
14
comment Refresh summation formulas
But the outer loop is executed N times. According to your answer the outer loop is executed N^3 times.
Jun
14
comment Refresh summation formulas
What about the particular example I am stuck on?
Jun
14
asked Refresh summation formulas
Dec
27
comment Can we express “exactly X” with set theory?
I am not trying to make a point.Just to clear my confusion.You note that we "define more and more terms and abbreviate..." so I understand by this that the term "exactly" is an abbreviation of a more general (accurate?) definition. So we turn to the expanded definition to express the "exactly" in set theory?
Dec
27
comment Can we express “exactly X” with set theory?
But you also explain the term exactly in your answer by rephrasing.
Dec
26
comment Can we express “exactly X” with set theory?
I guess that adding some suitableHAVING clause should work in SQL My question is not about how to form the SQL query.My confusion is mainly about the need to rephrase the term "exactly" to the equivalent "no more and no less than".
Dec
26
comment Can we express “exactly X” with set theory?
@marcvanleeuwen:It is not that I dislike something.I am trying to understand why the "exactly" needs to be rephrased to be "captured"
Dec
26
comment Can we express “exactly X” with set theory?
Yes, I understand that The word "exactly" means "no more and no less" but my question is why do we need to rephrase it in order to manipulate data sets
Dec
26
asked Can we express “exactly X” with set theory?