9 ms·
Okay, I had the problem going the other way. I assumed the n was a symbol on the previous number, like an f suffix in C. But even still, 2^(0.6039n) could have
by hyperhello 1mo ago
Okay, I had the problem going the other way. I assumed the n was a symbol on the previous number, like an f suffix in C. But even still, 2^(0.6039n) could have been rendered in a nice way stripping out the parenthesis, leaving the core text mathematically correct.
- altairprime 1mo agoEmail the mods to have the title edited, hn@ycombinator.com; it’s a worthwhile change here. “in 2^[0.6039n+o(n)] time” could be a better edit than the paper’s provided title, though I selected [] rather than {} for human use. I defer to experts in the field on whether it matters to declare O(n) or not.
- shiandow 1mo agoYou'll want small o, not big O. Otherwise there's no point in mentioning the constant factor 0.6039. And yes the o(n) is relevant. Though I guess implied to some extent.
- altairprime 1mo agoOops, fixed!
- traes 1mo agoChanging {} to [] seems like a very strange suggestion to me. {} is used here because it's the way you group things in LaTeX. If you were going to change it for human use, why not just use parenthesis? What's wrong with {} in the first place?
- altairprime 1mo agoSure, that’s fine too. Whatever makes more sense than the current title is an improvement, and I can’t judge what’s best for this audience.