RE: Surprising (for me) benchmark results...
by Daniel Berlin other posts by this author
May 3 2001 8:42AM messages near this date
RE: Surprising (for me) benchmark results...
|
RE: Surprising (for me) benchmark results...
On Thu, 3 May 2001, John J. Lee wrote:
>
> [I wrote]
> > There are O(N) sorting algorithms?? I thought that was restricted to
> > quantum computation.
> [...]
>
> Actually, there is no quantum algorithm that works better than O(N ln N)
> either. There is a *search* that is better than the classical limit.
Not yet, anyway.It's provable that you can't do comparison based sorting
in less time than O(N ln N), unless you can make N log N comparisons take less than N
Log N time (IE less than O(1) per comparison).
You might actually be able to pull off the < O(1) per comparison on a
quantum computer by finding some way to evaluate more than one comparison at a time, and hav
e it take
the same time as just one (You can already do this type of thing if you
have multiple CPU's.)
--Dan
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Thread:
John J. Lee
Daniel Berln
John J. Lee
Brian Quinlan
John J. Lee
Daniel Berlin
John J. Lee
|