A METHOD TO COMPARE TWO COMPLEXITY FUNCTIONS USING COMPLEXITY CLASSES

Similar documents
Recursive Algorithm for Generating Partitions of an Integer. 1 Preliminary

CS537. Numerical Analysis and Computing

Polynomial Generalizations and Combinatorial Interpretations for Sequences Including the Fibonacci and Pell Numbers

CS321. Numerical Analysis and Computing

Some Variants of Newton's Method with Fifth-Order and Fourth-Order Convergence for Solving Nonlinear Equations

The Discrete-Time Fourier Transform (DTFT)

On maximally nonlinear and extremal balanced Boolean functions

NEW FAST CONVERGENT SEQUENCES OF EULER-MASCHERONI TYPE

Lecture 2 Clustering Part II

A New Method to Order Functions by Asymptotic Growth Rates Charlie Obimbo Dept. of Computing and Information Science University of Guelph

New Characterization of Topological Transitivity

Sequences of Definite Integrals, Factorials and Double Factorials

PRELIMINARY MATHEMATICS LECTURE 5

On a class of convergent sequences defined by integrals 1

Generalized H-codes and type II codes over GF(4)

Langford s Problem. Moti Ben-Ari. Department of Science Teaching. Weizmann Institute of Science.

Topic 9 - Taylor and MacLaurin Series

TIME-PERIODIC SOLUTIONS OF A PROBLEM OF PHASE TRANSITIONS

Pairs of disjoint q-element subsets far from each other

CSE 1400 Applied Discrete Mathematics Number Theory and Proofs

CLOSED FORM FORMULA FOR THE NUMBER OF RESTRICTED COMPOSITIONS

05/11/2016. MATH 154 : Lecture 20

Commutativity in Permutation Groups

ABOUT CHAOS AND SENSITIVITY IN TOPOLOGICAL DYNAMICS

Phys. 201 Mathematical Physics 1 Dr. Nidal M. Ershaidat Doc. 12

6.3 Testing Series With Positive Terms

Product measures, Tonelli s and Fubini s theorems For use in MAT3400/4400, autumn 2014 Nadia S. Larsen. Version of 13 October 2014.

Mixing, Weakly Mixing and Transitive Sets

g () n = g () n () f, f n = f () n () x ( n =1,2,3, ) j 1 + j 2 + +nj n = n +2j j n = r & j 1 j 1, j 2, j 3, j 4 = ( 4, 0, 0, 0) f 4 f 3 3!

Modification of Weerakoon-Fernando s Method with Fourth-Order of Convergence for Solving Nonlinear Equation

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 6.265/15.070J Fall 2013 Lecture 3 9/11/2013. Large deviations Theory. Cramér s Theorem

PAijpam.eu ON TENSOR PRODUCT DECOMPOSITION

Euler-MacLaurin using the ZETA-matrix

A NUMERICAL METHOD OF SOLVING CAUCHY PROBLEM FOR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS BASED ON A LINEAR APPROXIMATION

The minimum value and the L 1 norm of the Dirichlet kernel

A GENERALIZATION OF THE SYMMETRY BETWEEN COMPLETE AND ELEMENTARY SYMMETRIC FUNCTIONS. Mircea Merca

Weakly Connected Closed Geodetic Numbers of Graphs

Information-based Feature Selection

Comparison Study of Series Approximation. and Convergence between Chebyshev. and Legendre Series

Ramanujan s Famous Partition Congruences

On the Inverse of a Certain Matrix Involving Binomial Coefficients

( ) (( ) ) ANSWERS TO EXERCISES IN APPENDIX B. Section B.1 VECTORS AND SETS. Exercise B.1-1: Convex sets. are convex, , hence. and. (a) Let.

7 Sequences of real numbers

Different kinds of Mathematical Induction

Boundaries and the James theorem

AN EXTENSION OF A RESULT ABOUT THE ORDER OF CONVERGENCE

AMS Mathematics Subject Classification : 40A05, 40A99, 42A10. Key words and phrases : Harmonic series, Fourier series. 1.

The random version of Dvoretzky s theorem in l n

The picture in figure 1.1 helps us to see that the area represents the distance traveled. Figure 1: Area represents distance travelled

Bounds on double Roman domination number of graphs a

MP and MT-implications on a finite scale

THE ASYMPTOTIC COMPLEXITY OF MATRIX REDUCTION OVER FINITE FIELDS

Solution. 1 Solutions of Homework 1. Sangchul Lee. October 27, Problem 1.1

MAT1026 Calculus II Basic Convergence Tests for Series

arxiv: v1 [math.co] 23 Mar 2016

On Some Properties of Digital Roots

JENSEN S INEQUALITY FOR QUASICONVEX FUNCTIONS S. S. DRAGOMIR 1 and C. E. M. PEARCE 2. Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia

SOME TRIBONACCI IDENTITIES

An Extension of the Szász-Mirakjan Operators

Constructions of Uniformly Convex Functions

Math F215: Induction April 7, 2013

DANIELL AND RIEMANN INTEGRABILITY

ON SOME DIOPHANTINE EQUATIONS RELATED TO SQUARE TRIANGULAR AND BALANCING NUMBERS

REPRESENTING MARKOV CHAINS WITH TRANSITION DIAGRAMS

arxiv: v1 [math.co] 3 Feb 2013

Infinite Sequences and Series

Amortized Analysis - Part 2 - Dynamic Tables. Objective: In this lecture, we shall explore Dynamic tables and its amortized analysis in detail.

About Surányi s Inequality

Fuzzy Shortest Path with α- Cuts

The standard deviation of the mean

4 The Sperner property.

The Local Harmonious Chromatic Problem

Relations between the continuous and the discrete Lotka power function

McGill University Math 354: Honors Analysis 3 Fall 2012 Solutions to selected problems. x y

MATH 324 Summer 2006 Elementary Number Theory Solutions to Assignment 2 Due: Thursday July 27, 2006

A Hadamard-type lower bound for symmetric diagonally dominant positive matrices

A Block Cipher Using Linear Congruences

A Note on the Kolmogorov-Feller Weak Law of Large Numbers

FIR Filter Design: Part I

Disjoint Systems. Abstract

LAZHAR S INEQUALITIES AND THE S-CONVEX PHENOMENON. I.M.R. Pinheiro

Seed and Sieve of Odd Composite Numbers with Applications in Factorization of Integers

Chapter 13, Part A Analysis of Variance and Experimental Design

SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF OLIVIER S THEOREM

Week 5-6: The Binomial Coefficients

A class of spectral bounds for Max k-cut

An Introduction to Randomized Algorithms

Numerical Conformal Mapping via a Fredholm Integral Equation using Fourier Method ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION

ON RUEHR S IDENTITIES

Precise Rates in Complete Moment Convergence for Negatively Associated Sequences

FLOOR AND ROOF FUNCTION ANALOGS OF THE BELL NUMBERS. H. W. Gould Department of Mathematics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA

1 Approximating Integrals using Taylor Polynomials

A RANK STATISTIC FOR NON-PARAMETRIC K-SAMPLE AND CHANGE POINT PROBLEMS

5. Fast NLMS-OCF Algorithm

De Bruijn Sequences for the Binary Strings with Maximum Specified Density

ON POINTWISE BINOMIAL APPROXIMATION

The Rand and block distances of pairs of set partitions

Convergence of random variables. (telegram style notes) P.J.C. Spreij

Enumerative & Asymptotic Combinatorics

Fermat s Little Theorem. mod 13 = 0, = }{{} mod 13 = 0. = a a a }{{} mod 13 = a 12 mod 13 = 1, mod 13 = a 13 mod 13 = a.

Transcription:

UPB Sci Bull, Series A, Vol 7, Iss, ISSN 3-77 A METHOD TO COMPARE TWO COMPLEXITY FUNCTIONS USING COMPLEXITY CLASSES Adrei-Horia MOGOS, Adia Magda FLOREA Complexitatea uui algoritm poate i exprimată ca o ucţie, umită ucţie de complexitate I acest articol studiem compararea a două ucţii de complexitate olosid clase de complexitate Dupa ce deiim multimea tuturor ucţiilor de complexitate comparabile cu o ucţie dată, prezetăm câteva proprietăţi ale acestei mulţimi Cele mai importate rezultate di articolul ostru sut cateva criterii suiciete petru ca două ucţii de complexitate să ie comparabile şi câteva criterii suiciete petru ca două ucţii de complexitate să ie icomparabile The complexity o a algorithm ca be expressed as a uctio, called complexity uctio I this paper we study the compariso o two complexity uctios usig complexity classes Ater deiig the set o all complexity uctios comparable with a give uctio, we give some properties o this set The most importat results o our paper are some suiciet criteria or two complexity uctios to be comparable ad some suiciet criteria or two complexity uctios to be icomparable Keywords: algorithm, complexity uctio, complexity class, complexity uctios compariso Itroductio Complexity uctios are used i various research ields For example, i [] complexity uctios describe some properties o the dyamic systems, ad i [] complexity uctios describe the complexity o the structure o models related to some techical systems I this paper, complexity uctios are used or measurig the complexity o algorithms The complexity o a algorithm ca be expressed usig a complexity uctio, ie, a positive real valued uctio deied o the set o positive itegers I may cases such uctios have complicated expressios ad usig these uctios is a diicult task For this reaso, computer scietists ote express the complexity o a algorithm usig complexity classes, a simpler way o expressig the complexity o a algorithm, but a less exact oe Some basic Assistat, Departmet o Computer Sciece, Uiversity POLITEHNICA o Bucharest, Romaia, e-mail: mogosadrei@yahoocom Proessor, Departmet o Computer Sciece, Uiversity POLITEHNICA o Bucharest, Romaia, e-mail: adiamagdalorea@yahoocom

7 Adrei-Horia Mogos, Adia Magda Florea properties o the complexity classes are preseted i almost ay paper or book that cotais some elemets o algorithms complexity theory See, or example [3], [4], [5] I this paper we study the complexity uctios usig the elemetary theory o uctios ad sets Other approaches use more advaced mathematical theories: or example, i [6], the authors use the osymmetric Hausdor distace or studyig the complexity uctios; i [7] the authors itroduce a ew quasi-metric o the dual p-complexity space or studyig the complexity distaces betwee algorithms Nevertheless, our approach is powerul eough to help us to obtai several iterestig results As oe ca observe, whe comparig algorithms, i act we compare complexity uctios, or at least complexity classes A possible use case o algorithms compariso is whe someoe wats to develop a very eiciet algorithm or solvig a give problem, see or example [8] Aother use case is whe someoe is iterested i complexity aalysis i heterogeeous systems, see or example [9] A iterestig idea is preseted i [4]: the authors oly draw a aalogy betwee the compariso o the complexity uctios usig complexity classes ad the compariso o real umbers Their immediate coclusio was that every two real umbers ca be compared, but ot every two complexity uctios ca be compared Startig rom the results preseted i [], [], this paper studies the compariso o two complexity uctios usig complexity classes Ater we deie the set o all complexity uctios comparable with a give uctio, we give some properties o this set We also preset some iterestig properties o the complexity classes The mai cotributios o this paper are some suiciet criteria or two complexity uctios to be comparable ad some suiciet criteria or two complexity uctios to be icomparable The paper is orgaized as ollows Sectio cotais the deiitios used or the rest o the paper Sectio 3 presets some properties o the complexity classes Sectio 4 cotais the mai results o our paper Fially, i Sectio 5, we preset the coclusios o the paper Deiitios We will deote by R the set o all positive real umbers ad by N the set o all positive itegers We will cosider the uctio g : N R to be a arbitrary ixed complexity uctio Cosider the ollowig complexity classes (see [4], [5]):

A method to compare two complexity uctios usig complexity classes 7 ( = { : N c, c Θ R, R, } N () O( = { : N R c R,, } Ω ( = { : N R c R,, } o( = { : N R c R, <, } ω( = { : N R c R, <, } () (3) (4) (5) Deiitio Let : N R be a complexity uctio The uctio ( is comparable with the uctio g ( i O( Ω( o( (6) We say that the uctio ( is icomparable with the uctio g ( i ( is ot comparable with g ( We deote by C ( the set o all the complexity uctios comparable with the uctio g ( Remark We have the ollowig idetity: C( = Θ( O( Ω( o( (7) Deiitio We deie the ollowig complexity classes: oθ ( = O( \ ( o( ) (8) Θ ω( = Ω( \ ( Θ( ) (9) 3 Some properties o the complexity classes This sectio shows some properties o the complexity classes deied i the previous sectio

7 Adrei-Horia Mogos, Adia Magda Florea Propositio We have the ollowig properties: a) Θ ( g ( Ø, O ( Ø, Ω ( g ( Ø b) o ( Ø, ω ( Ø c) o Θ ( Ø, Θ ω ( Ø Proo a) These results ollow rom the ollowig observatios:,, () b) It ca be proved, usig (4) ad (5), that / ad ω( c) Let us show that o Θ ( Ø Cosider two complexity uctios: ( ( We deie the ollowig complexity uctio: : N (, = k = (, = R, k () The uctio ( is deied by ( ) or odd umber, ad by ( ) or eve umber Next, we prove that We have to show that,, ad From )) we have: c, c R,, () From )) we have: c R, ( <, (3) From the deiitio o ( it ollows that c, c R,,, = k (4)

A method to compare two complexity uctios usig complexity classes 73 c R, <,, = k (5) ad cosequetly c R,, c R,, = k,, = k (6) (7) Let be c = max{ c, c } ad let be max{, = } It ollows that, (8) so we have Next, we assume that We have: c, c R, such that, (9) From the deiitio o ( we have c R, <,, = k () Let be = max{, } For c = c we have, ad < c,, = k () Cosequetly Usig the same idea, it ca be proved that So, we have,, ad It ollows that \ ( o( ) that is For provig that Θ ω( Ø oe ca use a similar idea

74 Adrei-Horia Mogos, Adia Magda Florea Propositio We have the ollowig properties: a) o( ω( = Ø, O( Ω( = Θ( b) o( Ω( = Ø, O( ω( = Ø c) o( O(, Θ ( O( d) ω ( Ω(, Θ ( Ω( Proo The results ca be obtaied usig (), (), (3), (4), ad (5) Propositio 3We have the ollowig properties: a) o( Θ( = Ø, o( oθ( = Ø, oθ ( Θ( = Ø b) o ( oθ( = O( I other words, the complexity classes o (, oθ ( ad Θ ( orm a partitio o the complexity class O ( Proo a) The irst equality ca be obtaied usig the deiitios () ad (4) The other two equalities are easily obtaied rom the deiitio o the complexity class oθ ( b) From Propositio 3, we have o( O( Usig the deiitio o oθ ( we have o ( oθ( = O( Propositio 4 We have the ollowig properties: a) Θ ( ω( = Ø, Θ ( Θω( = Ø, Θ ω( ω( = Ø b) Θ( Θω ( = Ω( I other words, the complexity classes Θ (, Θ ω( ad ω ( orm a partitio o the complexity class Ω ( Proo The proo ollows the same idea as the proo or Propositio 4 Propositio 5 Let be N ad N two iiite subsets o N, N ad N orm a partitio o N Let be ( ) ad two complexity uctios Let be (, = () (, The, we have: a) I ( ( the b) I ( ( the c) I )) ad )) the

A method to compare two complexity uctios usig complexity classes 75 d) I ( ( the e) I ( ( the Proo For provig these results, we use the deiitios rom (), (), (3), (4), ad (5) a) From (, (, rom the expressio o ( we have: c, c R, such that,, (3) c, c R, such that,, (4) Let be c = mi( c, ), c = max( c, ), ad = max(, ) The, we have: c c,,,, (5) It ollows that b), c), d), e) The proos use the same idea as the proo or a) Propositio 6 Let be N ad N two iiite subsets o N, N ad N orm a partitio o N Let be ( ) ad two complexity uctios Let be (, = (6) (, The, we have: a) I ( ( the b) I ( ( O( the O( c) I ( ( Ω( the Ω( d) I ( ( the e) I )) ad ω( )) the ω(

76 Adrei-Horia Mogos, Adia Magda Florea Proo For provig these results, we use the deiitios rom (), (), (3), (4), ad (5) a) From )) we have that the property c, c R, such that,, (7) is alse I ollows that the property c, c R, such that,, (8) is alse Sice N is a iiite subset o N, we have b), c), d), e) The proos use the same idea as the proo or a) Propositio 7 Let be N ad N two iiite subsets o N, N ad N orm a partitio o N Let be ( ) ad two complexity uctios Let be (, = (9) (, The, we have: a) I ( ( the b) I ( ( the Proo For provig these results we use Propositio 5, Propositio 6, ad the properties: o ( Θ( = Ø ad Θ ( ω ( = Ø a) From ( ( we have ( ( Cosequetly, From ( ( we have ( ( Cosequetly, From ( ( we have ( ( Cosequetly, It ollows that \ ( o( ) Cosequetly, b) The proo uses the same idea as the proo or a)

A method to compare two complexity uctios usig complexity classes 77 Propositio 8 We have the ollowig property: i ad oly i ( Proo We have the ollowig well kow properties: i ad oly i ( (3) i ad oly i ( (3) i ad oly i ω( ( (3) From Deiitio, we have: oθ ( = O( \ ( o( ) (33) Θ ω( = Ω( \ ( Θ( ) (34) Cosider that We show that ( From the deiitio o oθ ( we have so, we have \ ( o( ) (35),, (36) Usig (3), (3), (3) it ollows that (, ω( (, ( Cosequetly, ( \ ( Θ( ( ( ) It ollows that ( The other implicatio ca be proved usig the same idea Propositio 9 Let be N ad N two iiite subsets o N, N ad N orm a partitio o N Let be ( ( two complexity uctios Let be (, = (37) (,

78 Adrei-Horia Mogos, Adia Magda Florea The, we have: a) I ( ( the b) I ( ( the c) I ( ( the d) I ( ( the Proo a) From ( we have that (, (, ( From ( we have that (, (, ( Cosequetly, usig Propositio 5 ad Propositio 6, we have,, ad It ollows that b), c), d) The proos use the same idea as the proo or a) 4 The mai results Theorem Let be The ( Proo We will use a well kow property o the complexity classes: ( i ad oly i ( )) (38) ( The hypothesis implies that Ω( From Propositio, we have O( Ω( = Θ( It ollows that we have two possibilities: either or ( Ω( \ Θ( ) I the (, hece ( I ( Ω( \ Θ( ) Ω( the (, hece ( Theorem The complexity classes o (, oθ (, Θ (, Θ ω( ad ω ( orm a partitio o the set C (, that is: a) C( = o( oθ( Θω( b) The complexity classes o (, oθ (, Θ (, Θ ω( ad ω ( are pairwise disjoit Proo a) For provig this result we use Remark, Propositio 3, ad Propositio 4 From C( = Θ( O( Ω( o( ω( (39)

A method to compare two complexity uctios usig complexity classes 79 we have C( = Θ( o( oθ( Θω( o( ω( (4) It ollows that C( = o( oθ( Θω( ω( (4) b) From Propositio 3, it ollows that o (, oθ( ad Θ ( are pairwise disjoit From Propositio 4, i ollows that Θ (, Θ ω( ad ω ( are pairwise disjoit From Propositio, i ollows that o ( ad ω ( are disjoit Usig Propositio, we have that o( Ω( = Ø, hece o ( ad Θ ω( are disjoit Usig agai Propositio, have O( ω( = Ø, hece oθ ( ad ω ( are disjoit From Propositio we have that O( Ω( = Θ( We kow that oθ ( O( ad Θω ( Ω( We also kow that oθ ( ad Θ ( are disjoit ad Θ ( ad Θω( are disjoit It ollows that oθ ( ad Θ ω( are disjoit Cosequetly o (, oθ (, Θ (, Θ ω( ad ω ( are pairwise disjoit Theorem 3 Let be ( ( two complexity uctios The ( ( ( ( Proo From )), we have: c R, ( <, From )), we have: (4) c R, < (, (43) Let be c R ; or c = c = c there exist ad with the above properties Let be = max{, } The, we have:

8 Adrei-Horia Mogos, Adia Magda Florea that is: It ollows that: ( < (44) ad < (, ( < (45) < (, c = R, = ( (, (46) hece ( ( From here, we have ( ( Next, usig Theorem, it ollows that ( )) ( Remark 3 I C( we say that ( ad g ( are comparable Note that, rom Theorem, i the ( Theorem 4We have the ollowig properties: a) Let be ( ( The ( ( b) Let be ( ( The ( ( Proo We prove that i ( ( the ( )) From )) ad Ω( )) we have: ( c R, ( <, (47) c R, (, (48) I we choose c = c, the we have: Next, we have <, max(, ) (49) c = R, = max(, ) < c (, such that (5) Cosequetly, ( )) It ollows that ( )) ( (

A method to compare two complexity uctios usig complexity classes 8 Usig Propositio 4, we have: Θ ( Ω( (5) Θω ( Ω( (5) a) From ( ( we have that ( ( It ollows that ( ( b) From ( ( we have that )) ad )) It ollows that ( )) ( Theorem 5 We have the ollowig properties: a) Let be ( ω( ( The ( ( b) Let be ( ( The ( ( Proo The proo ollows the same idea as the proo or the Theorem 4 Theorem 6 We have the ollowig properties: a) Let be ( ( The ( ( b) Let be ( ( The ( ( c) Let be ( ( The ( ( Proo Usig the same idea used i the proo o Theorem 4, oe ca prove that i ( ( the ( ( a) We have oθ ( O( ad Θ ( Ω( Cosequetly, we have ( ( It ollows that ( ( b), c) The proos ollow the same idea used or the proo o a) Theorem 7 We have the ollowig properties: a) There exists (, ( ( C( ( b) There exists (, ( ( C( ( Proo a) Let be /, = k = /, ( = (53), = k

8 Adrei-Horia Mogos, Adia Magda Florea It is easy to see that /, /, ad We have ( Usig Propositio 7, we have that ( Oe ca observe that ( / ) ( I additio, the set o odd aturals ad the set o eve aturals are iiite sets It ollows that ( C( ( b) The proo uses the same idea as the proo or a) Theorem 8 We have the ollowig properties: a) Let be ( ad g ( ) ω ( ( )) The ( ) ( ( C b) Let be ) o ( ( )) ad ( )) The ( ) ( ( C c) Let be ) o ( ( )) ad ( )) The ( ) ( ( C d) Let be g ( ) ω ( ( )) ad ( )) The ( ) ( ( C e) Let be g ( ) ω ( ( )) ad ( )) The ( ) ( ( C Proo We will use Propositio 8, ormulas (3), (3), (35), Theorem 3, Theorem 4, ad Theorem 5 a) From ( ad g ( ) ω ( ( )) we have that ( ( It ollows that ( ( b), c), d), e) The proos use the same idea as the proo or a) Theorem 9 Let be N ad N two iiite subsets o N, N ad N orm a partitio o N Let be ( ( two complexity uctios Let be (, = (54) (, The, we have: a) I ( ( the b) I ( ( the c) I ( ( the d) I ( ( the e) I ( ( the ) I ( ( the Proo For provig the theorem, we use Propositio 9 ad Propositio 5

A method to compare two complexity uctios usig complexity classes 83 a) From ( ( we have that Cosequetly, It ollows that c) From ( ( we have that ( ( Cosequetly, It ollows that b), d), e) The proos use the same idea as the proo or a) ) The proo uses the same idea as the proo or c) Theorem Let be N ad N two iiite subsets o N, N ad N orm a partitio o N Let be ( ) ad two complexity uctios Let be (, = (55) (, The, we have: a) I ( ( the C( b) I ( ( the C( c) I ( ( the C( d) I ( ( the C( Proo For provig that, we eed to id a complexity class that cotais both ( ) ( ) We will show that this is impossible Usig Remark, we have: C( = Θ( O( Ω( o( (56) The largest two complexity classes are O( ad Ω ( So we ca use the orm o C ( discussed i Remark : C( = O( Ω( a) From ( we have ( ( Ω( From ( we have ( O( ( It ollows that C( b), c), d) The proos use the same idea as the proo or a)

84 Adrei-Horia Mogos, Adia Magda Florea 6 Coclusio I this paper we preseted some iterestig results related to the compariso o two complexity uctios usig complexity classes These results are importat i practice because whe we compare two complexity uctios, i act, we compare two algorithms complexities Usig the results rom this paper, some algorithms ca be desiged to tell us i two uctios are comparable or to tell us i two uctios are icomparable Ackowledgemet This research was supported by the AGATE project: Sel-aware ad selorgaizig cogitive agets societies or modelig ad developig complex systems - Grat CNCSIS ID_35, 9- R E F E R E N C E S [] V Araimovich, L Glebsky, Measures Related to (ε, -Complexity Fuctios, i Discrete ad Cotiuous Dyamical Systems, vol, o &, Sept & Oct 8, pp 3-34 [] E Schmidt, A Schulz, L Kruse, G vo Cöll ad W Nebel, Automatic Geeratio o Complexity Fuctios or High-Level Power Aalysis, i Proceedigs o PATMOS, the Iteratioal Workshop Power ad Timig Modelig, Optimizatio ad Simulatio, Yverdo-les-bais, Switzerlad, 6-8 Sept, pp 6-35 [3] DE Kuth, Fudametal Algorithms, volume o The Art o Computer Programmig, Third editio, Addiso-Wesley, USA, 997 [4] TH Corme, CE Leiserso, RL Rivest ad C Stei, Itroductio to Algorithms, Secod editio, MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, Lodo Eglad, USA, [5] CA Giumale, Itroducere i Aaliza Algoritmilor Teorie si aplicatie (Itroductio to the Aalysis o Algorithms Theory ad Applicatio, Polirom, Bucharest, Romaia, 4 [6] J Rodríguez-López, S Romaguera ad O Valero, Asymptotic Complexity o Algorithms via the Nosymmetric Hausdor Distace, i Computig Letters (CoLe), vol, o 3, 4, pp 55-6 [7] S Romaguera, E A Sáchez-Pérez ad O Valero, Computig Complexity Distaces Betwee Algorithms, i Kyberetika, vol 39, o 5, 3, pp 569-58 [8] M I Adreica, Eiciet Gaussia Elimiatio o a D SIMD Array o Processors without Colum Broadcasts, i U P B Sci Bull, series C, vol 7, Iss 4, 9, pp 83-98 [9] K Sharma, D Garg, Complexity Aalysis i Heterogeeous System, i Computer ad Iormatio Sciece, vol, o, Feb 9, pp 48-5 [] AH Mogos, Comparable Complexity Fuctios, i Proceedigs o CSCS 6, the 6 th Iteratioal Coerece o Cotrol Systems ad Computer Sciece, Bucharest, Romaia, -5 May 7, vol, pp 46-5 [] AH Mogos, AM Florea, Comparig Two Complexity Fuctios usig -Comparable Complexity Fuctios, i Proceedigs o CSCS 7, the 7 th Iteratioal Coerece o Cotrol Systems ad Computer Sciece, Bucharest, Romaia, 6-9 May 9, vol, pp 55-6