Scribd
Upload
10 views2 pages

Big-O Notation: Asymptotic Upper Bound

Uploaded by

Anonymous gqSpNAmlW
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
10 views2 pages

Big-O Notation: Asymptotic Upper Bound

Uploaded by

Anonymous gqSpNAmlW
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Big-O notation

We use big-Θ notation to asymptotically bound the growth of a running time


to within constant factors above and below. Sometimes we want to bound
from only above. For example, although the worst-case running time of
binary search is Θ(lg n), it would be incorrect to say that binary search runs
in Θ(lg n) time in all cases. What if we find the target value upon the first
guess? Then it runs in Θ(1) time. The running time of binary search is never
worse than Θ(lg n), but it's sometimes better. It would be convenient to have a
form of asymptotic notation that means "the running time grows at most this
much, but it could grow more slowly." We use "big-O" notation for just such
occasions.

If a running time is O(f(n)), then for large enough n, the running time is at
most k⋅f(n) for some constant k. Here's how to think of a running time that is
O(f(n)):

We say that the running time is "big-O of f(n)" or just "O of f(n)." We use big-O
notation for asymptotic upper bounds, since it bounds the growth of the
running time from above for large enough input sizes.

Now we have a way to characterize the running time of binary search in all
cases. We can say that the running time of binary search is always O(lg n). We
can make a stronger statement about the worst-case running time: it's Θ(lg n).
But for a blanket statement that covers all cases, the strongest statement we
can make is that binary search runs in O(lg n) time.

If you go back to the definition of big-Θ notation, you'll notice that it looks a lot
like big-O notation, except that big-Θ notation bounds the running from both
above and below, rather than just from above. If we say that a running time is
Θ(f(n)) in a particular situation, then it's also O(f(n)). For example, we can
say that because the worst-case running time of binary search is Θ(lg n), it's
also O(lg n). The converse is not necessarily true: as we've seen, we can say
that binary search always runs in O(lg n) time but not that it always runs in
Θ(lg n) time.

Because big-O notation gives only an asymptotic upper bound, and not an
asymptotically tight bound, we can make statements that at first blush seem
incorrect, but are technically correct. For example, it is absolutely correct to
say that binary search runs in O(n) time. That's because the running time
grows no faster than a constant times n. In fact, it grows slower. Think of it
this way. Suppose you have 10 dollars in your pocket. You go up to your friend
and say, "I have an amount of money in my pocket, and I guarantee that it's no
more than one million dollars." Your statement is absolutely true, though not
terribly precise. One million dollars is an upper bound on 10 dollars, just as
O(n) is an upper bound on the running time of binary search. Other,
imprecise, upper bounds on binary search would be O(n2), O(n3) and O(2n).
But none of Θ(n), Θ(n2), Θ(n3), and Θ(2n) would be correct to describe the
running time of binary search in any case.

You might also like