Big O notation

Big O notation is a mathematical notation that describes

the limiting behavior of a function when the argument
tends towards a particular value or infinity. Big O is a
member of a family of notations invented by German
mathematicians Paul Bachmann,[1] Edmund Landau,[2]
and others, collectively called Bachmann–Landau
notation or asymptotic notation. The letter O was
chosen by Bachmann to stand for Ordnung, meaning the
order of approximation.

In computer science, big O notation is used to classify

algorithms according to how their run time or space
requirements grow as the input size grows.[3] In analytic
number theory, big O notation is often used to express a
bound on the difference between an arithmetical function Example of Big O notation: as
and a better understood approximation; a famous example since there exists (e.g., )
of such a difference is the remainder term in the prime and (e.g., ) such that
whenever .
number theorem. Big O notation is also used in many
other fields to provide similar estimates.

Big O notation characterizes functions according to their growth rates: different functions with the same
asymptotic growth rate may be represented using the same O notation. The letter O is used because the
growth rate of a function is also referred to as the order of the function. A description of a function in terms
of big O notation usually only provides an upper bound on the growth rate of the function.

Associated with big O notation are several related notations, using the symbols o, Ω, ω, and Θ, to describe
other kinds of bounds on asymptotic growth rates.[3]

Formal definition
Let the function to be estimated, be a real or complex valued function, and let the comparison function,
be a real valued function. Let both functions be defined on some unbounded subset of the positive real
numbers, and be non-zero (often, but not necessarily, strictly positive) for all large enough values of
[4] One writes

and it is read " is big O of " or more often " is of the order of " if the absolute value of
is at most a positive constant multiple of the absolute value of for all sufficiently large values of
That is, if there exists a positive real number and a real number such that
In many contexts, the assumption that we are interested in the growth rate as the variable goes to infinity
or to zero is left unstated, and one writes more simply that

The notation can also be used to describe the behavior of near some real number (often, ): we say

if there exist positive numbers and such that for all defined with

As is non-zero for adequately large (or small) values of both of these definitions can be unified using
the limit superior:

if

And in both of these definitions the limit point (whether or not) is a cluster point of the domains of
and i. e., in every neighbourhood of there have to be infinitely many points in common. Moreover, as
pointed out in the article about the limit inferior and limit superior, the (at least on the extended
real number line) always exists.

In computer science, a slightly more restrictive definition is common: and are both required to be
functions from some unbounded subset of the positive integers to the nonnegative real numbers; then
if there exist positive integer numbers and such that for all
[5]

Example
In typical usage the O notation is asymptotical, that is, it refers to very large x. In this setting, the
contribution of the terms that grow "most quickly" will eventually make the other ones irrelevant. As a result,
the following simplification rules can be applied:

If f(x) is a sum of several terms, if there is one with largest growth rate, it can be kept, and all
others omitted.
If f(x) is a product of several factors, any constants (factors in the product that do not depend
on x) can be omitted.
For example, let f(x) = 6x4 − 2x3 + 5, and suppose we wish to simplify this function, using O notation, to
describe its growth rate as x approaches infinity. This function is the sum of three terms: 6x4, −2x3, and 5.
Of these three terms, the one with the highest growth rate is the one with the largest exponent as a function of
x, namely 6x4. Now one may apply the second rule: 6x4 is a product of 6 and x4 in which the first factor
does not depend on x. Omitting this factor results in the simplified form x4. Thus, we say that f(x) is a "big
O" of x4. Mathematically, we can write f(x) = O(x4). One may confirm this calculation using the formal
definition: let f(x) = 6x4 − 2x3 + 5 and g(x) = x4. Applying the formal definition from above, the
statement that f(x) = O(x4) is equivalent to its expansion,

for some suitable choice of a real number x0 and a positive real number M and for all x > x0. To prove this,
let x0 = 1 and M = 13. Then, for all x > x0:

so

Use
Big O notation has two main areas of application:

In mathematics, it is commonly used to describe how closely a finite series approximates a

given function, especially in the case of a truncated Taylor series or asymptotic expansion.
In computer science, it is useful in the analysis of algorithms.[3]
In both applications, the function g(x) appearing within the O(·) is typically chosen to be as simple as
possible, omitting constant factors and lower order terms.

There are two formally close, but noticeably different, usages of this notation:

infinite asymptotics
infinitesimal asymptotics.
This distinction is only in application and not in principle, however—the formal definition for the "big O" is
the same for both cases, only with different limits for the function argument.

Infinite asymptotics
Big O notation is useful when analyzing algorithms for efficiency. For example, the time (or the number of
steps) it takes to complete a problem of size n might be found to be T(n) = 4n2 − 2n + 2. As n grows
large, the n2 term will come to dominate, so that all other terms can be neglected —for instance when
n = 500, the term 4n2 is 1000 times as large as the 2n term. Ignoring the latter would have negligible effect
on the expression's value for most purposes. Further, the coefficients become irrelevant if we compare to any
other order of expression, such as an expression containing a term n3 or n4. Even if T(n) = 1,000,000n2,
if U(n) = n3, the latter will always exceed the former once n grows larger than 1,000,000, viz.
T(1,000,000) = 1,000,0003 = U(1,000,000). Additionally, the number of steps depends on the details
of the machine model on which the algorithm runs, but different types of machines typically vary by only a
constant factor in the number of steps needed to execute an algorithm. So the big O notation captures what
remains: we write either
or

and say that the algorithm has order of n2 time complexity. The sign
"=" is not meant to express "is equal to" in its normal mathematical
sense, but rather a more colloquial "is", so the second expression is
sometimes considered more accurate (see the "Equals sign" discussion
below) while the first is considered by some as an abuse of notation.[6]

Infinitesimal asymptotics
Graphs of functions commonly used
Big O can also be used to describe the error term in an approximation in the analysis of algorithms,
to a mathematical function. The most significant terms are written showing the number of operations N
explicitly, and then the least-significant terms are summarized in a versus input size n for each function
single big O term. Consider, for example, the exponential series and
two expressions of it that are valid when x is small:

The middle expression (the one with O(x3)) means the absolute-value of the error ex − (1 + x + x2/2) is at
most some constant times |x3| when x is close enough to 0.

Properties
If the function f can be written as a finite sum of other functions, then the fastest growing one determines the
order of f(n). For example,

In particular, if a function may be bounded by a polynomial in n, then as n tends to infinity, one may
disregard lower-order terms of the polynomial. The sets O(nc) and O(cn) are very different. If c is greater
than one, then the latter grows much faster. A function that grows faster than nc for any c is called
superpolynomial. One that grows more slowly than any exponential function of the form cn is called
subexponential. An algorithm can require time that is both superpolynomial and subexponential; examples of
this include the fastest known algorithms for integer factorization and the function nlog n.

We may ignore any powers of n inside of the logarithms. The set O(log n) is exactly the same as
O(log(nc)). The logarithms differ only by a constant factor (since log(nc) = c log n) and thus the big O
notation ignores that. Similarly, logs with different constant bases are equivalent. On the other hand,
exponentials with different bases are not of the same order. For example, 2n and 3n are not of the same order.
Changing units may or may not affect the order of the resulting algorithm. Changing units is equivalent to
multiplying the appropriate variable by a constant wherever it appears. For example, if an algorithm runs in
the order of n2, replacing n by cn means the algorithm runs in the order of c2n2, and the big O notation
ignores the constant c2. This can be written as c2n2 = O(n2). If, however, an algorithm runs in the order of
2n, replacing n with cn gives 2cn = (2c)n. This is not equivalent to 2n in general. Changing variables may
also affect the order of the resulting algorithm. For example, if an algorithm's run time is O(n) when
measured in terms of the number n of digits of an input number x, then its run time is O(log x) when
measured as a function of the input number x itself, because n = O(log x).

Product

Sum
If and then . It follows that if and
then .

Multiplication by a constant
Let k be a nonzero constant. Then . In other words, if , then

Multiple variables
Big O (and little o, Ω, etc.) can also be used with multiple variables. To define big O formally for multiple
variables, suppose and are two functions defined on some subset of . We say

if and only if there exist constants and such that for all with for
some [7] Equivalently, the condition that for some can be written , where
denotes the Chebyshev norm. For example, the statement

asserts that there exist constants C and M such that

whenever either or holds. This definition allows all of the coordinates of to increase to
infinity. In particular, the statement

(i.e., ) is quite different from

(i.e., ).

Under this definition, the subset on which a function is defined is significant when generalizing statements
from the univariate setting to the multivariate setting. For example, if and , then
if we restrict and to , but not if they are defined on .

This is not the only generalization of big O to multivariate functions, and in practice, there is some
inconsistency in the choice of definition.[8]

Matters of notation

Equals sign
The statement " f(x) is O[ g(x) ] " as defined above is usually written as f(x) = O[ g(x) ] . Some
consider this to be an abuse of notation, since the use of the equals sign could be misleading as it suggests a
symmetry that this statement does not have. As de Bruijn says, O[ x ] = O[ x2 ] is true but
O[ x2 ] = O[ x ] is not.[9] Knuth describes such statements as "one-way equalities", since if the sides
could be reversed, "we could deduce ridiculous things like n = n2 from the identities n = O[ n2 ] and
n2 = O[ n2 ] ".[10] In another letter, Knuth also pointed out that
"the equality sign is not symmetric with respect to such notations", [as, in this notation,]
"mathematicians customarily use the '=' sign as they use the word 'is' in English: Aristotle is a
man, but a man isn't necessarily Aristotle".[11]

For these reasons, it would be more precise to use set notation and write f(x) ∈ O[ g(x) ] (read as: " f(x)
is an element of O[ g(x) ] ", or " f(x) is in the set O[ g(x) ] "), thinking of O[ g(x) ] as the class of
all functions h(x) such that |h(x)| ≤ C |g(x)| for some positive real number C.[10] However, the use of
the equals sign is customary.[9][10]

Other arithmetic operators

Big O notation can also be used in conjunction with other arithmetic operators in more complicated
equations. For example, h(x) + O(f(x)) denotes the collection of functions having the growth of h(x) plus a
part whose growth is limited to that of f(x). Thus,

expresses the same as

Example
Suppose an algorithm is being developed to operate on a set of n elements. Its developers are interested in
finding a function T(n) that will express how long the algorithm will take to run (in some arbitrary
measurement of time) in terms of the number of elements in the input set. The algorithm works by first
calling a subroutine to sort the elements in the set and then perform its own operations. The sort has a known
time complexity of O(n2), and after the subroutine runs the algorithm must take an additional 55n3 + 2n + 10
steps before it terminates. Thus the overall time complexity of the algorithm can be expressed as
T(n) = 55n3 + O(n2). Here the terms 2n + 10 are subsumed within the faster-growing O(n2). Again, this usage
disregards some of the formal meaning of the "=" symbol, but it does allow one to use the big O notation as a
kind of convenient placeholder.

Multiple uses
In more complicated usage, O(·) can appear in different places in an equation, even several times on each
side. For example, the following are true for :

The meaning of such statements is as follows: for any functions which satisfy each O(·) on the left side, there
are some functions satisfying each O(·) on the right side, such that substituting all these functions into the
equation makes the two sides equal. For example, the third equation above means: "For any function f(n) =
O(1), there is some function g(n) = O(en) such that nf(n) = g(n)." In terms of the "set notation" above, the
meaning is that the class of functions represented by the left side is a subset of the class of functions
represented by the right side. In this use the "=" is a formal symbol that unlike the usual use of "=" is not a
symmetric relation. Thus for example nO(1) = O(en) does not imply the false statement O(en) = nO(1).

Typesetting
Big O is typeset as an italicized uppercase "O", as in the following example: .[12][13] In TeX, it is
produced by simply typing O inside math mode. Unlike Greek-named Bachmann–Landau notations, it needs
no special symbol. However, some authors use the calligraphic variant instead.[14][15]

Orders of common functions

Here is a list of classes of functions that are commonly encountered when analyzing the running time of an
algorithm. In each case, c is a positive constant and n increases without bound. The slower-growing functions
are generally listed first.
 Notation Name Example

Finding the median value for a sorted array of numbers;

constant Calculating ; Using a constant-size lookup table

inverse
Amortized complexity per operation for the Disjoint-set data
Ackermann
structure
function

Average number of comparisons spent finding an item

double
using interpolation search in a sorted array of uniformly
logarithmic
distributed values
Finding an item in a sorted array with a binary search or a
logarithmic balanced search tree as well as all operations in a binomial
heap

Matrix chain ordering can be solved in polylogarithmic time

polylogarithmic
on a parallel random-access machine.

fractional power Searching in a k-d tree

Finding an item in an unsorted list or in an unsorted array;

linear
adding two n-bit integers by ripple carry

Performing triangulation of a simple polygon using Seidel's

algorithm,[16] where
n log-star n

linearithmic,
loglinear, Performing a fast Fourier transform; fastest possible
quasilinear, or "n comparison sort; heapsort and merge sort
log n"
Multiplying two n-digit numbers by schoolbook
multiplication; simple sorting algorithms, such as bubble
quadratic sort, selection sort and insertion sort; (worst-case) bound
on some usually faster sorting algorithms such as
quicksort, Shellsort, and tree sort

Tree-adjoining grammar parsing; maximum matching for

polynomial or
bipartite graphs; finding the determinant with LU
algebraic
decomposition

L-notation or sub- Factoring a number using the quadratic sieve or number

exponential field sieve

Finding the (exact) solution to the travelling salesman

exponential problem using dynamic programming; determining if two
logical statements are equivalent using brute-force search
Solving the travelling salesman problem via brute-force
search; generating all unrestricted permutations of a poset;
factorial
finding the determinant with Laplace expansion;
enumerating all partitions of a set

The statement is sometimes weakened to to derive simpler formulas for

asymptotic complexity. For any and , is a subset of for any , so
may be considered as a polynomial with some bigger order.
Related asymptotic notations
Big O is widely used in computer science. Together with some other related notations, it forms the family of
Bachmann–Landau notations.

Little-o notation
Intuitively, the assertion "f(x) is o(g(x))" (read "f(x) is little-o of g(x)" or "f(x) is of inferior order to g(x)")
means that g(x) grows much faster than f(x), or equivalently f(x) grows much slower than g(x). As before,
let f be a real or complex valued function and g a real valued function, both defined on some unbounded
subset of the positive real numbers, such that g(x) is strictly positive for all large enough values of x. One
writes

if for every positive constant ε there exists a constant such that

[17]

For example, one has

and both as

The difference between the definition of the big-O notation and the definition of little-o is that while the
former has to be true for at least one constant M, the latter must hold for every positive constant ε, however
small.[18] In this way, little-o notation makes a stronger statement than the corresponding big-O notation:
every function that is little-o of g is also big-O of g, but not every function that is big-O of g is little-o of g.
For example, but .

If g(x) is nonzero, or at least becomes nonzero beyond a certain point, the relation is
equivalent to

(and this is in fact how Landau[17] originally defined the little-o notation).

Little-o respects a number of arithmetic operations. For example,

if c is a nonzero constant and then , and

if and then
if and then

It also satisfies a transitivity relation:

if and then

Little-o can also be generalized to the finite case:[19]

if for some with .

Or, if g(x) is nonzero in a neighbourhood around :

if .

This definition especially useful in the computation of limits using Taylor series. For example:

, so

Big Omega notation

Another asymptotic notation is , read "big omega".[20] There are two widespread and incompatible
definitions of the statement

as ,

where a is some real number, , or , where f and g are real functions defined in a neighbourhood of a,
and where g is positive in this neighbourhood.

The Hardy–Littlewood definition is used mainly in analytic number theory, and the Knuth definition mainly
in computational complexity theory; the definitions are not equivalent.

The Hardy–Littlewood definition

In 1914 G.H. Hardy and J.E. Littlewood introduced the new symbol [21] which is defined as follows:

as if

Thus is the negation of

In 1916 the same authors introduced the two new symbols and defined as:[22]

as if

as if

These symbols were used by E. Landau, with the same meanings, in 1924.[23] Authors that followed Landau,
however, use a different notation for the same definitions: The symbol has been replaced by the current
notation with the same definition, and became

These three symbols as well as (meaning that

and are both satisfied), are now currently used in analytic number theory.[24][25]

Simple examples
We have
 as

and more precisely

as

We have

as

and more precisely

as

however

as

The Knuth definition

In 1976 Donald Knuth published a paper to justify his use of the -symbol to describe a stronger
property.[26] Knuth wrote: "For all the applications I have seen so far in computer science, a stronger
requirement ... is much more appropriate". He defined

with the comment: "Although I have changed Hardy and Littlewood's definition of , I feel justified in doing
so because their definition is by no means in wide use, and because there are other ways to say what they
want to say in the comparatively rare cases when their definition applies."[26]
Family of Bachmann–Landau notations

Limit
Notation Name[26] Description Formal definition
definition[27][28][29][26][21]

f is dominated
Small O; by g
Small Oh; asymptotically
Little O; (for any
Little Oh constant
factor )

is
asymptotically
Big O; Big bounded
Oh; Big above by g
Omicron (up to
constant
factor )

f is
asymptotically
Of the bounded by g
(Hardy's same order both above and
notation) or as (Hardy); (with constant
Big Theta factor ) and
(Knuth notation) (Knuth) below (with
constant
factor )

Asymptotic f is equal to g
equivalence asymptotically

Big Omega
in f is bounded
complexity below by g
theory asymptotically
(Knuth)

Small
Omega; f dominates g
Little asymptotically
Omega

Big Omega is not

in number
dominated by
theory
(Hardy– g
Littlewood) asymptotically

The limit definitions assume for sufficiently large . The table is (partly) sorted from smallest to
largest, in the sense that (Knuth's version of) on functions correspond to
on the real line [29] (the Hardy–Littlewood version of , however, doesn't correspond to any such
description).

Computer science uses the big , big Theta , little , little omega and Knuth's big Omega
notations. [30] Analytic number theory often uses the big , small , Hardy's ,[31] Hardy–Littlewood's big
Omega (with or without the +, − or ± subscripts) and notations.[24] The small omega notation is not
used as often in analysis.[32]
Use in computer science
Informally, especially in computer science, the big O notation often can be used somewhat differently to
describe an asymptotic tight bound where using big Theta Θ notation might be more factually appropriate in
a given context.[33] For example, when considering a function T(n) = 73n3 + 22n2 + 58, all of the following
are generally acceptable, but tighter bounds (such as numbers 2 and 3 below) are usually strongly preferred
over looser bounds (such as number 1 below).

1. T(n) = O(n100)
2. T(n) = O(n3)
3. T(n) = Θ(n3)
The equivalent English statements are respectively:

1. T(n) grows asymptotically no faster than n100

2. T(n) grows asymptotically no faster than n3
3. T(n) grows asymptotically as fast as n3.
So while all three statements are true, progressively more information is contained in each. In some fields,
however, the big O notation (number 2 in the lists above) would be used more commonly than the big Theta
notation (items numbered 3 in the lists above). For example, if T(n) represents the running time of a newly
developed algorithm for input size n, the inventors and users of the algorithm might be more inclined to put
an upper asymptotic bound on how long it will take to run without making an explicit statement about the
lower asymptotic bound.

Other notation
In their book Introduction to Algorithms, Cormen, Leiserson, Rivest and Stein consider the set of functions f
which satisfy

In a correct notation this set can, for instance, be called O(g), where

[34]

The authors state that the use of equality operator (=) to denote set membership rather than the set
membership operator (∈) is an abuse of notation, but that doing so has advantages.[6] Inside an equation or
inequality, the use of asymptotic notation stands for an anonymous function in the set O(g), which eliminates
lower-order terms, and helps to reduce inessential clutter in equations, for example:[35]

Extensions to the Bachmann–Landau notations

Another notation sometimes used in computer science is Õ (read soft-O), which hides polylogarithmic
factors. There are two definitions in use: some authors use f(n) = Õ(g(n)) as shorthand for
f(n) = O(g(n) logk n) for some k, while others use it as shorthand for f(n) = O(g(n) logk g(n)).[36] When g(n) is
polynomial in n, there is no difference; however, the latter definition allows one to say, e.g. that
 while the former definition allows for for any constant k. Some authors write
O* for the same purpose as the latter definition. [37] Essentially, it is big O notation, ignoring logarithmic
factors because the growth-rate effects of some other super-logarithmic function indicate a growth-rate
explosion for large-sized input parameters that is more important to predicting bad run-time performance
than the finer-point effects contributed by the logarithmic-growth factor(s). This notation is often used to
obviate the "nitpicking" within growth-rates that are stated as too tightly bounded for the matters at hand
(since logk n is always o(nε) for any constant k and any ε > 0).

Also, the L notation, defined as

is convenient for functions that are between polynomial and exponential in terms of .

Generalizations and related usages

The generalization to functions taking values in any normed vector space is straightforward (replacing
absolute values by norms), where f and g need not take their values in the same space. A generalization to
functions g taking values in any topological group is also possible. The "limiting process" x → xo can also
be generalized by introducing an arbitrary filter base, i.e. to directed nets f and g. The o notation can be used
to define derivatives and differentiability in quite general spaces, and also (asymptotical) equivalence of
functions,

which is an equivalence relation and a more restrictive notion than the relationship "f is Θ(g)" from above. (It
reduces to lim f / g = 1 if f and g are positive real valued functions.) For example, 2x is Θ(x), but 2x − x is
not o(x).

History (Bachmann–Landau, Hardy, and Vinogradov notations)

The symbol O was first introduced by number theorist Paul Bachmann in 1894, in the second volume of his
book Analytische Zahlentheorie ("analytic number theory").[1] The number theorist Edmund Landau adopted
it, and was thus inspired to introduce in 1909 the notation o;[2] hence both are now called Landau symbols.
These notations were used in applied mathematics during the 1950s for asymptotic analysis.[38] The symbol
(in the sense "is not an o of") was introduced in 1914 by Hardy and Littlewood.[21] Hardy and Littlewood
also introduced in 1916 the symbols ("right") and ("left"),[22] precursors of the modern symbols
("is not smaller than a small o of") and ("is not larger than a small o of"). Thus the Omega symbols (with
their original meanings) are sometimes also referred to as "Landau symbols". This notation became
commonly used in number theory at least since the 1950s. [39]

The symbol , although it had been used before with different meanings,[29] was given its modern definition
by Landau in 1909[40] and by Hardy in 1910.[41] Just above on the same page of his tract Hardy defined the
symbol , where means that both and are satisfied. The
notation is still currently used in analytic number theory. [42][31] In his tract Hardy also proposed the symbol
, where means that for some constant .
In the 1970s the big O was popularized in computer science by Donald Knuth, who proposed the different
notation for Hardy's , and proposed a different definition for the Hardy and
Littlewood Omega notation. [26]

Two other symbols coined by Hardy were (in terms of the modern O notation)

and

(Hardy however never defined or used the notation , nor , as it has been sometimes reported). Hardy
introduced the symbols and (as well as the already mentioned other symbols) in his 1910 tract "Orders
of Infinity", and made use of them only in three papers (1910–1913). In his nearly 400 remaining papers and
books he consistently used the Landau symbols O and o.

Hardy's symbols and (as well as ) are not used anymore. On the other hand, in the 1930s,[43] the
Russian number theorist Ivan Matveyevich Vinogradov introduced his notation , which has been
increasingly used in number theory instead of the notation. We have

and frequently both notations are used in the same paper.

The big-O originally stands for "order of" ("Ordnung", Bachmann 1894), and is thus a Latin letter. Neither
Bachmann nor Landau ever call it "Omicron". The symbol was much later on (1976) viewed by Knuth as a
capital omicron,[26] probably in reference to his definition of the symbol Omega. The digit zero should not be
used.

See also
Asymptotic computational complexity
Asymptotic expansion: Approximation of functions generalizing Taylor's formula
Asymptotically optimal algorithm: A phrase frequently used to describe an algorithm that has an
upper bound asymptotically within a constant of a lower bound for the problem
Big O in probability notation: Op, op
Limit inferior and limit superior: An explanation of some of the limit notation used in this article
Master theorem (analysis of algorithms): For analyzing divide-and-conquer recursive algorithms
using big O notation
Nachbin's theorem: A precise method of bounding complex analytic functions so that the
domain of convergence of integral transforms can be stated
Order of approximation
Order of accuracy
Computational complexity of mathematical operations

References and notes

1. Bachmann, Paul (1894). Analytische Zahlentheorie (https://archive.org/stream/dieanalytischeza
00bachuoft#page/402/mode/2up) [Analytic Number Theory] (in German). Vol. 2. Leipzig:
Teubner.
 2. Landau, Edmund (1909). Handbuch der Lehre von der Verteilung der Primzahlen (https://archiv
e.org/details/handbuchderlehre01landuoft) [Handbook on the theory of the distribution of the
primes] (in German). Vol. 1. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. p. 61. Also see page 883 in vol. 2 of the
book (not available from the link given).
3. Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L. (1990). "Growth of Functions".
Introduction to Algorithms (1st ed.). MIT Press and McGraw-Hill. pp. 23–41. ISBN 978-0-262-
53091-0.
4. Landau, Edmund (1909). Handbuch der Lehre von der Verteilung der Primzahlen (https://archiv
e.org/stream/handbuchderlehre01landuoft#page/31/mode/2up) [Handbook on the theory of the
distribution of the primes] (in German). Leipzig: B.G. Teubner. p. 31.
5. Sipser, Michael (1997). Introduction to the Theory of Computation. Boston, MA: PWS
Publishing. p. 227, def. 7.2.
6. Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L. (2009). Introduction to Algorithms
(https://archive.org/details/introductiontoal00corm_805) (3rd ed.). Cambridge/MA: MIT Press.
p. 45 (https://archive.org/details/introductiontoal00corm_805/page/n65). ISBN 978-0-262-
53305-8. "Because θ(g(n)) is a set, we could write "f(n) ∈ θ(g(n))" to indicate that f(n) is a
member of θ(g(n)). Instead, we will usually write f(n) = θ(g(n)) to express the same notion. You
might be confused because we abuse equality in this way, but we shall see later in this section
that doing so has its advantages."
7. Cormen et al. (2009), p. 53 (https://archive.org/details/introductiontoal00corm_805/page/n73)
8. Howell, Rodney. "On Asymptotic Notation with Multiple Variables" (http://people.cis.ksu.edu/~rh
owell/asymptotic.pdf) (PDF). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20150424012920/http://peo
ple.cis.ksu.edu/~rhowell/asymptotic.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2015-04-24. Retrieved
2015-04-23.
9. de Bruijn, N.G. (1958). Asymptotic Methods in Analysis (https://books.google.com/books?id=_tn
wmvHmVwMC&q=%22The+trouble+is%22&pg=PA5). Amsterdam: North-Holland. pp. 5–7.
ISBN 978-0-486-64221-5. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20230117051949/https://book
s.google.com/books?id=_tnwmvHmVwMC&q=%22The+trouble+is%22&pg=PA5) from the
original on 2023-01-17. Retrieved 2021-09-15.
10. Graham, Ronald; Knuth, Donald; Patashnik, Oren (1994). Concrete Mathematics (https://books.
google.com/books?id=pntQAAAAMAAJ) (2 ed.). Reading, Massachusetts: Addison–Wesley.
p. 446. ISBN 978-0-201-55802-9. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20230117051955/http
s://books.google.com/books?id=pntQAAAAMAAJ) from the original on 2023-01-17. Retrieved
2016-09-23.
11. Donald Knuth (June–July 1998). "Teach Calculus with Big O" (https://www.ams.org/notices/199
806/commentary.pdf) (PDF). Notices of the American Mathematical Society. 45 (6): 687.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20211014070416/https://www.ams.org/notices/199806/c
ommentary.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2021-10-14. Retrieved 2021-09-05. (Unabridged
version (http://www-cs-staff.stanford.edu/~knuth/ocalc.tex) Archived (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20080513234708/http://www-cs-staff.stanford.edu/~knuth/ocalc.tex) 2008-05-13 at the
Wayback Machine)
12. Donald E. Knuth, The art of computer programming. Vol. 1. Fundamental algorithms, third
edition, Addison Wesley Longman, 1997. Section 1.2.11.1.
13. Ronald L. Graham, Donald E. Knuth, and Oren Patashnik, Concrete Mathematics: A
Foundation for Computer Science (2nd ed.), Addison-Wesley, 1994. Section 9.2, p. 443.
14. Sivaram Ambikasaran and Eric Darve, An Fast Direct Solver for Partial
Hierarchically Semi-Separable Matrices, J. Scientific Computing 57 (2013), no. 3, 477–501.
15. Saket Saurabh and Meirav Zehavi, -Max-Cut: An -Time Algorithm and a
Polynomial Kernel, Algorithmica 80 (2018), no. 12, 3844–3860.
16. Seidel, Raimund (1991), "A Simple and Fast Incremental Randomized Algorithm for Computing
Trapezoidal Decompositions and for Triangulating Polygons", Computational Geometry, vol. 1,
pp. 51–64, CiteSeerX 10.1.1.55.5877 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.
1.55.5877), doi:10.1016/0925-7721(91)90012-4 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0925-7721%289
1%2990012-4)
17. Landau, Edmund (1909). Handbuch der Lehre von der Verteilung der Primzahlen (https://archiv
e.org/stream/handbuchderlehre01landuoft#page/61/mode/2up) [Handbook on the theory of the
distribution of the primes] (in German). Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. p. 61.
18. Thomas H. Cormen et al., 2001, Introduction to Algorithms, Second Edition, Ch. 3.1 (http://high
ered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0070131511/) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/200901161159
44/http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0070131511/) 2009-01-16 at the Wayback Machine
19. Baratchart, L.; Grimm, J.; LeBlond, J.; Partington, J.R. (2003). "Asymptotic estimates for
interpolation and constrained approximation in H2 by diagonalization of Toeplitz operators" (http
s://www.researchgate.net/profile/Juliette-Leblond/publication/225672883_Asymptotic_Estimates
_for_Interpolation_and_Constrained_Approximation_in_H2_by_Diagonalization_of_Toeplitz_Op
erators/links/0fcfd51433acd153b1000000/Asymptotic-Estimates-for-Interpolation-and-Constrain
ed-Approximation-in-H2-by-Diagonalization-of-Toeplitz-Operators.pdf) (PDF). Integral
Equations and Operator Theory. 45 (3): 269–29.
20. Cormen TH, Leiserson CE, Rivest RL, Stein C (2009). Introduction to algorithms (https://www.w
orldcat.org/oclc/676697295) (3rd ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. p. 48. ISBN 978-0-262-
27083-0. OCLC 676697295 (https://search.worldcat.org/oclc/676697295).
21. Hardy, G.H.; Littlewood, J.E. (1914). "Some problems of diophantine approximation: Part II. The
trigonometrical series associated with the elliptic θ functions" (http://projecteuclid.org/download/
pdf_1/euclid.acta/1485887376). Acta Mathematica. 37: 225. doi:10.1007/BF02401834 (https://d
oi.org/10.1007%2FBF02401834). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20181212063403/http
s://projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_1/euclid.acta/1485887376) from the original on 2018-12-12.
Retrieved 2017-03-14.
22. Hardy, G.H.; Littlewood, J.E. (1916). "Contribution to the theory of the Riemann zeta-function
and the theory of the distribution of primes". Acta Mathematica. 41: 119–196.
doi:10.1007/BF02422942 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF02422942).
23. Landau, E. (1924). "Über die Anzahl der Gitterpunkte in gewissen Bereichen. IV" [On the
number of grid points in known regions]. Nachr. Gesell. Wiss. Gött. Math-phys. (in German):
137–150.
24. Ivić, A. (1985). The Riemann Zeta-Function. John Wiley & Sons. chapter 9.
25. Tenenbaum, G. (2015). Introduction to Analytic and Probabilistic Number Theory. Providence,
RI: American Mathematical Society. § I.5.
26. Knuth, Donald (April–June 1976). "Big Omicron and big Omega and big Theta" (https://doi.org/1
0.1145%2F1008328.1008329). SIGACT News. 8 (2): 18–24. doi:10.1145/1008328.1008329 (ht
tps://doi.org/10.1145%2F1008328.1008329). S2CID 5230246 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/
CorpusID:5230246).
27. Balcázar, José L.; Gabarró, Joaquim. "Nonuniform complexity classes specified by lower and
upper bounds" (http://archive.numdam.org/article/ITA_1989__23_2_177_0.pdf) (PDF). RAIRO
– Theoretical Informatics and Applications – Informatique Théorique et Applications. 23 (2):
180. ISSN 0988-3754 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0988-3754). Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20170314153158/http://archive.numdam.org/article/ITA_1989__23_2_177_0.pdf)
(PDF) from the original on 14 March 2017. Retrieved 14 March 2017 – via Numdam.
28. Cucker, Felipe; Bürgisser, Peter (2013). "A.1 Big Oh, Little Oh, and Other Comparisons" (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=SNu4BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA467). Condition: The Geometry of
Numerical Algorithms. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 467–468. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-
38896-5 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-3-642-38896-5). ISBN 978-3-642-38896-5.
29. Vitányi, Paul; Meertens, Lambert (April 1985). "Big Omega versus the wild functions" (http://ww
w.kestrel.edu/home/people/meertens/publications/papers/Big_Omega_contra_the_wild_functio
ns.pdf) (PDF). ACM SIGACT News. 16 (4): 56–59. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.694.3072 (https://citeseer
x.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.694.3072). doi:10.1145/382242.382835 (https://doi.
org/10.1145%2F382242.382835). S2CID 11700420 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:
11700420). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20160310012405/http://www.kestrel.edu/hom
e/people/meertens/publications/papers/Big_Omega_contra_the_wild_functions.pdf) (PDF) from
the original on 2016-03-10. Retrieved 2017-03-14.
30. Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L.; Stein, Clifford (2001) [1990].
Introduction to Algorithms (2nd ed.). MIT Press and McGraw-Hill. pp. 41–50. ISBN 0-262-
03293-7.
31. Gérald Tenenbaum, Introduction to analytic and probabilistic number theory, « Notation », page
xxiii. American Mathematical Society, Providence RI, 2015.
32. for example it is omitted in: Hildebrand, A.J. "Asymptotic Notations" (http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~
ajh/595ama/ama-ch2.pdf) (PDF). Department of Mathematics. Asymptotic Methods in Analysis.
Math 595, Fall 2009. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/201
70314153801/http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~ajh/595ama/ama-ch2.pdf) (PDF) from the original on
14 March 2017. Retrieved 14 March 2017.
33. Cormen et al. (2009), p. 64: "Many people continue to use the O-notation where the Θ-notation
is more technically precise."
34. Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L. (2009). Introduction to Algorithms
(3rd ed.). Cambridge/MA: MIT Press. p. 47. ISBN 978-0-262-53305-8. "When we have only an
asymptotic upper bound, we use O-notation. For a given function g(n), we denote by O(g(n))
(pronounced "big-oh of g of n" or sometimes just "oh of g of n") the set of functions O(g(n)) = {
f(n) : there exist positive constants c and n0 such that 0 ≤ f(n) ≤ cg(n) for all n ≥ n0}"
35. Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L. (2009). Introduction to Algorithms
(https://archive.org/details/introductiontoal00corm_805) (3rd ed.). Cambridge/MA: MIT Press.
p. 49 (https://archive.org/details/introductiontoal00corm_805/page/n69). ISBN 978-0-262-
53305-8. "When the asymptotic notation stands alone (that is, not within a larger formula) on
the right-hand side of an equation (or inequality), as in n = O(n2), we have already defined the
equal sign to mean set membership: n ∈ O(n2). In general, however, when asymptotic notation
appears in a formula, we interpret it as standing for some anonymous function that we do not
care to name. For example, the formula 2n2 + 3n + 1 = 2n2 + θ(n) means that 2n2 + 3n + 1 =
2n2 + f(n), where f(n) is some function in the set θ(n). In this case, we let f(n) = 3n + 1, which is
indeed in θ(n). Using asymptotic notation in this manner can help eliminate inessential detail
and clutter in an equation."
36. Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L.; Stein, Clifford (2022).
Introduction to Algorithms (https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262046305/introduction-to-algorithms/)
(4th ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. pp. 74–75. ISBN 9780262046305.
37. Andreas Björklund and Thore Husfeldt and Mikko Koivisto (2009). "Set partitioning via
inclusion-exclusion" (https://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/mkhkoivi/publications/sicomp-2009.pdf) (PDF).
SIAM Journal on Computing. 39 (2): 546–563. doi:10.1137/070683933 (https://doi.org/10.113
7%2F070683933). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20220203095918/https://www.cs.helsi
nki.fi/u/mkhkoivi/publications/sicomp-2009.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 2022-02-03.
Retrieved 2022-02-03. See sect.2.3, p.551.
38. Erdelyi, A. (1956). Asymptotic Expansions. Courier Corporation. ISBN 978-0-486-60318-6..
39. E. C. Titchmarsh, The Theory of the Riemann Zeta-Function (Oxford; Clarendon Press, 1951)
40. Landau, Edmund (1909). Handbuch der Lehre von der Verteilung der Primzahlen (https://archiv
e.org/details/handbuchderlehre01landuoft) [Handbook on the theory of the distribution of the
primes] (in German). Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. p. 62.
41. Hardy, G. H. (1910). Orders of Infinity: The 'Infinitärcalcül' of Paul du Bois-Reymond (https://arc
hive.org/details/ordersofinfinity00harduoft). Cambridge University Press. p. 2.
42. Hardy, G. H.; Wright, E. M. (2008) [1st ed. 1938]. "1.6. Some notations". An Introduction to the
Theory of Numbers. Revised by D. R. Heath-Brown and J. H. Silverman, with a foreword by
Andrew Wiles (6th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-921985-8.
43. See for instance "A new estimate for G(n) in Waring's problem" (Russian). Doklady Akademii
Nauk SSSR 5, No 5-6 (1934), 249–253. Translated in English in: Selected works / Ivan
Matveevič Vinogradov; prepared by the Steklov Mathematical Institute of the Academy of
Sciences of the USSR on the occasion of his 90th birthday. Springer-Verlag, 1985.
Further reading
Hardy, G. H. (1910). Orders of Infinity: The 'Infinitärcalcül' of Paul du Bois-Reymond (https://arc
hive.org/details/ordersofinfinity00harduoft). Cambridge University Press.
Knuth, Donald (1997). "1.2.11: Asymptotic Representations". Fundamental Algorithms. The Art
of Computer Programming. Vol. 1 (3rd ed.). Addison-Wesley. ISBN 978-0-201-89683-1.
Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L.; Stein, Clifford (2001). "3.1:
Asymptotic notation". Introduction to Algorithms (2nd ed.). MIT Press and McGraw-Hill.
ISBN 978-0-262-03293-3.
Sipser, Michael (1997). Introduction to the Theory of Computation (https://archive.org/details/int
roductiontoth00sips_928). PWS Publishing. pp. 226 (https://archive.org/details/introductiontoth0
0sips_928/page/n239)–228. ISBN 978-0-534-94728-6.
Avigad, Jeremy; Donnelly, Kevin (2004). Formalizing O notation in Isabelle/HOL (http://www.an
drew.cmu.edu/~avigad/Papers/bigo.pdf) (PDF). International Joint Conference on Automated
Reasoning. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-25984-8_27 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-3-540-25984-8
_27).
Black, Paul E. (11 March 2005). Black, Paul E. (ed.). "big-O notation" (https://xlinux.nist.gov/da
ds/HTML/bigOnotation.html). Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures. U.S. National
Institute of Standards and Technology. Retrieved December 16, 2006.
Black, Paul E. (17 December 2004). Black, Paul E. (ed.). "little-o notation" (https://xlinux.nist.go
v/dads/HTML/littleOnotation.html). Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures. U.S. National
Institute of Standards and Technology. Retrieved December 16, 2006.
Black, Paul E. (17 December 2004). Black, Paul E. (ed.). "Ω" (https://xlinux.nist.gov/dads/HTM
L/omegaCapital.html). Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures. U.S. National Institute of
Standards and Technology. Retrieved December 16, 2006.
Black, Paul E. (17 December 2004). Black, Paul E. (ed.). "ω" (https://xlinux.nist.gov/dads/HTM
L/omega.html). Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures. U.S. National Institute of
Standards and Technology. Retrieved December 16, 2006.
Black, Paul E. (17 December 2004). Black, Paul E. (ed.). "Θ" (https://xlinux.nist.gov/dads/HTM
L/theta.html). Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures. U.S. National Institute of Standards
and Technology. Retrieved December 16, 2006.

External links
Growth of sequences — OEIS (Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences) Wiki (http://oeis.or
g/wiki/Growth_of_sequences)
Introduction to Asymptotic Notations (https://classes.soe.ucsc.edu/cse102/Fall21/Handouts/Asy
mptoticGrowth.pdf)
Big-O Notation – What is it good for (http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=573138)
An example of Big O in accuracy of central divided difference scheme for first derivative (https://
autarkaw.org/2013/01/30/making-sense-of-the-big-oh/) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2
0181007223123/https://autarkaw.org/2013/01/30/making-sense-of-the-big-oh/) 2018-10-07 at
the Wayback Machine
A Gentle Introduction to Algorithm Complexity Analysis (https://discrete.gr/complexity/)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Big_O_notation&oldid=1282713105"