MHB Proving $T(n)=O(n^2 \lg^2 n)$ Using Recurrence Relation

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that the recurrence relation $T(n) = 4 T(n/2) + n^2 \lg n$ is bounded by $O(n^2 \lg^2 n)$. The method involves assuming $T(k) \leq c k^2 \lg^2 k$ for all $k < n$ and deriving a condition for $c$. The calculations show that for the relation to hold, $c$ must be greater than or equal to 1/2. Participants confirm that the approach and calculations are correct, validating the proof strategy. The conversation concludes with affirmation of the method's correctness.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
3,741
0
Hello! (Wave)

I want to prove that $T(n)=4 T \left ( \frac{n}{2}\right )+n^2 \lg n=O(n^2 \lg^2 n)$,where $T(n)$ is constant for $n \leq 8$, using the following method:

"We choose a specific function $f(n)$ and we try to show that for an appropriate $c>0$ and an appropriate $n_0 \in \mathbb{N}$, it stands that $T(n) \leq c f(n)$.
We suppose that $T(k) \leq c f(k), \forall k<n$ and we try to show that it stands for $n$."

That's what I have tried:

We suppose that :




So, the relation stands $\forall c \geq \frac{1}{2}$.

Is it right or have I done something wrong? (Thinking)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
evinda said:
Hello! (Wave)

I want to prove that $T(n)=4 T \left ( \frac{n}{2}\right )+n^2 \lg n=O(n^2 \lg^2 n)$,where $T(n)$ is constant for $n \leq 8$, using the following method:

"We choose a specific function $f(n)$ and we try to show that for an appropriate $c>0$ and an appropriate $n_0 \in \mathbb{N}$, it stands that $T(n) \leq c f(n)$.
We suppose that $T(k) \leq c f(k), \forall k<n$ and we try to show that it stands for $n$."

That's what I have tried:

We suppose that :
$$T(k) \leq c k^2 \lg^2 k, \forall k<n$$

$$T(n)=4 T \left ( \frac{n}{2}\right )+n^2 \lg n \leq 4c \left ( \frac{n}{2}\right )^2 \lg^2 \left ( \frac{n}{2}\right )+n^2 \lg n=cn^2 (\lg n-1)^2+n^2 \lg n=cn^2(\lg^2 n-2 \lg n+1)+n^2 \lg n \Rightarrow c \geq \frac{-\lg n}{1-2 \lg n} \to \frac{1}{2}$$

So, the relation stands $\forall c \geq \frac{1}{2}$.

Is it right or have I done something wrong? (Thinking)

Hi! (Smile)

It is right! (Nod)
 
I like Serena said:
Hi! (Smile)

It is right! (Nod)

Nice! Thank you! (Clapping)
 
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. But this one involves probability, known as the Monty Hall Problem. Please see any number of YouTube videos on this for an explanation, I'll leave it to them to explain it. I question the predicate of all those who answer this...