Talk:Rader's FFT algorithm: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Add topic

Revision as of 08:18, 3 January 2021 edit Raysphere24 (talk \| contribs) 28 edits →Time complexity without zero-padding: new section ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 10:35, 23 May 2024 edit undo 2a02:1210:2657:d600:63b7:3ed2:bba4:60d3 (talk) →Time complexity without zero-padding: Reply Tag: Reply
(4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: {{WikiProject ~~Computing~~banner shell\|class=Start\| {{WikiProject Computing \|importance=Low \|science=y \|science-importance=Low \|software=y \|software-importance=Low}} {{~~Maths rating \|class=Start~~WikiProject Mathematics\|priority=Low ~~\|field=applied~~}} }} Hey, does anyone have a ___location for where this conference took place. The citation reads: Line 23 ⟶ 25: == Time complexity without zero-padding == Without zero-padding, the article states that the worst case requires O(N<sup>2</sup>) time. But each step of the recursion halves N, therefore isn't it still O(N log N) time? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Raysphere24\|Raysphere24]] ([[User talk:Raysphere24#top\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Raysphere24\|contribs]]) 08:18, 3 January 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> :Agree. [[Special:Contributions/128.54.13.249\|128.54.13.249]] ([[User talk:128.54.13.249\|talk]]) 22:14, 9 November 2023 (UTC) :Agree as well. I see no O(n<sup>2)</sup> runtime. [[Special:Contributions/2A02:1210:2657:D600:63B7:3ED2:BBA4:60D3\|2A02:1210:2657:D600:63B7:3ED2:BBA4:60D3]] ([[User talk:2A02:1210:2657:D600:63B7:3ED2:BBA4:60D3\|talk]]) 10:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)