Talk:Computational complexity of matrix multiplication
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Merge from Matrix multiplication algorithm
I propose merging Matrix multiplication algorithm into Computational complexity of matrix multiplication. I think the content in Matrix multiplication algorithm can easily be explained in the context of Computational complexity of matrix multiplication, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Computational complexity of matrix multiplication.129.177.124.226 (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
- I think this might be a good idea. From my perspective, the theoretical computer science question of sub-cubic algorithms is a topic of interest meriting its own article, with questions of distributed algorithms and cache behavior being more secondary. However, I think this might not be a consensus belief, which is why I separated sub-cubic algorithms into its own article Computational complexity of matrix multiplication rather than restructuring Matrix multiplication algorithm. In any case, a merge is appropriate if having both articles seems redundant. Fawly (talk) 19:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose: Each article is already quite long and complex, and merging them into one just makes reading them that much more tedious. Wikipedia is not a collection of review articles of unbounded length, building on an assumption that the reader has the leisure time, patience and mental fortitude to plow through a long article. Let each article say what it needs to say, succinctly. If two articles have overlapping subject matter, that's OK; the minority of readers who need both can go ahead and read both. Similar remarks for article editors and maintainers: the burden of tracking two smaller articles is lower than the burden of maintaining one large article in a coherent, well-organized state. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 18:34, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
- Closing, given the uncontested objection with stale discussion. Klbrain (talk) 08:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Maximum Matrix Efficiency Constant
/It seems like there is a limiting value to how efficiently two matrices can be multiplied by each other. I am wondering if this is a mathematical constant, similar to how e is the limit of the sum of x^n/n! infinite series. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- There is a limiting value (typically denoted ω in the literature) but my understanding is that many researchers think or hope that ω = 2, making this a somewhat uninteresting mathematical constant to name. Fawly (talk) 07:40, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
AlphaTensor
Are we going to add the latest scientific result obtained by Google deepmind? 161.81.69.23 (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- It's probably sufficiently notable, but it has no direct implications on the matrix multiplication exponent. There's currently no section about matrix multiplication algorithms in various bases, which would be a good place to put it. Fawly (talk) 04:28, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Feasible matrix multiplication, vs galactic algorithms
The article contained nothing about galactic size algorithms and that there are also available usable ones. I added sentence about it, but is was (not) corrected, but changed to:
"On the opposite, above Strassen's algorithm of 1969, and Pan's algorithm of 1978, whose respective exponents are slightly above and below 2.78 have constant coefficients that make them feasible."
Above sentence in its very language layer does not make a sense at all. Also scientifically does not.
I AM RISING IT, BECAUSE MR D.LAZARD CHANGED MY INITIAL, SENSIBLE VERSION, TO NON-SENSE. AND AT MY PERSONAL SITE MR D.LAZARD WRITES THAT IT SHOULD BE DELETED.
To repeat what D Lazard wrote: "above and below 2.78 have constant coefficients that make them feasible.". What does it mean ???? Thus I suggest Mr Lazard not insinuate to delete my personal page. It should be augmented, ok. Jerzy.Respondek (talk) 10:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC)