For the first recurrence relation, the master theorem compares with . Since , the recursive leaves dominate and the answer is . More explicitly, the work at depth is , a growing geometric series that stops at depth , where its sum has that order.
For the second recurrence relation, each step subtracts two and adds one until reaching a base case. For integral there are steps, so and the answer is .
The third set of printed requirements is inconsistent. The specified base values and its recurrence relation give identically, as strong induction immediately verifies: . In particular , while the extra condition demands . Thus no function satisfies all the printed conditions. Dropping that extra inequality gives .
The likely intended growth calculation can nevertheless be made precise, without treating it as a solution of the contradictory data. On dyadic arguments put . Its equation has the general formbecause has characteristic equation . The printed values force . With suitably different initial values, the condition for arbitrarily large instead requires , hence and , or . That last order describes corrected initial data, not the paper as printed. All three bullets belong to this single marked part.
Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.