|
Members in Shoutbox
None.
Shoutbox Search
Shoutbox Commands
/w [name] > Whisper
/r > Reply to last whisper /me > Marks as action Shoutbox Information
Moderators may delete any and all shouts at will.
|
Global Shoutbox
Please log in to shout.
[2014-9-28. : 5:26 pm]  Moose -- This is because Gauss Jordan elimination can written as a series of matrix multiplications, that when done together, give you the inverse.[2014-9-28. : 5:21 pm]  MasterJohnny -- which is faster getting inverse of A^k and multiplying b or getting A^k and doing gauss elimination[2014-9-28. : 5:19 pm] MasterJohnny -- man I have to write matlab psuedocode for this problem and I still have no idea what im doing[2014-9-28. : 5:09 pm] Moose -- Er, the original matrix might have eigenvalue(s) OF zero, which would make the diagonal matrix singular  [2014-9-28. : 5:08 pm] Moose -- The diagonal might have zero eigenvalues, which would be a problem for invertibility[2014-9-28. : 5:01 pm] trgk -- http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/c/c/a/cca5bced8892fe27a2d4eb42d7d15f44.png[2014-9-28. : 5:00 pm] MasterJohnny -- Mini Moose 2707Mini Moose 2707 shouted: That has a link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coppersmith%E2%80%93Winograd_algorithm which is faster. That article mentions something faster developed in 2010. The problem is this wikipedia page doesnt tell me what the coppersmith winograd algorithm actually is[2014-9-28. : 4:57 pm] MasterJohnny -- trgktrgk shouted: For calculating A^k, use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigendecomposition_of_a_matrix does nonsymmetric imply that i can always get a diagonalizable matrix?[2014-9-28. : 4:56 pm] Moose -- Yeah, or e^A, which can be very useful for solving certain systems of differential equations[2014-9-28. : 4:55 pm]  jjf28 -- Mini Moose 2707Mini Moose 2707 shouted: Yeah, cosine of a matrix, everything you thought you knew was wrong I thought I knew everything I thought I knew was wrong[2014-9-28. : 4:52 pm] trgk -- A = Q T (Q^-1) . so A^k = Q (T^k) (Q^-1). Since T is diagonal matrix, it can be calculated very fast[2014-9-28. : 4:51 pm] trgk -- For calculating A^k, use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigendecomposition_of_a_matrix[2014-9-28. : 4:36 pm] Moose -- That has a link to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coppersmith%E2%80%93Winograd_algorithm which is faster. That article mentions something faster developed in 2010.[2014-9-28. : 4:26 pm] MasterJohnny -- my cs friend said that I could do http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strassen_algorithm to get A^k faster[2014-9-28. : 4:25 pm] MasterJohnny -- sigsaucysigsaucy shouted: either solve for A inverse, this might take longer but it will let you solve Ax =b quickly for multiple b easily So I would multiply A inverse k-1 times?[2014-9-28. : 4:22 pm] jjf28 -- should prolly use the stack trick to get that unit spawn correct... but it would slightly slow units under it[2014-9-28. : 4:20 pm] jjf28 -- Mini Moose 2707Mini Moose 2707 shouted: You could use the high ground built into locations themselves indeed, using locations med air/high air (whether you're over med/high ground) can help; chkdraft's "show tile elevations" can show you which is which. You can also make a pixel location over the flyer and see if you can spawn a unit that stays in said location to check for unwalkable area[2014-9-28. : 4:03 pm] Roy -- You could also find refurbished or used laptops that meet those requirements.[2014-9-28. : 2:49 pm] LoveLess -- JackJack shouted: http://devilesk.com/ is this the evildesk we all know and love to hate? Yes, he is an avid DOTA2 player.[2014-9-28. : 2:23 pm] FlameViper -- Does anyone know how to detect terrain? I want to order a flying unit to stop if it tries going over the wall.[2014-9-28. : 11:01 am] Generalpie -- JackJack shouted: http://devilesk.com/ is this the evildesk we all know and love to hate? Steam Group: "Mikelat's club of extraordinary cool people"[2014-9-28. : 7:57 am] Jack -- http://devilesk.com/ is this the evildesk we all know and love to hate?[2014-9-28. : 5:42 am] Excalibur -- http://www.staredit.net/topic/16571/ Made a thread for my newest project.[2014-9-28. : 5:00 am] jjf28 -- JackJack shouted: jjf28 lies, that's not the only reason and it's extremely difficult/impossible to get smaller with silicon pretty much, we have higher-power-processors ready to go if the cooling made financial sense; i'd call getting smaller parts a near-horizon problem rather than something holding us back right now[2014-9-28. : 4:56 am] Jack -- Heat and leakage are also a problem it's true, I should have mentioned that[2014-9-28. : 4:54 am] Jack -- jjf28jjf28 shouted: Jack lies, it's due to the power/heat wall lies, that's not the only reason and it's extremely difficult/impossible to get smaller with silicon[2014-9-28. : 4:41 am] jjf28 -- apparently someone did it: http://www.overclockers.com/how-to-build-a-refrigerator-cpu-cooler/[2014-9-28. : 4:41 am] jjf28 --  I joking thought "why don't we make the processor air-tight and have a mini-fridge around it[2014-9-28. : 4:28 am] jjf28 -- if processing had only doubled two more times we'd have workable high-density 3d libraries for affordable laptops[2014-9-28. : 4:16 am] jjf28 -- JackJack shouted: Desktop processing power has plateaued, due in part to the difficulty of making smaller silicon dies. While there are still advances to be made in the areas of superconductors and quantum computing, many of the speed increases have come from parallel processing and CPU optimizations in the past few years, rather than a simple increase of the number of transistors on a CPU. lies, it's due to the power/heat wall |
moore's law