uu-sml / sml-book-page

Page for the SML book
48 stars 16 forks source link

Infinite in theory, not infinite in practise? #66

Open HjalmarrSv opened 2 years ago

HjalmarrSv commented 2 years ago

April 30, 2021, p. 31, 6th row from bottom Please provide:

  1. Version (bottom left page)
  2. Page number
  3. Line/equation number

Describe the mistake Maybe I am on a personal mission against the overuse of the word "infinite". But I do not think there is an infinite number of numbers between any two numbers on a computer. In theory maybe you could argue that you have infinitely long real numbers, and by having two infinitely long numbers your problem becomes infinite. But in this world and on our computers problems are not infinite (unless you introduce something that is infinite (that does not exist in this world)), they are possibly intractable. Depending on the number of bits used for the real number the problem may even become tractable in practice, thus leading to tractable infinite problems!

Suggested change In this version you use infinite+ 19 times and intractable 0 times. I suggest you consider varying your terms, even if you disregard my reasoning. "Infinite in theory" could also work, even though intractable may be the better word.

Thank you for providing this book. I enjoy reading it, although I will have to jump the hurdles between one and nineteen times. This post reflects my personal opinion, which may not be widely shared.

andreas-lindholm commented 2 years ago

Hi, and thank you for your comment. I think I understand your point that "I do not think there is an infinite number of numbers between any two numbers on a computer", but that only applies when we discuss the "infinite" number of possible splits one can make in a decision tree in Example 2.6, and I agree that we could consider re-phrasing that.

Our other uses of the term "infinite" that I found are rather concerning the problem of something being unbounded, such as values growing without any bounds (which on a computer means, eventually, a numerical overflow) or (in particular in chapter 8) vectors being of infinte dimensiion (which, of course, is a theoretchical conecpt that can't be implemented explicitly, but that's the entire point of using kernels).

Please let me know if I have misunderstood your comment.