Re: 'monotonic increasing'
Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com> Fri, 17 February 2006 18:41 UTC
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1FAAYI-0003S0-5Y; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:41:58 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1FAAYG-0003Qo-JO for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:41:56 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA20651 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:40:08 -0500 (EST)
Received: from av8-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net ([81.228.9.184]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FAAmg-0001HI-B8 for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:56:54 -0500
Received: by av8-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id AB88E37F16; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:41:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net [81.228.9.102]) by av8-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8867A37E44; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:41:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (81-224-201-50-no45.tbcn.telia.com [81.224.201.50]) by smtp3-2-sn3.vrr.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E10637E5C; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:41:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <henrik@levkowetz.com>) id 1FAAY1-0007UR-Tz; Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:41:41 +0100
Message-ID: <43F618E4.6050207@levkowetz.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:41:40 +0100
From: Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Macintosh/20051201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ken Raeburn <raeburn@MIT.EDU>
References: <200601301716.JAA16888@gra.isi.edu> <002501c628af$62188600$0601a8c0@pc6> <014601c633dd$82948bc0$0601a8c0@pc6> <32B27366-3D49-433F-8ABE-B54453C1E9C9@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <32B27366-3D49-433F-8ABE-B54453C1E9C9@mit.edu>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: henrik@levkowetz.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shiraz.levkowetz.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e5ba305d0e64821bf3d8bc5d3bb07228
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: 'monotonic increasing'
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Ken, on 2006-02-17 18:46 Ken Raeburn said the following: > On Feb 17, 2006, at 11:14, Tom.Petch wrote: >> Elsewhere - dictionaries, encyclopaedia, text books - I see it >> defined so that when applied to a sequence of numbers, then each >> number is not >> less than its predecessor, so that > > That's "non-decreasing". As far as I've ever heard (math classes as > well as CS), a monotonic increasing sequence is one where each > element is strictly greater than the previous element. Tom's definition is also correct. A "strictly monotonically increasing sequence" has each term larger than its predecessor, but a "monotonically increasing sequence" in most definitions has each term equal to or larger than its predecessor. However in some contexts "monotonically increasing" seems to be synonymous with "strictly monotonically increasing", conforming to your definition. This is both what I remember from studies a long time ago, and what seems to be indicated in the online references I checked. As to IETF usage, I would applaud us using the same definitions as the rest of the world. Henrik _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- RE: IETF65 hotel location Ed Juskevicius
- Re: IETF65 hotel location David Kessens
- IETF65 hotel location Pekka Savola
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Pekka Savola
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Joel Jaeggli
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Dave Crocker
- Re: IETF65 hotel location John Levine
- RE: IETF65 hotel location Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Dave Crocker
- Re: IETF65 hotel location John Levine
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Michael Thomas
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Spencer Dawkins
- RE: IETF65 hotel location Robin Uyeshiro
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Jeffrey Hutzelman
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Marshall Eubanks
- RE: IETF65 hotel location David B Harrington
- RE: IETF65 hotel location Jeffrey Hutzelman
- Re: IETF65 hotel location lconroy
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Ole Jacobsen
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Dave Crocker
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Marshall Eubanks
- RE: IETF65 hotel location Gray, Eric
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Bob Braden
- Re: IETF65 hotel location John Levine
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Dave Crocker
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Daniel Senie
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Joel Jaeggli
- Re: IETF65 hotel location JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Keith Moore
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Tom.Petch
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Tom.Petch
- 'monotonic increasing' Tom.Petch
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Ken Raeburn
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Frank Ellermann
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Elwyn Davies
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Francis Dupont
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Elwyn Davies
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Tom.Petch
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Ken Raeburn
- Re: 'monotonic increasing' Joe Touch
- Re: IETF65 hotel location Stephen Sprunk