haskell / haskell/math-functions
Contradiction in comparison of summation algorithms?
- Dominant language
- Haskell
- Stars
- 45
- Forks
- 32
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
In the Haddocks for Numeric.Sum, under the Kahan sum, it says
> This summation method is included for completeness. Its use is not recommended. In practice, KBNSum is both 30% faster and more accurate.
But under KBN sum, it says:
> Kahan-Babuška-Neumaier summation. This is a little more computationally costly than plain Kahan summation, but is always at least as accurate.
These statements seem to contradict each other---the first says that KBN sum is 30% faster than Kahan, but the second says that KBN is more costly (presumably in time, but maybe it means something else) than Kahan.
Am I interpreting this correctly?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
Assessment
This issue has not been assessed yet.