Knuth's Up-arrow Notation - Definition

Definition

The up-arrow notation is formally defined by

a\uparrow^n b= \left\{ \begin{matrix} a^b, & \mbox{if }n=1; \\ 1, & \mbox{if }b=0; \\ a\uparrow^{n-1}(a\uparrow^n(b-1)), & \mbox{otherwise} \end{matrix} \right.

for all integers with .

All up-arrow operators (including normal exponentiation, ) are right associative, i.e. evaluation is to take place from right to left in an expression that contains two or more such operators. For example, not ; for example
is not

There is good reason for the choice of this right-to-left order of evaluation. If we used left-to-right evaluation, then would equal, so that would not be an essentially new operation. Right associativity is also natural because we can rewrite the iterated arrow expression that appears in the expansion of as, so that all the s appear as left operands of arrow operators. This is significant since the arrow operators are not commutative.

Writing for the bth functional power of the function we have .

The definition could be extrapolated one step, starting with if n = 0, because exponentiation is repeated multiplication starting with 1. Extrapolating one step more, writing multiplication as repeated addition, is not as straightforward because multiplication is repeated addition starting with 0 instead of 1. "Extrapolating" again one step more, writing addition of n as repeated addition of 1, requires starting with the number a. Compare the definition of the hyper operator, where the starting values for addition and multiplication are also separately specified.

Read more about this topic:  Knuth's Up-arrow Notation

Famous quotes containing the word definition:

    “The physicians say, they are not materialists; but they are:MSpirit is matter reduced to an extreme thinness: O so thin!—But the definition of spiritual should be, that which is its own evidence. What notions do they attach to love! what to religion! One would not willingly pronounce these words in their hearing, and give them the occasion to profane them.”
    —Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)

    “... if, as women, we accept a philosophy of history that asserts that women are by definition assimilated into the male universal, that we can understand our past through a male lens—if we are unaware that women even have a history—we live our lives similarly unanchored, drifting in response to a veering wind of myth and bias.”
    —Adrienne Rich (b. 1929)

    “Beauty, like all other qualities presented to human experience, is relative; and the definition of it becomes unmeaning and useless in proportion to its abstractness. To define beauty not in the most abstract, but in the most concrete terms possible, not to find a universal formula for it, but the formula which expresses most adequately this or that special manifestation of it, is the aim of the true student of aesthetics.”
    —Walter Pater (1839–1894)