claimroutine
Axis exposure costs via chunk swaps
Exposing and restoring axes costs via chunk swaps
bounds data movement for linewise algorithms
Statement (paper)
Under the stated assumptions (, , the array kept in the full padded box of entries, each entry occupying bits), each adjacent interchange of the -bit or -bit address fields of two axes costs , using Lemma for equal widths and, for unequal widths, an interchange of equal-width pieces together with a single bit move via Lemma . Exposing and restoring one axis needs adjacent interchanges, so all axes need in total; these are exact permutations of the padded box and change neither norms nor errors.
In plain English
When each with and the array is kept in the padded box of entries of bits, swapping the address fields of two adjacent axes costs . Exposing and restoring every axis takes such swaps per axis, so in total, and these are exact permutations that change neither norms nor errors.
Why it's here
This is the cost accounting for the data movement in the parent lemma: the linewise one-dimensional algorithms need each axis made contiguous, and this bounds that rearrangement. Equal-width fields are swapped with the chunk-swap lemma. When widths differ by one bit ( versus ), an equal-width swap plus one bit move from the elementary-streams lemma suffices, giving the factor from swaps for each of the axes.
Classified routine:
Direct cost bookkeeping from the paper's chunk-swap lemma and elementary-streams lemma. It counts O(d) adjacent address-field interchanges per axis, in the style of standard Turing-machine transposition and data-rearrangement accounting (as in Harvey–van der Hoeven multidimensional FFT arguments).
Uses
Used by
Nothing in the paper
Sources
PaperOpen
- Section
- §8.2 Growing dimension and the padded array
- Page
- —
- Label
—- Line
sections/07-resampling.tex:380
Leannot aligned
Phase 2 aligns this node to a Lean declaration.