Please check wether the definition is good. My source isn't a very reliable one (random google search, namely [1]). I hope it's ok, however--it looks enough similarly to the Ackermann function to me to think it grows fast, as it should.

Is the table of values right?

edit

I have an assignment for entry level Computer Science which is to implement the Sudan function recursively. I was trying to find some sample values to see if I had implemented it correctly, so I came to the wikipedia article. My program was not working- or so I thought. The table in the article is correct if you change the third condition's second argument to F(x, y) + y-----leaving out the plus 1. Can anyone more skilled speak to this?

137.54.8.99 (talk) 21:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Follow up- I read it wrong. Article is right.


137.54.8.99 (talk) 21:43, 15 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

What is exactly the Sudan function ?

edit

The article does not say what the Sudan function exactly is, as it defines a sequence   of functions.

Perhaps it should be more appropriate to write the function   whith three arguments. Pierre de Lyon 11:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Would that make the definition:
 
 
 
or shortened:
 
 
 
? - uackor 20:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
This is exactly what I meant. By the way, I prefer the first definition which refers more to its inductive definition and makes a difference between the cases   and  . Pierre de Lyon 17:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

The function here doesn't match Sudan's paper

edit

I checked both the 1979 article and the 1927 paper, and both of them describe Sudan's function as a function that uses transfinite recursion as follows:

 
 

where

 
 .

I don't understand the functions in the paper well enough at the moment to interpret them. The source linked above attributes the function as given to MR 82k:03061 but I can't interpret this identifier. Arcorann (talk) 09:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)Reply