Wikipedia:Peer review/Ackermann function/archive1

Ackermann function
(moved from Village Pump at 2:52 EST by User:Pakaran)

Hi,

I added a table to that article. It was based on another table (which I link to) but it shouldn't be a copyvio because I just copied the numbers (and to some extent the format). I could have generated my own table, or typed in the values from scratch, in a bit more time. Is my editorial comment at the bottom of the table section appropriate? I guess I have a sense of awe towards the function that's proving quite hard to get rid of, and it shows in the article.

On another note - I mentioned in the talk page that NIST has their own version of the Ackermann function - which seems incompatible with ours, and which does not appear anywhere else on the web. Are they just plain wrong?

Thanks! -- Pakaran 04:46, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Update: I added a lot of content to the article, and I have been informed that there is no copyvio issue. I'd be interested in comments. -- Pakaran 06:47, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Just in case you are not aware of it Peer review is another place to ask for comments ... it seems to be on plenty of people's watchlists. (Probably not as many as the mighty VP though!) Pete 10:15, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * I'd already computed some of the numbers and put them on the talk page, based on the definition already in the article, so I doubt the numbers themselves could somehow in any way be copyrighted by some other site... &#922;&#963;&#965;&#960; Cyp  12:16, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Thanks Cyp. Yeah, I doubt that's any longer a concern.  I'm interested in re view of my comments on the asymptotic behavior of naive attempts to compute the function.  Thanks.  -- Pakaran 05:21, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)