Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
Comparison between the previous algorithm [22] (refered as reference) and the proposed algorithm (refered as perceptual).
Similar(59)
Comparison with the previous algorithm shows a definite improvement.
The previous algorithm is clearly O(n).
The modification from the previous algorithm reviewed in the previous section is the inclusion of a step size s.
Although the performance of the algorithm developed in [15] is not as good as that of the previous algorithms, it nevertheless provides an excellent trade-off between performance level and computational complexity.
The previous algorithms adopt local search algorithms to minimize the structure distance between designed and target structures, and do not use a free energy as an OF.
Therefore, we design the proposed algorithm to overcome the defects in the previous algorithms.
Some of the previous algorithms obtain alphabet independent time complexities, for example the algorithms in [ 9] and [ 2].
This could be due to the search algorithms and objective function (OF) used in the previous algorithms.
The main difference between the previous two algorithms is that a separate time line for each individual random walker is determined.
Our algorithm can substantially decrease both the execution time and maximum memory usage in comparison to the two previous algorithms.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com