inline void O0Algorithm() {}

那么这个呢:

void FindRandomInList(list l)
{
    while(1)
    {
        int rand = Random.next();
        if (l.contains(rand))
            return;
    }
}

随着列表大小的增加，程序的预期运行时间会减少。

正如已经指出的，除了null函数可能的例外，不可能有O(1/n)个函数，因为所花费的时间必须接近0。

当然，有一些算法，比如康拉德定义的算法，它们至少在某种意义上应该小于O(1)

def get_faster(list):
    how_long = 1/len(list)
    sleep(how_long)

If you want to investigate these algorithms, you should either define your own asymptotic measurement, or your own notion of time. For example, in the above algorithm, I could allow the use of a number of "free" operations a set amount of times. In the above algorithm, if I define t' by excluding the time for everything but the sleep, then t'=1/n, which is O(1/n). There are probably better examples, as the asymptotic behavior is trivial. In fact, I am sure that someone out there can come up with senses that give non-trivial results.

It may be possible to construct an algorithm that is O(1/n). One example would be a loop that iterates some multiple of f(n)-n times where f(n) is some function whose value is guaranteed to be greater than n and the limit of f(n)-n as n approaches infinity is zero. The calculation of f(n) would also need to be constant for all n. I do not know off hand what f(n) would look like or what application such an algorithm would have, in my opinion however such a function could exist but the resulting algorithm would have no purpose other than to prove the possibility of an algorithm with O(1/n).

好吧，我想了一下，也许有一个算法可以遵循这个一般形式:

你需要计算一个1000节点图的旅行商问题，但是，你也有一个你不能访问的节点列表。随着不可访问节点列表的增加，问题变得更容易解决。

我不懂数学，但这个概念似乎是寻找一个函数，需要更少的时间，你添加更多的输入?在这种情况下，怎么样:

def f( *args ): 
  if len(args)<1:
    args[1] = 10

当添加可选的第二个参数时，此函数会更快，因为否则必须赋值它。我意识到这不是一个方程，但维基百科页面说大o通常也应用于计算系统。