math.square on complex, real part

Percentage Accurate: 93.7% → 95.8%
Time: 1.9s
Alternatives: 4
Speedup: 0.6×

Specification

?
\[\begin{array}{l} \\ re \cdot re - im \cdot im \end{array} \]
(FPCore re_sqr (re im) :precision binary64 (- (* re re) (* im im)))
double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	return (re * re) - (im * im);
}
real(8) function re_sqr(re, im)
    real(8), intent (in) :: re
    real(8), intent (in) :: im
    re_sqr = (re * re) - (im * im)
end function
public static double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	return (re * re) - (im * im);
}
def re_sqr(re, im):
	return (re * re) - (im * im)
function re_sqr(re, im)
	return Float64(Float64(re * re) - Float64(im * im))
end
function tmp = re_sqr(re, im)
	tmp = (re * re) - (im * im);
end
re$95$sqr[re_, im_] := N[(N[(re * re), $MachinePrecision] - N[(im * im), $MachinePrecision]), $MachinePrecision]
\begin{array}{l}

\\
re \cdot re - im \cdot im
\end{array}

Sampling outcomes in binary64 precision:

Local Percentage Accuracy vs ?

The average percentage accuracy by input value. Horizontal axis shows value of an input variable; the variable is choosen in the title. Vertical axis is accuracy; higher is better. Red represent the original program, while blue represents Herbie's suggestion. These can be toggled with buttons below the plot. The line is an average while dots represent individual samples.

Accuracy vs Speed?

Herbie found 4 alternatives:

AlternativeAccuracySpeedup
The accuracy (vertical axis) and speed (horizontal axis) of each alternatives. Up and to the right is better. The red square shows the initial program, and each blue circle shows an alternative.The line shows the best available speed-accuracy tradeoffs.

Initial Program: 93.7% accurate, 1.0× speedup?

\[\begin{array}{l} \\ re \cdot re - im \cdot im \end{array} \]
(FPCore re_sqr (re im) :precision binary64 (- (* re re) (* im im)))
double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	return (re * re) - (im * im);
}
real(8) function re_sqr(re, im)
    real(8), intent (in) :: re
    real(8), intent (in) :: im
    re_sqr = (re * re) - (im * im)
end function
public static double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	return (re * re) - (im * im);
}
def re_sqr(re, im):
	return (re * re) - (im * im)
function re_sqr(re, im)
	return Float64(Float64(re * re) - Float64(im * im))
end
function tmp = re_sqr(re, im)
	tmp = (re * re) - (im * im);
end
re$95$sqr[re_, im_] := N[(N[(re * re), $MachinePrecision] - N[(im * im), $MachinePrecision]), $MachinePrecision]
\begin{array}{l}

\\
re \cdot re - im \cdot im
\end{array}

Alternative 1: 95.8% accurate, 0.6× speedup?

\[\begin{array}{l} \\ \begin{array}{l} \mathbf{if}\;re \cdot re \leq 1.2 \cdot 10^{+249}:\\ \;\;\;\;re \cdot re - im \cdot im\\ \mathbf{else}:\\ \;\;\;\;re \cdot re\\ \end{array} \end{array} \]
(FPCore re_sqr (re im)
 :precision binary64
 (if (<= (* re re) 1.2e+249) (- (* re re) (* im im)) (* re re)))
double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	double tmp;
	if ((re * re) <= 1.2e+249) {
		tmp = (re * re) - (im * im);
	} else {
		tmp = re * re;
	}
	return tmp;
}
real(8) function re_sqr(re, im)
    real(8), intent (in) :: re
    real(8), intent (in) :: im
    real(8) :: tmp
    if ((re * re) <= 1.2d+249) then
        tmp = (re * re) - (im * im)
    else
        tmp = re * re
    end if
    re_sqr = tmp
end function
public static double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	double tmp;
	if ((re * re) <= 1.2e+249) {
		tmp = (re * re) - (im * im);
	} else {
		tmp = re * re;
	}
	return tmp;
}
def re_sqr(re, im):
	tmp = 0
	if (re * re) <= 1.2e+249:
		tmp = (re * re) - (im * im)
	else:
		tmp = re * re
	return tmp
function re_sqr(re, im)
	tmp = 0.0
	if (Float64(re * re) <= 1.2e+249)
		tmp = Float64(Float64(re * re) - Float64(im * im));
	else
		tmp = Float64(re * re);
	end
	return tmp
end
function tmp_2 = re_sqr(re, im)
	tmp = 0.0;
	if ((re * re) <= 1.2e+249)
		tmp = (re * re) - (im * im);
	else
		tmp = re * re;
	end
	tmp_2 = tmp;
end
re$95$sqr[re_, im_] := If[LessEqual[N[(re * re), $MachinePrecision], 1.2e+249], N[(N[(re * re), $MachinePrecision] - N[(im * im), $MachinePrecision]), $MachinePrecision], N[(re * re), $MachinePrecision]]
\begin{array}{l}

\\
\begin{array}{l}
\mathbf{if}\;re \cdot re \leq 1.2 \cdot 10^{+249}:\\
\;\;\;\;re \cdot re - im \cdot im\\

\mathbf{else}:\\
\;\;\;\;re \cdot re\\


\end{array}
\end{array}
Derivation
  1. Split input into 2 regimes
  2. if (*.f64 re re) < 1.2e249

    1. Initial program 100.0%

      \[re \cdot re - im \cdot im \]

    if 1.2e249 < (*.f64 re re)

    1. Initial program 84.0%

      \[re \cdot re - im \cdot im \]
    2. Taylor expanded in re around inf 93.3%

      \[\leadsto \color{blue}{{re}^{2}} \]
    3. Step-by-step derivation
      1. unpow293.3%

        \[\leadsto \color{blue}{re \cdot re} \]
    4. Simplified93.3%

      \[\leadsto \color{blue}{re \cdot re} \]
  3. Recombined 2 regimes into one program.
  4. Final simplification98.0%

    \[\leadsto \begin{array}{l} \mathbf{if}\;re \cdot re \leq 1.2 \cdot 10^{+249}:\\ \;\;\;\;re \cdot re - im \cdot im\\ \mathbf{else}:\\ \;\;\;\;re \cdot re\\ \end{array} \]

Alternative 2: 96.7% accurate, 0.1× speedup?

\[\begin{array}{l} \\ \mathsf{fma}\left(re, re, im \cdot \left(-im\right)\right) \end{array} \]
(FPCore re_sqr (re im) :precision binary64 (fma re re (* im (- im))))
double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	return fma(re, re, (im * -im));
}
function re_sqr(re, im)
	return fma(re, re, Float64(im * Float64(-im)))
end
re$95$sqr[re_, im_] := N[(re * re + N[(im * (-im)), $MachinePrecision]), $MachinePrecision]
\begin{array}{l}

\\
\mathsf{fma}\left(re, re, im \cdot \left(-im\right)\right)
\end{array}
Derivation
  1. Initial program 95.3%

    \[re \cdot re - im \cdot im \]
  2. Step-by-step derivation
    1. fma-neg97.3%

      \[\leadsto \color{blue}{\mathsf{fma}\left(re, re, -im \cdot im\right)} \]
    2. distribute-rgt-neg-in97.3%

      \[\leadsto \mathsf{fma}\left(re, re, \color{blue}{im \cdot \left(-im\right)}\right) \]
  3. Simplified97.3%

    \[\leadsto \color{blue}{\mathsf{fma}\left(re, re, im \cdot \left(-im\right)\right)} \]
  4. Final simplification97.3%

    \[\leadsto \mathsf{fma}\left(re, re, im \cdot \left(-im\right)\right) \]

Alternative 3: 64.6% accurate, 1.2× speedup?

\[\begin{array}{l} \\ \begin{array}{l} \mathbf{if}\;im \leq 4.4 \cdot 10^{+70}:\\ \;\;\;\;re \cdot re\\ \mathbf{else}:\\ \;\;\;\;im \cdot \left(-im\right)\\ \end{array} \end{array} \]
(FPCore re_sqr (re im)
 :precision binary64
 (if (<= im 4.4e+70) (* re re) (* im (- im))))
double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	double tmp;
	if (im <= 4.4e+70) {
		tmp = re * re;
	} else {
		tmp = im * -im;
	}
	return tmp;
}
real(8) function re_sqr(re, im)
    real(8), intent (in) :: re
    real(8), intent (in) :: im
    real(8) :: tmp
    if (im <= 4.4d+70) then
        tmp = re * re
    else
        tmp = im * -im
    end if
    re_sqr = tmp
end function
public static double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	double tmp;
	if (im <= 4.4e+70) {
		tmp = re * re;
	} else {
		tmp = im * -im;
	}
	return tmp;
}
def re_sqr(re, im):
	tmp = 0
	if im <= 4.4e+70:
		tmp = re * re
	else:
		tmp = im * -im
	return tmp
function re_sqr(re, im)
	tmp = 0.0
	if (im <= 4.4e+70)
		tmp = Float64(re * re);
	else
		tmp = Float64(im * Float64(-im));
	end
	return tmp
end
function tmp_2 = re_sqr(re, im)
	tmp = 0.0;
	if (im <= 4.4e+70)
		tmp = re * re;
	else
		tmp = im * -im;
	end
	tmp_2 = tmp;
end
re$95$sqr[re_, im_] := If[LessEqual[im, 4.4e+70], N[(re * re), $MachinePrecision], N[(im * (-im)), $MachinePrecision]]
\begin{array}{l}

\\
\begin{array}{l}
\mathbf{if}\;im \leq 4.4 \cdot 10^{+70}:\\
\;\;\;\;re \cdot re\\

\mathbf{else}:\\
\;\;\;\;im \cdot \left(-im\right)\\


\end{array}
\end{array}
Derivation
  1. Split input into 2 regimes
  2. if im < 4.40000000000000001e70

    1. Initial program 97.1%

      \[re \cdot re - im \cdot im \]
    2. Taylor expanded in re around inf 67.7%

      \[\leadsto \color{blue}{{re}^{2}} \]
    3. Step-by-step derivation
      1. unpow267.7%

        \[\leadsto \color{blue}{re \cdot re} \]
    4. Simplified67.7%

      \[\leadsto \color{blue}{re \cdot re} \]

    if 4.40000000000000001e70 < im

    1. Initial program 87.8%

      \[re \cdot re - im \cdot im \]
    2. Taylor expanded in re around 0 79.6%

      \[\leadsto \color{blue}{-1 \cdot {im}^{2}} \]
    3. Step-by-step derivation
      1. unpow279.6%

        \[\leadsto -1 \cdot \color{blue}{\left(im \cdot im\right)} \]
      2. mul-1-neg79.6%

        \[\leadsto \color{blue}{-im \cdot im} \]
      3. distribute-rgt-neg-in79.6%

        \[\leadsto \color{blue}{im \cdot \left(-im\right)} \]
    4. Simplified79.6%

      \[\leadsto \color{blue}{im \cdot \left(-im\right)} \]
  3. Recombined 2 regimes into one program.
  4. Final simplification70.0%

    \[\leadsto \begin{array}{l} \mathbf{if}\;im \leq 4.4 \cdot 10^{+70}:\\ \;\;\;\;re \cdot re\\ \mathbf{else}:\\ \;\;\;\;im \cdot \left(-im\right)\\ \end{array} \]

Alternative 4: 53.4% accurate, 2.3× speedup?

\[\begin{array}{l} \\ re \cdot re \end{array} \]
(FPCore re_sqr (re im) :precision binary64 (* re re))
double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	return re * re;
}
real(8) function re_sqr(re, im)
    real(8), intent (in) :: re
    real(8), intent (in) :: im
    re_sqr = re * re
end function
public static double re_sqr(double re, double im) {
	return re * re;
}
def re_sqr(re, im):
	return re * re
function re_sqr(re, im)
	return Float64(re * re)
end
function tmp = re_sqr(re, im)
	tmp = re * re;
end
re$95$sqr[re_, im_] := N[(re * re), $MachinePrecision]
\begin{array}{l}

\\
re \cdot re
\end{array}
Derivation
  1. Initial program 95.3%

    \[re \cdot re - im \cdot im \]
  2. Taylor expanded in re around inf 58.8%

    \[\leadsto \color{blue}{{re}^{2}} \]
  3. Step-by-step derivation
    1. unpow258.8%

      \[\leadsto \color{blue}{re \cdot re} \]
  4. Simplified58.8%

    \[\leadsto \color{blue}{re \cdot re} \]
  5. Final simplification58.8%

    \[\leadsto re \cdot re \]

Reproduce

?
herbie shell --seed 2023201 
(FPCore re_sqr (re im)
  :name "math.square on complex, real part"
  :precision binary64
  (- (* re re) (* im im)))