Metrics for tanhf (example 3.4)

analyze150.0ms (3.2%)

Algorithm

1×

Search

Probability	Valid	Unknown	Precondition	Infinite	Domain	Can't	Iter
0%	0%	100%	0%	0%	0%	0%	0
0%	0%	100%	0%	0%	0%	0%	1
0%	0%	100%	0%	0%	0%	0%	2
25%	25%	75%	0%	0%	0%	0%	3
37.5%	37.5%	62.5%	0%	0%	0%	0%	4
43.8%	43.7%	56.2%	0%	0%	0%	0%	5
46.9%	46.9%	53.1%	0%	0%	0%	0%	6
48.4%	48.4%	51.5%	0%	0%	0%	0%	7
49.2%	49.2%	50.8%	0%	0%	0%	0%	8
49.6%	49.6%	50.4%	0%	0%	0%	0%	9
49.8%	49.8%	50.2%	0%	0%	0%	0%	10
49.9%	49.9%	50.1%	0%	0%	0%	0%	11
50%	49.9%	50%	0%	0%	0%	0%	12

Compiler

Compiled 16 to 11 computations (31.3% saved)

sample4.0s (85.9%)

Results

1.1s	4528×	256	valid
2.2s	2157×	2048	valid
418.0ms	982×	1024	valid
235.0ms	517×	512	valid
61.0ms	72×	4096	valid

Bogosity

preprocess311.0ms (6.6%)

Algorithm

1×	egg-herbie

Rules

750×	`fma-def`
410×	`div-sub`
196×	`associate-/r*`
176×	`associate-/l*`
118×	`sub-neg`

FPErrors

Click to see full error table

Ground Truth	Example	Underpredictions	Example	Subexpression
79	-	0	-	`(-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x))`
66	-	2	(2.822840664407128e-161)	`(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x)) (sin.f64 x))`
0	-	0	-	`x`
0	-	0	-	`(cos.f64 x)`
0	-	0	-	`(sin.f64 x)`
0	-	0	-	`1`

Iterations

Useful iterations: 2 (0.0ms)

Iter	Nodes	Cost
0	17	60
1	44	60
2	69	56
3	143	56
4	326	56
5	734	56
6	1393	56
7	1777	56
8	1858	56
9	1935	56
10	1986	56
11	1998	56

Stop Event

1×

saturated

Calls

Call 1

Inputs
(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x)) (sin.f64 x))
(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x)) (sin.f64 x))
(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 (neg.f64 x))) (sin.f64 (neg.f64 x)))
(neg.f64 (/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 (neg.f64 x))) (sin.f64 (neg.f64 x))))

Outputs
(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x)) (sin.f64 x))
(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))
(tan.f64 (*.f64 x 1/2))
(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x)) (sin.f64 x))
(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))
(tan.f64 (*.f64 x 1/2))
(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 (neg.f64 x))) (sin.f64 (neg.f64 x)))
(tan.f64 (/.f64 (neg.f64 x) 2))
(tan.f64 (*.f64 -1/2 x))
(tan.f64 (*.f64 x -1/2))
(neg.f64 (/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 (neg.f64 x))) (sin.f64 (neg.f64 x))))
(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))
(tan.f64 (*.f64 x 1/2))

Symmetry

(negabs x)

Compiler

Compiled 46 to 26 computations (43.5% saved)

eval0.0ms (0%)

Compiler: Compiled 9 to 7 computations (22.2% saved)

prune1.0ms (0%)

Alt Table

Click to see full alt table

Status	Accuracy	Program
▶	100.0%	(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))
▶	100.0%	(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))

Compiler

Compiled 10 to 8 computations (20% saved)

localize28.0ms (0.6%)

Compiler: Compiled 11 to 8 computations (27.3% saved)

eval0.0ms (0%)

Compiler: Compiled 1 to 1 computations (0% saved)

prune1.0ms (0%)

Pruning

1 alts after pruning (0 fresh and 1 done)

	Kept	Total
New	0	0
Fresh	0	0
Picked	1	1
Done	0	0
Total	1	1

Accuracy

100.0%

Counts

1 → 1

Alt Table

Click to see full alt table

Status	Accuracy	Program
✓	100.0%	(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))

Compiler

Compiled 17 to 13 computations (23.5% saved)

regimes7.0ms (0.1%)

Accuracy

Total -32.2b remaining (-∞%)

Threshold costs -32.2b (-∞%)

Counts

2 → 1

Calls

Call 1

Inputs
(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))
(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x)) (sin.f64 x))

Outputs
(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))

Calls

2 calls:

3.0ms	(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x)) (sin.f64 x))
3.0ms	x

Results

Accuracy	Segments	Branch
100.0%	1	`x`
100.0%	1	`(/.f64 (-.f64 1 (cos.f64 x)) (sin.f64 x))`

Compiler

Compiled 22 to 16 computations (27.3% saved)

simplify2.0ms (0%)

Algorithm

1×	egg-herbie

Iterations

Useful iterations: 0 (0.0ms)

Iter	Nodes	Cost
0	9	14

Stop Event

1×	done
1×	saturated

Calls

Call 1

Inputs
(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))

Outputs
(tan.f64 (/.f64 x 2))

Compiler

Compiled 5 to 4 computations (20% saved)

soundness119.0ms (2.5%)

Rules

750×	`fma-def`
410×	`div-sub`
196×	`associate-/r*`
176×	`associate-/l*`
118×	`sub-neg`

Iterations

Useful iterations: 2 (0.0ms)

Iter	Nodes	Cost
0	17	60
1	44	60
2	69	56
3	143	56
4	326	56
5	734	56
6	1393	56
7	1777	56
8	1858	56
9	1935	56
10	1986	56
11	1998	56

Stop Event

1×

saturated

Compiler

Compiled 12 to 9 computations (25% saved)

end0.0ms (0%)

preprocess39.0ms (0.8%)

Remove: (negabs x)
Compiler: Compiled 56 to 44 computations (21.4% saved)

analyze150.0ms (3.2%)

sample4.0s (85.9%)

preprocess311.0ms (6.6%)

eval0.0ms (0%)

prune1.0ms (0%)

localize28.0ms (0.6%)

eval0.0ms (0%)

prune1.0ms (0%)

regimes7.0ms (0.1%)

simplify2.0ms (0%)

soundness119.0ms (2.5%)

end0.0ms (0%)

preprocess39.0ms (0.8%)

Profiling