<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Improving the numerical stability of fast matrix multiplication · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1507.00687/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1507.00687/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Improving the numerical stability of fast matrix multiplication — mentioned by HappyPanacea</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44009873</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1507.00687:44009873</guid><pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2025 21:15:25 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes see this: https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.00687 . There is also this answer ( https://mathoverflow.net/a/421380 ) in MathOverflow which state that you can&amp;#x27;t do better than cubic time if you want strong form of numerical stability.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1507.00687/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.NA</category></item></channel></rss>
