where the symbol f'l denotes an A N D operation and the symbol F U R T H E R REMARKS ON REDU

• denotes a multiplication operation. TRUNCATION ERRORS

(2) The result of an OR operation w i t h any number of Boolean
variables is the same as the (arithmetic) addition of tile x, y, z R e c e n t l y Jack M. Wolfe [1] proposed the use o f
integer variables after the following t e s t is made: accumulators to evaluate a sum of the form S =
(a) If the sum is equal to zero, t h e result is correct; when N is large and all the y's are of rougMy the s a m (
(b) If the sum is larger thart zero, t h e answer is a 1; i.e. magnitude. His intention was to alleviate tile accumula~tion 0/
rounding or t r u n c a t i o n errors which otherwise occurs wlmn S i~
x+y+z= A U B U C ifx+y+ z = 0 evaluated in the straightforward way illustrated by t h e followbv, !
(2) iFoRTtRAN program.
x+y+ z = 1 if ( x - F y + z) ~ 1
1 S = 0.0
where the symbol O denotes an OR (}peration and the symbol 2 D O 4 I = 1, N
-{- denotes an addition operation. 3 Y[ . . . .
(3) The result of a NOT operation with a Bo{}lean variable is 4 S=S+Y[
the same as subtracting an integer variable x from 1; i.e. 5 ....

i = (1 -- x) (3) The rounding or truncation in statement 4 could c o n t r i b u t e to a

loss of almost log~o N significant decimals in S. 2}his w o u k t be
because if A = x = l, t h e n A = 1 -- 1 = 0 ; a n d i f A = x = 0,
important in those cases where the values of YI c o m p u t e d in
then /[ = I -- 0 = I .
s t a t e m e n t 3 were correct to nearly full machine p r e c i s i o n ; ether.
The FOUTm~N program in Figure 1 illustrates the method pre-
wise t h e uncertainty in tile Yl's would swamp any a d d i t i o n a l !{
sented. It simulates the logic of a full-adder as described by the
error introduced in s t a t e m e n t 4.
folh}wing two Boolean flmctions: ii
Of course, the simplest and fastest way to prevent s u c h figure.
.L = K1K.., + K~Ka + K2Ka (4) loss is to accumulate S to double-precision. For e x ~ m p I e , ia
FOn'rRAN IV program it would suffice to precede st,'~teinent 1
M = L(K, + K~ + Ka) + K~K~KKa (5)
above by tile T Y P E s t a t e m e n t DOUBLE P R E C I S I O N S •
where K~ , K.a and Ka are the two i n p u t bits attd previous carry The convenient accessibility of double-precision in m a n y Fol~Taax
to be added, L is the output carry, and M is the output sum. and some ALGOL compilers indicates that d o u b l e - p r e c i s i o n will
htteger variables were chosen for compatibility with the FOEn'R~N soon be universally acceptable as a substitute for i n g e n u i t y iT,
language. the solution of muncrieal problems.
In the meantime, programmers without easy access t o dou[
precision arithmetic may be able to simulate it in t h e p r o g r
E EXAMPLE OF BQOLEAN S I M U L A T I O N above by a method far simpler than Wolfe's, p r o v i d e d t h e y
L S I M U L A T | O N (IF A F U L L - A D I I E R
DIMENSION K(31 usit~g one of the electronic computers which n o r m a l i z e floati
C INITIAL. I / E IHE INPUT TRUTtt TABLE r 0 ZERO
[10 1{} 1 = 1 , 3
point sums before rounding or truncating them. A m o n g s~
I0 K{I};O machines are, for ext~mple, tile I,B.M. 704, 709, 7090, 7094, 7(
L { ) ~ R I V ETHE [RtJIH rABLE FOR THE SUM Mt AN[) THE CARRY L, 7044 and 360 (short word arithmetic).
I}f] 110 I=1,8
L : KII)'KI2I~KII)*KI3}~KI2ImE{3) T h e trick to be described below does not work o n roach'
ITIL} 2(},~0,20
20 L = 1
such as the I.B.M. 650, 1620, Univac 1l(t7 and the C o n t r o l I
30 I.I=K[I}+KI2)~K(3} 3600 which round or truncate floating-point sums t o s i n g l e
1FILl) 60,50,40
40 tl=l
cision before normalizing them.
50 ~ = (I-LI.LI + KIII~RIgI~K(3) In the following program $2 is an estimate of the e r r o r caused
IF(R) 60,T0,60
60 M = 1
when S = T was last rounded or truncated, and is u s e d i n state ~
tO PRINT T S , K I 3 I , K I 2 I , K I I I , M , L ment 13 to compensate for t h a t error. The p a r e n t h e s e s i n state-
C GENERATETHE NEXT INPUT C O M B I N A I I ( } N merit 23 must not be omitted; they cause tile d i f f e r e n c e (S--T)
KI3):KII)*K(2Ii(I-K(3)) ~ II-K(1)'KI2I}~KII)
I F ( R I 3 } ) 80,90,g0 to be evaluated first and hence, in most e~ses, w i t h o u t e r r o r be-
80 KI3}=l
90 K(2} =KII)~II-K(2}} + {I-KIII|~K{2}
cause the difference is normalized before it is rounded o r t r u n c a t e d .
I F I K ( 2 ) ) TO0,110,100
tO0 K(2)=l 1 S=0.0
IiO K(II=(I-K[I)) s2 = o.o
75 FORMAT(10X,I3,I3,I3,6X,I3,13)
PAUSE
2 DO4I = I,N
END 3 YI . . . .
]?iG, 1
13 82 = 82 + YI
T = S + 82
23 $2 = ( S - T ) + $2
The AND and NOT operatimts are transf0rlned to multiplica- 4 S-T i!
tion and subtraction operations as described in (1) and (3). The 5 ....
OR operation needs a control I F s t a t e m e n t after the arithmetic Until double-precision arithmetic was made ~;::k:l
addition is performed in order to r e s t o r e the value of tile variable of tile t;OI~TRAX language, the author and his t I s
to unity. This may be simplified by using a li'unction subprogram trick on a 7090 in ili'OI~TmtN II programs to perform q u a d r a t u r e ,
to calculate tile result of the OIL o p e r a t i o n , thus eliminating the solve differential equations and sum infinite series.
need for repetition of the IF s t a t e m e n t s . It was not done in this
I{.E F E I~.EN E E :
example because of the limitatien of t h e FOremAN colnpiier in the
1. WOLFE, J. 5/[. Reducing truncation errors by p r o g r a m m i n g .
1620 Model 1 computer where this p r o g r a m was checked out, and
Comm. ACM 7 (Jmm 1964), 355-35B.
where the use of subprograms is not pernfitted.
M. MORRIS MANO
W. KAHAN
California State College at Los Angeles University of Toronto
Los Angeles, California. I{E:CELVED JULY, 1964 Toronto, Ontqrio, C'ar~ada
RECEIWBD FEBRUARY, 1964 (Pracniques are eontin~,ed on page 48}

40 C o m m u n i c a t i o n s o f t h e AC~I Volume 8 Number 1 / January, 1965

t h e d o m a i n last, e n t e r e d is k n o w n a n d it is this d o m a i n in
w h i c h t h e t e r m i n a l p o i n t lies.
-VII. C o m m e n t s on hnplementation of Algorithm
I t is to be n o t e d t h a t a c t u a l use of t h i s a l g o r i t h m will
f r e q u e n t l y i n v o l v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of a c c u r a c y a n d sig~
nifieance. T h e s e n m s t be v i e w e d from t h e v i e w p o i n t of
n u m e r i c a l a n a l y s i s in t e r m s of permissible errors as re-
q u i r e d b y t h e n a t u r e of t h e given p r o b l e m . C o n s e q u e n t l y ,
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each test, such as those for inclusion within
or on a rectangle, coincident points, etc., t h e r e will nor-
m a l l y be some s m a l l q u a n t i t y ~ ( p e r h a p s u n i q u e to t h e
given t e s t ) which results in t h e t e s t being m o r e "eonserva--
l i v e , " i.e. r e t a i n i n g c e r t a i n borderline cases for considera-
t i o n u n d e r s u b s e q u e n t tests in t h e procedure.
A second p o i n t is t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e
a l g o r i t h m is in t e r m s of a static set of p a r t i t i o n i n g b o u n d -
aries, it is q u i t e a d a p t a b l e to a s i t u a t i o n in which t h e
b o u n d a r i e s of t h e region are d y n a m i c a l l y changing d u r i n g
t h e course of t h e p r o b l e m solution. T h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e
list of significant p o i n t s is such t h a t insertions a n d dele-
t i o n s m a y be easily m a d e to reflect c h a n g i n g b o u n d a r i e s .
T h e n a t u r e of t h e a l g o r i t h m will be u n c h a n g e d . Of course,
a s a l r e a d y n o t e d , processing t i m e is c o n d i t i o n e d b y t h e
n u m b e r of b o u n d a r i e s i n v o l v e d , t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n , etc.
A n e x a m p l e of a n a p p l i c a t i o n s a r e a w h e r e a p r o c e d u r e of
t h e t y p e here d e s c r i b e d is e x t e n s i v e l y e m p l o y e d is t h a t of
c o m p u t e r - g e n e r a t e d p a t h s over configurations of surfaces
for p u r p o s e s of n u m e r i c a l l y c o n t r o l l e d m a c h i n i n g . * T o o l
p a t h s are c o n s t r u c t e d b y a series of c o n n e c t e d s t r a i g h t - l i n e
s e g m e n t s . T h e g e n e r a t i o n of t h e s e tool p a t h s is d e p e n d e n t
o n k n o w l e d g e of t h e surface ( d o m a i n ) on which the c u r r e n t
a n d p r e v i o u s tool p o i n t s lie. T h u s t h e intersection curves
( b o u n d a r i e s ) b e t w e e n c o n t i g u o u s c o n s t i t u e n t surfaces in
t h e c o m p l e x m u s t be observed. I n a d d i t i o n , t h e tool p a t h
c u r r e n t l y being g e n e r a t e d m u s t c o n f o r m to e e r t a i u restric-
t i o n s i m p o s e d b y t h e p r e v i o u s l y g e n e r a t e d tool p a t h s ,
w h i c h t h u s c o n s t i t u t e a d y n a m i c set of boundaries. Sines
t h i s a l g o r i t h m is d e v e l o p e d in t e r m s of p a r t i t i o n i n g
b o u n d a r i e s in a b o u n d e d , plane region, t h e given configura-
t i o n of surfaces in such a inachine t o o l i n g p r o b l e m m u s t
be such t h a t the p r o j e c t i o n s into some fixed p l a n e of t h e
b o u n d a r i e s c o r r e s p o n d i n g to t h e i r d e l i m i t i n g curves of
i n t e r s e c t i o n as well as t h e b o u n d a r i e s c o r r e s p o n d i n g to t h e
t o o l p a t h s g e n e r a t e d on t h e surfaces m u s t satisfy t h e cri-
t e r i a for v a l i d t)oundaries e s t a b l i s h e d in Section I I of this
paper.
Acknowledgments. T h e e o n e e p t i o n of t h e essence of t h e
p r o c e d u r e d e s c r i b e d in this p a p e r was p r i m a r i l y a c h i e v e d
b y M r . A r n o l d Siegel, t h e n w i t h I B M , now w i t h C o m p u -
tronics, Inc., a n d M r . S a m u e l M . M a t s a , I B M M a t h e -
matics and Applications Department.
I:{ECEIVED JUNE, 1964; t~EWSED SEP'rl~:MBEr~,1964
iREiFE RE N CE
1. AUTOPROMT, A System for N:umerieal Programming. iX[ &
A-12, IBM Math. & Appl., New York, May 1961.
48 C o m m u n i c a t i o n s of the ACM
PRACNIQUES--Conf. from page 40
LONGEI~, STRINGS Ft~OM S()[{T[NG*
Presented hm'(: is a description of a SO IUI'/M EI{t~I!; L(~chniqus
which can be ineorpor:~ted into existi~g sorbing methods to sub,
stantially increase the lengths of the sort output sLrings. This is
accomplished by relaxing the sort string ord('r erit, eria Lo the ex,
tenl, that string order is recoverable by the first merge pass. The
standard sorting programs generate sequenced file records i~
tape record blocks. The records within a tape block are sequenced,
and Lhe last record of one Mock precedes the lirs~ record of the new
block according ~o sequence. This new technique still requires that
the tape bloeks contain sequenced file records, but relaxes the
second eriteria. This revised requirement is that for a set of tape
blocks with last, reeord sort keys, the next tape block nmst contain
records with sort keys at least as large as the lowest of the tabled
last record sort keys. In addition, the last record sort key of this
new bloek will replace :the sort key which was previously lowest.
The number of entries it* this set of last sort keys is the number 0f
tape records which nmst be merged from this tape on the first
merge pass with the nmltiple records from the other sort pass out.
put tapes. The number of buffers required for reading this tape
exceeds the size of the set by one buffer, if the set consists of one
entry, then the sort pass will generate the standard type output.
To use the above technique, it is necessary to have special sort
pass routines. Separate techniques are proposed below for fixed
and w~riable-length file records. They appear to have the mosl
promise. The fixed-length method will be superior to the variable.
length method when most records approach the longest record in
length.
For fixeddength records, two read buffers and a scatter write
procedure should be used. A binary selection technique (see
tournament or replacement selection of the literature) should be
used to select file records for output. Output is considered a paired
procedure. As one tape record is being written, the file records
from the other tape record are being replaced in a burst from the
input buffers. After the replacement the next tape record is se-
lected. This will cause the binary selection tree to pulsate. The
file records on each tape block will be in sequence. During the re.
placement each new record is checked to determine if it is in the
current string. When core is filled with the next string, that string
is started.
The above method is believed to be superior to all others since
it uses the fastest selection technique, requires only one data
inove, and uses a minimum of buffers. Conservative estimates are
that overlapping tape blocks will be equivalent to having orts
extra magnetic tape drive on the first merge pass.
For variable-length records, it is proposed that a read to full
core, and then write all of core, be used for great length varia-
tions. For this procedure, the sets of tape block last record keys
will be maintained for all output tapes. After the first few core
loads, outtmt will be to all output tapes on each core load. Selec-
tion of output tat)e is according to the lowest sort key permitted
for a tape. The procedure begins with the tape with tile highest
tabled sort key. When there are records remaining after all tapes
are used for output, a new string is begun on the tape with the
largest tabled sert keys.
Excluding the first and last records on each tape the strings will
be approximately 2.5 core lengths long if tile strings are evenly
distributed on two or more tapes. Additional gains will be made
for files where the record length variances cannot be e~tieicntly
handled by other techniques.
t{. J. DINSMORE
The Bunker-Ramo Corp.
Eastern Technical Center
Silver Spring, Maryland
RECEIVED SEPTEMBER, 1964
* These techniques were developed by ~he author during his employment a~
Control Data Corporation.