(250 is peanut-sized in cryptography, number theory or computer algebra, and asymptotically fast matrix multiplication is very much useful in practice in those domains.)
(250 is peanut-sized in cryptography, number theory or computer algebra, and asymptotically fast matrix multiplication is very much useful in practice in those domains.)
Strassen multiplication usually starts to win over classical multiplication already for matrices with a few hundred rows (in special circumstances, it is even superior for 2x2 matrices). The Coppersmith–Winograd algorithm, on the other hand, is probably "strictly of theoretical interest" for the time being...
- expected portfolio mean & variance
- optimizing mean-variance subject to a risk budget (following Markowitz portfolio theory), etc.
would all entail operating on the n×n covariance matrix, which is typically dense. If your universe is the Russell 1000, S&P 500, etc, then n will be significantly larger than 250.
And yes, I was thinking that it was the "sparse" nature of typical large matrices that makes them impractical.