However here are disillusioning news.
nslog is computed with the same matrix size \( n \) as dsexp and I pushed \( n \) up to 35, computing \( \delta(0.2) \) with precision 400 up to \( n=33 \) and computing \( \delta(0.2) \) with precision 800 for \( n\ge 34 \). Till \( n=20 \) everything looks nice:
But after \( n=20 \) we see that the difference probably does not converge to 0:
edit: indeed this behaviour continues, with some effort (the used memory easily exceeds 2GB) I computed \( n=45 \) (precision 800) \( \delta_{800,45}(0.2)\approx -2.11 \times 10^{-7} \) which seems quite close to the real limit.
nslog is computed with the same matrix size \( n \) as dsexp and I pushed \( n \) up to 35, computing \( \delta(0.2) \) with precision 400 up to \( n=33 \) and computing \( \delta(0.2) \) with precision 800 for \( n\ge 34 \). Till \( n=20 \) everything looks nice:
But after \( n=20 \) we see that the difference probably does not converge to 0:
edit: indeed this behaviour continues, with some effort (the used memory easily exceeds 2GB) I computed \( n=45 \) (precision 800) \( \delta_{800,45}(0.2)\approx -2.11 \times 10^{-7} \) which seems quite close to the real limit.