# use multiplicative in a sentence.

There's a *multiplicative* effect.

How does: *multiplicative* : primary "* " *multiplicative* { return $1 * $3; }return the product of two integers?

From what I understand it's also *multiplicative*.

A empty product is the *multiplicative* identity (1), just like an empty sum is the additive identity (0).

Wouldn't a combination of *multiplicative* blending and additive blending give you the possibillity to create images with adjustable opacity?

I smell an easy study generator: take well-established results from single factors, combine them, and then see the relationship of the results (are they additive, *multiplicative*, completely at odds with one another, etc.

I think that article does make a nice clear point, and while the ideas aren't worth that much in some regard, being a *multiplicative* factor is a pretty big deal.

This should either be called *multiplicative* inverse square root, or reciprocal square root, no?

Well, it's like this -- log_2 and log_10 (and natural log) differ only by a constant *multiplicative* factor, so they're all the same asymptotically, and it doesn't matter which one you use inside the O().

The order of the ring of integers modulo n is (p-1)(q-1)You mean, the order of the *multiplicative* group.

Thanks, what I don't get from reading the grammar is how, as you say, *multiplicative* is either a primary or primary followed by a *multiplicative*.

This is the frightening reality of what happens when you have a large business where everything scales multiplicatively and then you make a trivial change which is net-beneficial.

Then I look over at Zynga at all where you can do *multiplicative* effectiveness within the context of a viral loop, which is just so effective I'm almost certain it goes against my religion somehow.

I find that marginal costs/benefits for low-priced items are best contemplated multiplicatively, not additively.

There are 2 mostly distinct branches of number theory additive and *multiplicative*.