Conor OMalley

No sorry for the confusion I don't have the evaluations already.

@Yimin i need to test multiple x values, specifically binary search over x as the function is strictly increasing (up to some point), hence the O(nlogn) i currently know of.

@EricTowers you're right I guess there is really no way to avoid that, however I don't need answers for those x, so is there no way to see approximate/test if an x will result in something really big.

@user619894 how does one integrate over a distribution?

@ThomasAndrews i wanted to explicitly say that I needed something faster than O(nlogn)

Yes, a, b, c are all known, but completely arbitrary, i.e. there is no pattern as i changes. x is the variable and yes this is what I want to change frequently, I want the output of the function for many different x.