When analyzing an algorithm, the following recurrence relation popped up:
$T(n,d)=2T(n/2,d)+T(n,d-1)+O(dn)$
where $T(n,1)=O(n \log{n})$ and $T(1,d)=O(d)$.
By applying the Master Theorem inductively, for any particular $d$, it holds that $T(n,d)=O(n (\log{n})^d)$. However, it does not necessarily hold that $T(n,d)=O(n (\log{n})^d)$ because the constant hidden by the $O$-notation depends on the value of $d$.
I was hoping that the technically incorrect bound given by repeated application of the master theorem would be good enough. It turns out that this is actually a terrible, terrible bound. The actual values of $T(n,d)$ are orders of magnitude lower from what the asymptotic bound would predict. Does anyone know how to get a better bound?