Acta Informatica

, Volume 45, Issue 3, pp 193–210 | Cite as

Two-tier relaxed heaps

Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

We introduce a data structure which provides efficient heap operations with respect to the number of element comparisons performed. Let n denote the size of the heap being manipulated. Our data structure guarantees the worst-case cost of O(1) for finding the minimum, inserting an element, extracting an (unspecified) element, and replacing an element with a smaller element; and the worst-case cost of O(lg n) with at most lg n + 3 lg lg n + O(1) element comparisons for deleting an element. We thereby improve the comparison complexity of heap operations known for run-relaxed heaps and other worst-case efficient heaps. Furthermore, our data structure supports melding of two heaps of size m and n at the worst-case cost of O(min {lg m, lg n}).

Keywords

Active Node Priority Queue Lower Store Current Minimum Element Comparison 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Brodal, G.S.: Worst-case efficient priority queues. In: Proceedings of the 7th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pp. 52–58. ACM/SIAM, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brodal, G.S., Okasaki, C.: Optimal purely functional priority queues. J. Funct. Programming 6(6), 839–857 (1996)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clancy, M.J., Knuth, D.E.: A programming and problem-solving seminar. Technical Report STAN-CS-77-606, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University (1977)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cormen, T.H., Leiserson, C.E., Rivest, R.L., Stein, C.: Introduction to Algorithms, 2nd edn. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Driscoll, J.R., Gabow, H.N., Shrairman, R., Tarjan, R.E.: Relaxed heaps: an alternative to Fibonacci heaps with applications to parallel computation. Comm. ACM 31(11), 1343–1354 (1988)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elmasry, A., Jensen, C., Katajainen, J.: A framework for speeding up priority-queue operations. CPH STL Report 2004-3, Department of Computing, University of Copenhagen. Available at http://cphstl.dk (2004)
  7. 7.
    Elmasry, A., Jensen, C., Katajainen, J.: Two new methods for transforming priority queues into double-ended priority queues. CPH STL Report 2006-9, Department of Computing, University of Copenhagen Available at http://cphstl.dk (2006)
  8. 8.
    Elmasry, A., Jensen, C., Katajainen, J.: Two-tier relaxed heaps. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4288, pp. 308–317. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elmasry, A., Jensen, C., Katajainen, J.: Multipartite priority queues. ACM Transactions on Algorithms (2008, in press)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fredman, M.L.: On the efficiency of pairing heaps and related data structures. J. ACM 46(4), 473–501 (1999)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fredman, M.L., Sedgewick, R., Sleator, D.D., Tarjan, R.E.: The pairing heap: a new form of self-adjusting heap. Algorithmica 1(1), 111–129 (1986)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fredman, M.L., Tarjan, R.E.: Fibonacci heaps and their uses in improved network optimization algorithms. J. ACM 34(3), 596–615 (1987)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gonnet, G.H., Munro, J.I.: Heaps on heaps. SIAM J. Comput. 15(4), 964–971 (1986)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goodrich, M.T., Tamassia, R.: Algorithm Design: Foundations, Analysis, and Internet Examples. Wiley, New York (2002)MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kaplan, H., Shafrir, N., Tarjan, R.E.: Meldable heaps and Boolean union-find. In: Proceedings of the 34th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 573–582. ACM, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaplan, H., Tarjan, R.E.: New heap data structures. Technical Report TR-597-99, Department of Computer Science, Princeton University (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kernighan, B.W., Ritchie, D.M.: The C Programming Language, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall PTR, Englewood Cliffs (1988)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Okasaki, C.: Purely Functional Data Structures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Overmars, M.H., van Leeuwen, J.: Worst-case optimal insertion and deletion methods for decomposable searching problems. Inform. Process. Lett. 12(4), 168–173 (1981)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vuillemin, J.: A data structure for manipulating priority queues. Comm. ACM 21(4), 309–315 (1978)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Williams, J.W.J.: Algorithm 232: Heapsort. Comm. ACM 7(6), 347–348 (1964)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Engineering and SystemsAlexandria UniversityAlexandriaEgypt
  2. 2.Department of ComputingUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen EastDenmark

Personalised recommendations