Improved Upper Bounds for Pairing Heaps

  • John Iacono
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1851)


Pairing heaps are shown to have constant amortized time insert and zero amortized time meld, thus improving the previous O(log n) amortized time bound on these operations. It is also shown that pairing heaps have a distribution sensitive behavior whereby the cost to perform an extract-min on an element x is O(log min(n, k)) where k is the number of heap operations performed since x’s insertion. Fredman has observed that pairing heaps can be used to merge sorted lists of varying sized optimally, within constant factors. Utilizing the distribution sensitive behavior of pairing heap, an alternative method the employs pairing heaps for optimal list merging is derived.


Actual Cost Potential Gain Execution Sequence White Node Black Node 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. Cole. On the dynamic finger conjecture for splay trees. part ii: The proof. Technical Report Computer Science TR1995-701, New York Univerity, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Cole, B. Mishra, J. Schmidt, and A. Siegel. On the dynamic finger conjecture for splay trees. part i: Splay sorting log n-block sequences. Technical Report Computer Science TR1995-700, New York Univerity, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. L. Fredman. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. L Fredman. On the efficiency of pairing heaps and related data structures. JACM, 46(4):473–501, 1999.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. L Fredman. A priority queue transform. In Workshop on Algorithm Engineering, pages 243–257, 1999. LNCS 1668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. L. Fredman, R. Sedgewick, D. D. Sleator, and R. E. Tarjan. The pairing heap: A new form of self-adjusting heap. Algorithmica, 1:111–129, 1986.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. L Fredman and R. E. Tarjan. Fibonacci heaps and their used in improved network optimization algorithms. JACM, 34:596–615, 1987.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haim Kaplan and Robert E. Tarjan. New heap data structures. Technical Report Computer Science TR-597-99, Princeton University, 1999.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. D. Sleator and R. E. Tarjan. Self-adjusting binary trees. JACM, 32:652–686, 1985.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. D. Sleator and R. E. Tarjan. Self-adjusting heaps. SIAM Journal of Computing, 15:52–69, 1986.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. T. Stasko and J. S. Vitter. Pairing heaps: experiments and analysis. CACM, 15:234–249, 1987.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Sundar. Amoritzed Complexity of Data Structures. PhD thesis, New York University, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. E. Tarjan. Sequential access in splay trees takes linear time. Combinatorica, 5:367–378, 1985.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Iacono
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceRutgers UniversityNew Brunswick

Personalised recommendations