Triply-logarithmic upper and lower bounds for minimum, range minima, and related problems with integer inputs

  • O. Berkman
  • Y. Matias
  • P. Ragde
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 709)


We consider the problem of computing the minimum of n values, and several well-known generalizations (prefix minima, range minima, and all-nearest-smaller-values (ANSV) problems) for input elements drawn from the integer domain [1., s] where sn. Recent work [4] has shown that parallel algorithms that are sensitive to the size of the input domain can improve on more general parallel algorithms. The cited paper demonstrates an O(log log log s)-step algorithm on an n-processor

Priority CRCW PRAM for finding the prefix-minima of n numbers in the range [1., s]. The best known upper bounds for the range minima and ANSV problems were previously O(log log n) (using algorithms for general input). This was also the best known upper bound for computing prefix minima or even just the minimum on the common CRCW PRAM; this model has a Θ(log n/ log log n) time separation from the stronger Priority model when using the same number of processors. In this paper we give simple and efficient algorithms for all of the above problems. These algorithms all take O(log log log s) time using an optimal number of processors and O(ns) space on the Common CRCW PRAM. We also prove a lower bound demonstrating that no algorithm is asymptotically faster as a function of s, by showing that for \(s = 2^{2^{\Omega (log n log log n)} }\) the upper bounds are tight.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    A. Amir, G. M. Landau, and U. Vishkin. Efficient pattern matching with scaling. In Proc. of the First Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 344–357, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Beame and J. Håstad. Optimal bounds for decision problems on the CRCW PRAM. In Proc. of the 19th Ann. ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pages 83–93, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. Berge. Graphs and Hypergraphs. North-Holland, 1973.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    O. Berkman, J. JáJá, S. Krishnamurthy, R. Thurimella, and U. Vishkin. Some triply-logarithmic parallel algorithms. In Proc. of the 31st IEEE Annual Symp. on Foundation of Computer Science, pages 871–881, 1990. To appear in SIAM J. of Comput. as ‘Top-bottom routing around a rectangle is as easy as computing prefix minima'.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    O. Berkman, B. Schieber, and U. Vishkin. Optimal doubly logarithmic parallel algorithms based on finding all nearest smaller values. Journal of Algorithms, 14:344–370, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    O. Berkman and U. Vishkin. On parallel integer merging. Technical Report UMIACS-TR-90-15.1 (revised version), Institute for Advanced Computer Studies, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA, 1990. To appear in Information and Computation.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. B. Boppana. Optimal separations between concurrent-write parallel machines. In Proc. of the 21st Ann. ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pages 320–326, 1989.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. Chaudhuri. Lower Bounds for Parallel Computation. PhD thesis, Rutgers University, 1991.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Edmonds. Lower bounds with smaller domain size on concurrent write parallel machines. In Proc. 6th Annual IEEE Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Erdős and R. Rado. Intersection theorems for systems of sets. J. London Math. Soc., 35:85–90, 1960.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. E. Fich, F. Meyer auf der Heide, and A. Wigderson. Lower bounds for parallel random-access machines with unbounded shared memory. In Advances in Computing Research. JAI Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    F. E. Fich, P. L. Ragde, and A. Wigderson. Relations between concurrent-write models of parallel computation (preliminary version). In Proceedings 3rd Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 179–189, 1984.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    F. E. Fich, P. L. Ragde, and A. Wigderson. Simulations among concurrent-write PRAMs. Algorithmica, 3:43–51, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    H. N. Gabow, J. L. Bentley, and R. E. Tarjan. Scaling and related techniques for geometry problems. In Proc. of the 16th Ann. ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pages 135–143, 1984.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. T. Goodrich. Triangulating a polygon in parallel. Journal of Algorithms, 10:327–351, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    V. Grolmusz and P. L. Ragde. Incomparability in parallel computation. In Proc. of the 28th IEEE Annual Symp. on Foundation of Computer Science, pages 89–98, 1987.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. Harel and R. E. Tarjan. Fast algorithms for finding nearest common ancestors. SIAM J. Comput., 13(2):338–355, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. P. Kruskal. Searching, merging, and sorting in parallel computation. IEEE Trans. on Comp, C-32:942–946, 1983.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    F. Meyer auf der Heide and A. Wigderson. The complexity of parallel sorting. In Proc. of the 26th IEEE Annual Symp. on Foundation of Computer Science, pages 532–540, 1985.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    P. L. Ragde, W. L. Steiger, E. Szemerédi, and A. Wigderson. The parallel complexity of element distinctness is Ω(√log n). SIAM Journal on Disceret Mathematics, 1(3):399–410, Aug. 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    V. Ramachandran and U. Vishkin. Efficient parallel triconnectivity in logarithmic parallel time. In Proc. of the 3rd Aegean Workshop on Parallel Computing, Springer LNCS 319, pages 33–42, 1988.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    B. Schieber. Design and analysis of some parallel algorithms. PhD thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, Tel Aviv Univ., 1987.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    B. Schieber and U. Vishkin. On finding lowest common ancestors: simplification and parallelization. SIAM J. Comput., 17(6):1253–1262, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Y. Shiloach and U. Vishkin. Finding the maximum, merging, and sorting in a parallel computation model. Journal of Algorithms, 2:88–102, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    M. Snir. On parallel searching. SIAM J. Comput., 14:688–707, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    L. G. Valiant. Parallelism in comparison problems. SIAM J. Comput., 4:348–355, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • O. Berkman
    • 1
  • Y. Matias
    • 2
  • P. Ragde
    • 3
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer ScienceKing's College LondonLondonEngland
  2. 2.AT&T Bell LaboratoriesMurray HillUSA
  3. 3.Dept. of Computer ScienceUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations