Adaptive linear list reorganization for a system processing set queries

  • R. S. Valiveti
  • B. J. Oommen
  • J. R. Zgierski
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 529)


The problem of reorganizing a linear list, when the individual records are accessed independently, has been well studied. In this paper, self-organizing linear list heuristics are examined under a more general query system which allows accesses to any subset of the list of elements. We propose a pragmatic model for the query generator, characterized by a set of parameters of size equal to the number of elements in the list. We derive the distribution of accesses to the individual records of the list, and show that these accesses are statistically dependent. Throughout this paper, the set accesses are processed by serializing the set elements.

We then present extensions to the classical Move-To-Front (MTF) and Transposition (TR) rules under this generalized query generation mechanism. The resulting heuristics are termed MTF_TQS and TR_TQS respectively. Under this query generation model, the optimal (static) list is shown to be one in which the elements are ordered in the descending order of the total probability of accessing the records. The expected cost under the MTF_TQS heuristic is shown to be no more than π/2 times the mean access cost for the optimal list. We also prove that MTF_TQS and TR_TQS are superior to the simpler reorganization scheme in which the classical MTF or TR heuristic (respectively) is employed in conjunction with the (serial) stream consisting of individual record accesses. Experimental results for these heuristics are also reported.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    J.R. Bitner, “Heuristics that Dynamically Organize Data Structures”, SIAM J. Computing, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1979, pp. 82–110.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    G.H. Gonnet, J.I. Munro, and H. Suwanda, “The Exegesis of Self-Organizing Linear Search”, SIAM J. Computing, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1981, pp. 613–637.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    K.N. Hendricks, “An Account of Self-Organizing Systems”, SIAM J. Computing, Vol. 5, 1976, pp. 715–723.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    J.H. Hester, D.S. Hirschberg, “Self-Organizing Linear Search”, ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 17, No. 3, 1985, pp. 295–311.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    K. Lam, M. Leung, and M.K. Siu, “Self-Organizing Files with Dependent Accesses”, J. Appl. Prob., Vol. 21, 1984, pp. 343–359.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    R.L. Rivest, “On Self-Organizing Sequential Search Heuristics”, Comm. ACM, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1976, pp. 63–67.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    S.M. Ross, Introduction to Probability Models Academic Press, New York, 1980, 2nd Edition.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R.S. Valiveti, B.J. Oommen, and J.R. Zgierski, “Adaptive Linear List Reorganization Under a Generalized Query System”, Submitted for Publication. Also available as Technical report SCS-TR-181 from the School of Computer Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ont., K1S 5B6, Canada.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. S. Valiveti
    • 1
  • B. J. Oommen
    • 1
  • J. R. Zgierski
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations