Skip to main content

How to find a minimum spanning tree in practice

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
New Results and New Trends in Computer Science

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 555))

Abstract

We address the question of theoretical vs. practical behavior of algorithms for the minimum spanning tree problem. We review the factors that influence the actual running time of an algorithm, from choice of language, machine, and compiler, through low-level implementation choices, to purely algorithmic issues. We discuss how to design a careful experimental comparison between various alternatives. Finally, we present some results from an ongoing study in which we are using: multiple languages, compilers, and machines; all the major variants of the comparison-based algorithms; and eight varieties of graphs with sizes of up to 130,000 vertices (in sparse graphs) or 750,000 edges (in dense graphs).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cheriton, D., and R.E. Tarjan, “Finding minimum spanning trees,” SIAM J. Comput. 5 (1976), pp. 724–742.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Driscoll, J.R., H.N. Gabow, R. Shrairman, and R.E. Tarjan, “Relaxed heaps: an alternative to Fibonacci heaps with applications to parallel computation,” Comm. ACM 11 (1988), pp. 1343–1354.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Fredman, M.L., and R.E. Tarjan, “Fibonacci heaps and their use in improved network optimization algorithms,” Proc. 25th Ann. IEEE Symp. Foundations Comput. Sci. FOCS-81, pp. 338–346; also in final form in J. ACM 34 (1987), pp. 596–615.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fredman, M.L., and D.E. Willard, “Trans-dichotomous algorithms for minimum spanning trees and shortest paths,” Proc. 31st Ann. IEEE Symp. Foundations Comput. Sci. FOCS-90, pp. 719–725.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gabow, H.N., Z. Galil, T.H. Spencer, and R.E, Tarjan, “Efficient algorithms for minimum spanning trees on directed and undirected graphs,” Combinatorica 6 (1986), pp. 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Graham, R.L., and O. Hell, “On the history of the minimum spanning tree problem,” Ann. Hist. Comput. 7 (1985), pp. 43–57.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Johnson, D.B., “Priority queues with update and finding minimum spanning trees,” Inf. Process. Lett. 4 (1975), pp. 53–57.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Moret, B.M.E., and H.D. Shapiro. Algorithms from P to NP. Volume I: Design and Efficiency. Benjamin-Cummings, Menlo Park, CA, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Moret, B.M.E., and H.D. Shapiro, “An empirical analysis of algorithms for constructing a minimum spanning tree,” Proc. 2nd Ann. Workshop on Data Structs. and Algs. WADS-91, Ottawa (CA), to appear in Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Stasko, J.T., and J.S. Vitter, “Pairing heaps: experiments and analysis,” Commun. ACM 30 (1987), pp. 234–249.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Hermann Maurer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Moret, B.M.E., Shapiro, H.D. (1991). How to find a minimum spanning tree in practice. In: Maurer, H. (eds) New Results and New Trends in Computer Science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 555. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0038190

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0038190

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-54869-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46457-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics