6 Binary Search Trees of Edges

6 Binary Search Trees of edges. For every node µ, there is a unique path from the root to µ. The length of that path is the depth of µ. One of the purposes of sorting is to facilitate fast search- The height of the tree is the maximum depth of any node. ing. However, while a sorted sequence stored in a lin- The path length is the sum of depths over all nodes, and ear array is good for searching, it is expensive to add and the external path length is the same sum restricted to the delete items. Binary search trees give you the best of both leaves in the tree. worlds: fast search and fast update. Searching. A binary search tree is a sorted binary tree. Definitions and terminology. We begin with a recursive We assume each nodeis a recordstoring an item and point- definition of the most common type of tree used in algo- ers to two children: rithms. A (rooted) binary tree is either empty or a node (the root) with a binary tree as left subtree and binary tree struct Node{item info; Node ∗ ℓ, ∗ r}; as right subtree. We store items in the nodes of the tree. typedef Node ∗ Tree. It is often convenient to say the items are the nodes. A binary tree is sorted if each item is between the smaller or Sometimes it is convenient to also store a pointer to the equal items in the left subtree and the larger or equal items parent, but for now we will do without. We can search in in the right subtree. For example, the tree illustrated in a binary search tree by tracing a path starting at the root. Figure 11 is sorted assuming the usual ordering of English characters. Terms for relations between family members Node ∗ SEARCH(Tree ̺, item x) such as child, parent, sibling are also used for nodes in a case ̺ = NULL: return NULL; tree. Every node has one parent, except the root which has x<̺ → info: return SEARCH(̺ → ℓ, x); no parent. A leaf or external node is one without children; x = ̺ → info: return ̺; all other nodes are internal. Anode ν is a descendent of µ x>̺ → info: return SEARCH(̺ → r, x) if ν = µ or ν is a descendent of a child of µ. Symmetri- endcase. cally, µ is an ancestor of ν if ν is a descendent of µ. The subtree of µ consists of all descendents of µ. An edge is a The running time depends on the length of the path, which parent-child pair. is at most the height of the tree. Let n be the size. In the worst case the tree is a linked list and searching takes time O(n). In the best case the tree is perfectly balanced and r searching takes only time O(log n). g y c j v z Insert. To add a new item is similarly straightforward: follow a path from the root to a leaf and replace that leaf b d i l by a new node storing the item. Figure 12 shows the tree k m obtained after adding w to the tree in Figure 11. The run- r Figure 11: The parent, sibling and two children of the dark node are shaded. The internal nodes are drawn as circles while the g y leaves are drawn as squares. c j v z The size of the tree is the number of nodes. A binary b d i l w tree is full if every internal node has two children. Every full binary tree has one more leaf than internal node. To k m count its edges, we can either count 2 for each internal node or 1 for every node other than the root. Either way, Figure 12: The shaded nodes indicate the path from the root we the total number of edges is one less than the size of the traverse when we insert w into the sorted tree. tree. A path is a sequence of contiguous edges without repetitions. Usually we only consider paths that descend ning time depends again on the length of the path. If the or paths that ascend. The length of a path is the number insertions come in a random order then the tree is usually 19 close to being perfectly balanced. Indeed, the tree is the the n items is same as the one that arises in the analysis of quicksort. n The expected number of comparisons for a (successful) 1+ C(T ) = p · (δ + 1) search is one n-th of the expected running time of quick- X i i i=1 sort, which is roughly 2 ln n. n = 1+ X pi · δi, i=1 Delete. The main idea for deleting an item is the same as for inserting: follow the path from the root to the node where δi is the depth of the node that stores ai. C(T ) ν that stores the item. is the weighted path length or the cost of T . We study the problem of constructing a tree that minimizes the cost. 1 To develop an example, let n = 3 and p1 = 2 , p2 = Case 1. ν has no internal node as a child. Remove ν. 1 1 3 , p3 = 6 . Figure 14 shows the five binary trees with three nodes and states their costs. It can be shown that the Case 2. ν has one internal child. Make that child the child of the parent of ν. a1 a1 a2 a3 a3 a2 a3 a1 a3 a1 a2 Case 3. ν has two internal children. Find the rightmost a a a a internal node in the left subtree, remove it, and sub- 3 2 2 1 stitute it for ν, as shown in Figure 13. Figure 14: There are five different binary trees of three nodes. 2 5 2 7 4 From left to right their costs are 3 , 6 , 3 , 6 , 3 . The first tree and the third tree are both optimal. ν KJν 1 2n number of different binary trees with n nodes is n+1 n , which is exponential in n. This is far too large to try all J possibilities, so we need to look for a more efficient way to construct an optimum tree. Figure 13: Store J in ν and delete the node that used to store J. j Dynamic programming. We write Ti for the optimum j weighted binary search tree of ai,ai+1,...,aj , Ci for its The analysis of the expected search time in a binary search j j cost, and pi = Pk=i pk for the total probability of the tree constructed by a random sequence of insertions and j deletions is considerably more challenging than if no dele- items in Ti . Suppose we know that the optimum tree k−1 tions are present. Even the definition of a random se- stores item ak in its root. Then the left subtree is Ti j quence is ambiguous in this case. and the right subtree is Tk+1. The cost of the optimum j k−1 j j tree is therefore Ci = Ci + Ck+1 + pi − pk. Since we do not know which item is in the root, we try all possibili- Optimal binary search trees. Instead of hoping the in- ties and find the minimum: cremental construction yields a shallow tree, we can con- j k−1 j j Ci = min {Ci + Ck+1 + pi − pk}. struct the tree that minimizes the search time. We con- i≤k≤j sider the common problem in which items have different probabilities to be the target of a search. For example, This formulacan be translated directly into a dynamicpro- some words in the English dictionary are more commonly gramming algorithm. We use three two-dimensional ar- j searched than others and are therefore assigned a higher rays, one for the sums of probabilities, pi , one forthe costs j probability. Let a1 < a2 <...<an be the items and of optimum trees, Ci , and one for the indices of the items j pi the corresponding probabilities. To simplify the discus- stored in their roots, Ri . We assume that the first array has sion, we only consider successful searches and thus as- already been computed. We initialize the other two arrays n sume Pi=1 pi =1. The expected number of comparisons along the main diagonal and add one dummy diagonal for for a successful search in a binary search tree T storing the cost. 20 for k =1 to n do Improved running time. Notice that the array R in Ta- C[k, k − 1] = C[k, k]=0; R[k, k]= k ble 2 is monotonic, both along rows and along columns. j−1 j endfor; Indeed it is possible to prove Ri ≤ Ri in every row and j j C[n +1,n]=0. Ri ≤ Ri+1 in every column. We omit the proof and show how the two inequalities can be used to improve the dy- We fill the rest of the two arrays one diagonal at a time. namic programming algorithm. Instead of trying all roots from i through j we restrict the innermost for-loop to for ℓ =2 to n do for i =1 to n − ℓ +1 do for k = R[i, j − 1] to R[i +1, j] do j = i + ℓ − 1; C[i, j]= ∞; for k = i to j do The monotonicity property implies that this change does cost = C[i, k − 1]+ C[k +1, j] not alter the result of the algorithm.

Load more