mergesort

Space requirements of a merge-sort

允我心安 提交于 2019-11-29 11:44:16
问题 I'm trying to understand the space requirements for a Mergesort, O(n). I see that time requirements are basically, amount of levels(logn) * merge(n) so that makes (n log n). Now, we are still allocating n per level, in 2 different arrays, left and right. I do understand that the key here is that when the recursive functions return the space gets deallocated, but I'm not seeing it too obvious. Besides, all the info I find, just states space required is O(n) but don't explain it. Any hint?

Combining MergeSort with Insertion sort to make it more efficient

a 夏天 提交于 2019-11-29 05:23:07
So I have a MergeSort algorithm and I want to combine MergeSort with Insertion sort to reduce the overhead of merging, the question is how? I want to sort the segments using insertion sort and then merge. public class mergesorttest{ public static void main(String[]args){ int d[]= {10,2,3,4,5,6,5,4,3,5,6,7,1}; mergeSort(d,0,d.length); for(int x:d) System.out.print(x+" "); System.out.println(); } static void mergeSort(int f[],int lb, int ub){ //termination reached when a segment of size 1 reached -lb+1=ub if(lb+1<ub){ int mid = (lb+ub)/2; mergeSort(f,lb,mid); mergeSort(f,mid,ub); merge(f,lb,mid

How do I use merge sort to delete duplicates?

a 夏天 提交于 2019-11-29 05:16:49
I use recursive merge sort for sorting a link list, but during the merge sort I would like to delete duplicates. Anyone has insight in how to accomplish this? I am using C code. In merge sort you take two (or more) already-sorted lists repeatedly apply the following rules: find the lesser/least of the items of the top of each of the input lists, choosing any of the lowest items if there is a tie remove that item from its list add it to your output list To remove duplicates, you simply modify the rules very slightly: find the lesser/least of the items of the top of each of the input lists,

A Python Segmentation Fault?

淺唱寂寞╮ 提交于 2019-11-29 03:54:50
This generates a Segmentation Fault: 11 and I have no clue why. Before I get into it, here's the code: import numpy.random as nprnd import heapq import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(10**6) def rlist(size, limit_low, limit_high): for _ in xrange(size): yield nprnd.randint(limit_low, limit_high) def iterator_mergesort(iterator, size): return heapq.merge( iterator_mergesort( (iterator.__next__ for _ in xrange(size/2)), size/2), iterator_mergesort( iterator, size - (size/2)) ) def test(): size = 10**3 randomiterator = rlist(size, 0, size) sortediterator = iterator_mergesort(randomiterator, size)

Why does Java 6 Arrays#sort(Object[]) change from mergesort to insertionsort for small arrays?

限于喜欢 提交于 2019-11-28 23:04:39
Java 6's mergesort implementation in Arrays.java uses an insertion-sort if the array length is less than some threshold. This value is hard-coded to 7. As the algorithm is recursive, this eventually happens many times for a large array. The canonical merge-sort algorithm does not do this, just using merge-sort all the way down until there is only 1 element in the list. Is this an optimisation? If so, how is it supposed to help? And why 7 ? The insertion sort (even of <=7 things) increases the number of comparisons required to sort a large array dramatically - so will add cost to a sort where

Explanation of Merge Sort for Dummies

旧街凉风 提交于 2019-11-28 16:34:35
I found this code online: def merge(left, right): result = [] i ,j = 0, 0 while i < len(left) and j < len(right): if left[i] <= right[j]: result.append(left[i]) i += 1 else: result.append(right[j]) j += 1 result += left[i:] result += right[j:] return result def mergesort(list): if len(list) < 2: return list middle = len(list) / 2 left = mergesort(list[:middle]) right = mergesort(list[middle:]) return merge(left, right) It works 100% when I run it. I just do not really get how the merge sort works or how the recursive function is able to properly order both a left and a right. I believe that

why is merge sort preferred over quick sort for sorting linked lists

瘦欲@ 提交于 2019-11-28 15:33:12
问题 I read the following in a forum : Merge sort is very efficient for immutable datastructures like linked lists and Quick sort is typically faster than merge sort when the data is stored in memory. However, when the data set is huge and is stored on external devices such as a hard drive, merge sort is the clear winner in terms of speed. It minimizes the expensive reads of the external drive and when operating on linked lists, merge sort only requires a small constant amount of auxiliary storage

Java MergeSort - Out Of Memory Error: Java Heap Space

时光总嘲笑我的痴心妄想 提交于 2019-11-28 14:28:21
I'm trying to get some practice with sorting in Java. I'm working on the merge sort now... Eclipse is outputting Out Of Memory Error: Java Heap space , but I'm not sure how to debug that. I feel like my code is okay- any thoughts? import java.util.ArrayList; import java.util.List; public class Sorts { List<Integer> initialList; public Sorts() { initialList = new ArrayList<Integer>(); initialList.add(2); initialList.add(5); initialList.add(9); initialList.add(3); initialList.add(6); System.out.print("List: ["); for (int values : initialList) { System.out.print(values); } System.out.println("]")

Algorithm to merge multiple sorted sequences into one sorted sequence in C++

与世无争的帅哥 提交于 2019-11-28 07:17:06
问题 I am looking for an algorithm to merge multiple sorted sequences, lets say X sorted sequences with n elements, into one sorted sequence in c++ , can you provide some examples? note: I do not want to use any library 回答1: There are three methods that do the merging :- Suppose you are merging m lists with n elements each Algorithm 1 :- Merge lists two at a time. Use merge sort like merge routine to merge as the lists are sorted. This is very simple to implement without any libraries. But takes

Parallel Merge Sort with threads /much/ slower than Seq. Merge Sort. Help

独自空忆成欢 提交于 2019-11-28 06:54:00
问题 http://pastebin.com/YMS4ehRj ^ This is my implementation of parallel merge sort. Basically what I do is, For every split, the first half is handled by a thread whereas the second half is sequential (i.e.) say we have an array of 9 elements, [0..4] is handled by Thread 1, [0..1] is handled Thread 2, [5..6] is handled by thread 3 (Look at the source code for clarification). Everything else stays the same, like Merging. But the problem is, this runs much slower than merge sort, even slower than