Should static search trees ever be unbalanced?

3Citations
Citations of this article
2Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

In this paper we study the question of whether or not a static search tree should ever be unbalanced. We present several methods to restructure an unbalanced k-ary search tree T into a new tree R that preserves many of the properties of T while having a height of log k n + 1 which is one unit off of the optimal height. More specifically, we show that it is possible to ensure that the depth of the elements in R is no more than their depth in T plus at most log k log k n + 2. At the same time it is possible to guarantee that the average access time P(R) in tree R is no more than the average access time P(T) in tree T plus O(log k P(T)). This suggests that for most applications, a balanced tree is always a better option than an unbalanced one since the balanced tree has similar average access time and much better worst case access time. © 2010 Springer-Verlag.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bose, P., & Douïeb, K. (2010). Should static search trees ever be unbalanced? In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 6506 LNCS, pp. 109–120). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17517-6_12

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free