3 is a more promising algorithmic parameter than 2

Computers and Mathematics with Applications

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 19-24

  Kaykobad, M ^a   Islam, Md M ^a   Amyeen, M E ^a   Murshed, M M ^b  

^a BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY   (Bangladesh)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Analysis of algorithms; Divide and conquer technique; Heaps; Performance evaluation; Quicksort

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; DIGITAL ARITHMETIC; TREES (MATHEMATICS);

ALGORITHMIC PARAMETER; DIVIDE AND CONQUER TECHNIQUE; TERNARY NUMBER SYSTEM;

NUMBER THEORY;

EID: 0032164720     PISSN: 08981221     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0898-1221(98)00158-8     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. N. Megiddo, Is binary encoding appropriate for the problem-language relationship?, Theoretical Computer Science 19, 337-341 (1982).
2. F. Göbel and C. Hoede, On an optimality property of ternary trees, Information and Control 42, 10-26 (1979).
3. S.S. Pinter and Y. Wolfstahl, Embedding ternary trees in VLSI arrays, Information Processing Letters 26, 187-191 (1987).
4. R. Schaffer and R. Sedgewick, The analysis of heapsort, Journal of Algorithms 15, 76-100 (1993).
5. S. Carlsson, Average-case results on heapsort, BIT 27, 2-17 (1987).
6. S. Carlsson, An optimal algorithm for deleting the root of a heap, Information Processing Letters 37, 117-120 (1991).
7. A. Paulik, Worst-case analysis of a generalized heapsort algorithm, Information Processing Letters 36, 159-165 (1990).
8. E.M. Reingold and W.J. Hansen, Data Structures, Little Brown and Company, (1983).