Introduction To Algorithms: Randomly Built Binary Search Trees

Introduction to Algorithms
6.046J/18.401J
LECTURE 9
Randomly built binary
search trees
• Expected node depth
• Analyzing height
Convexity lemma
Jensen’s inequality
Exponential height
• Post mortem
Prof. Erik Demaine
October 17, 2005 Copyright © 2001-5 by Erik D. Demaine and Charles E. Leiserson L7.1
Binary-search-tree sort
T←∅ ⊳ Create an empty BST
for i = 1 to n
do TREE-INSERT(T, A[i])
Perform an inorder tree walk of T.
Example: 33
A = [3 1 8 2 6 7 5] 11 88
Tree-walk time = O(n), 22 66
but how long does it 55 77
take to build the BST?
Analysis of BST sort
BST sort performs the same comparisons as
quicksort, but in a different order!
3 1 8 2 6 7 5
1 2 8 6 7 5
2 6 75
5 7
The expected time to build the tree is asymptot-
ically the same as the running time of quicksort.
Node depth
The depth of a node = the number of comparisons
made during TREE-INSERT. Assuming all input
permutations are equally likely, we have
Average node depth
⎡ n ⎤
= E ⎢∑ (# comparisons to insert node i )⎥
1
n ⎣ i =1 ⎦
= 1 O(n lg n) (quicksort analysis)
n
= O(lg n) .
Expected tree height
But, average node depth of a randomly built
BST = O(lg n) does not necessarily mean that its
expected height is also O(lg n) (although it is).
Example.
≤ lg n
h= n
Ave. depth ≤ 1 ⎛⎜ n ⋅ lg n + n ⋅ n ⎟⎞
n⎝ 2 ⎠
= O(lg n)
Height of a randomly built
binary search tree
Outline of the analysis:
• Prove Jensen’s inequality, which says that
f(E[X]) ≤ E[f(X)] for any convex function f and
random variable X.
• Analyze the exponential height of a randomly
built BST on n nodes, which is the random
variable Yn = 2Xn, where Xn is the random
variable denoting the height of the BST.
• Prove that 2E[Xn] ≤ E[2Xn ] = E[Yn] = O(n3),
and hence that E[Xn] = O(lg n).
Convex functions
A function f : R → R is convex if for all
α,β ≥ 0 such that α + β = 1, we have
f(αx + βy) ≤ α f(x) + β f(y)
for all x,y ∈ R.
f
f(y)
αf(x) + βf(y)
f(x)
f(αx + βy)
x αx + βy y
Convexity lemma
Lemma. Let f : R → R be a convex function,
and let α1, α2 , …, αn be nonnegative real
numbers such that ∑k αk = 1. Then, for any
real numbers x1, x2, …, xn, we have
⎛ n ⎞ n
f ⎜⎜ ∑ α k xk ⎟⎟ ≤ ∑ α k f ( xk ) .
⎝ k =1 ⎠ k =1
Proof. By induction on n. For n = 1, we have
α1 = 1, and hence f(α1x1) ≤ α1f(x1) trivially.
Proof (continued)
Inductive step:
⎛ n ⎞ ⎛ n −1 ⎞
αk
f ⎜⎜ ∑ α k xk ⎟⎟ = f ⎜⎜α n xn + (1 − α n ) ∑ xk ⎟⎟
⎝ k =1 ⎠ ⎝ k =11 − α n ⎠
Algebra.
Proof (continued)
Inductive step:
⎛ n ⎞ ⎛ n −1 ⎞
αk
f ⎜⎜ ∑ α k xk ⎟⎟ = f ⎜⎜α n xn + (1 − α n ) ∑ xk ⎟⎟
⎝ k =1 ⎠ ⎝ k =11 − α n ⎠
⎛ n−1 α k ⎞
≤ α n f ( xn ) + (1 − α n ) f ⎜⎜ ∑ xk ⎟⎟
⎝ k =11 − α n ⎠
Convexity.
Proof (continued)
Inductive step:
⎛ n ⎞ ⎛ n −1 ⎞
αk
f ⎜⎜ ∑ α k xk ⎟⎟ = f ⎜⎜α n xn + (1 − α n ) ∑ xk ⎟⎟
⎝ k =1 ⎠ ⎝ k =11 − α n ⎠
⎛ n−1 α k ⎞
≤ α n f ( xn ) + (1 − α n ) f ⎜⎜ ∑ xk ⎟⎟
⎝ k =11 − α n ⎠
n −1
αk
≤ α n f ( xn ) + (1 − α n ) ∑ f ( xk )
k =11 − α n
Induction.
Proof (continued)
Inductive step:
⎛ n ⎞ ⎛ n −1 ⎞
αk
f ⎜⎜ ∑ α k xk ⎟⎟ = f ⎜⎜α n xn + (1 − α n ) ∑ xk ⎟⎟
⎝ k =1 ⎠ ⎝ k =11 − α n ⎠
⎛ n−1 α k ⎞
≤ α n f ( xn ) + (1 − α n ) f ⎜⎜ ∑ xk ⎟⎟
⎝ k =11 − α n ⎠
n −1
αk
≤ α n f ( xn ) + (1 − α n ) ∑ f ( xk )
k =11 − α n
n
= ∑ α k f ( xk ) . Algebra.
k =1
Convexity lemma: infinite case
Lemma. Let f : R → R be a convex function,
and let α1, α2 , …, be nonnegative real numbers
such that ∑k αk = 1. Then, for any real
numbers x1, x2, …, we have
⎛ ∞ ⎞ ∞
f ⎜ ∑ α k xk ⎟ ≤ ∑ α k f ( xk ) ,
⎝ k =1 ⎠ k =1
assuming that these summations exist.
Proof. By the convexity lemma, for any n ≥ 1,
⎛ n α ⎞ n α
f ⎜ ∑ n k xk ⎟ ≤ ∑ n k f ( xk ) .
⎜ k =1 ⎟ k =1
⎝ ∑i =1 i ⎠
α ∑i =1α i
Proof. By the convexity lemma, for any n ≥ 1,
⎛ n α ⎞ n α
f ⎜ ∑ n k xk ⎟ ≤ ∑ n k f ( xk ) .
⎜ k =1 ⎟ k =1
⎝ ∑i =1 i ⎠
α ∑i =1α i
Taking the limit of both sides
(and because the inequality is not strict):
⎛ 1 n ⎞ 1 n
lim f ⎜ n ∑ ⎟
α k xk ≤ lim n ∑α f ( xk )
n →∞ ⎜ ⎟ n →∞
⎝ ∑i =1α i ∑i =1α i
k
k =1 k =1
⎠
∞ ∞
→ 1 → ∑ α k xk →1 → ∑ α k f ( xk )
k =1 k =1
Lemma. Let f be a convex function, and let X
be a random variable. Then, f (E[X]) ≤ E[ f (X)].
Proof.
⎛ ∞ ⎞
f ( E[ X ]) = f ⎜⎜ ∑ k ⋅ Pr{ X = k}⎟⎟
⎝ k =−∞ ⎠
Definition of expectation.
Proof.
⎛ ∞ ⎞
f ( E[ X ]) = f ⎜⎜ ∑ k ⋅ Pr{ X = k}⎟⎟
⎝ k =−∞ ⎠
∞
≤ ∑ f (k ) ⋅ Pr{X = k}
k =−∞
Convexity lemma (infinite case).
Proof.
⎛ ∞ ⎞
f ( E[ X ]) = f ⎜⎜ ∑ k ⋅ Pr{ X = k}⎟⎟
⎝ k =−∞ ⎠
∞
≤ ∑ f (k ) ⋅ Pr{X = k}
k =−∞
= E[ f ( X )] .
Tricky step, but true—think about it.
Analysis of BST height
Let Xn be the random variable denoting
the height of a randomly built binary
search tree on n nodes, and let Yn = 2Xn
be its exponential height.
If the root of the tree has rank k, then
Xn = 1 + max{Xk–1, Xn–k} ,
since each of the left and right subtrees
of the root are randomly built. Hence,
we have
Yn = 2· max{Yk–1, Yn–k} .
Analysis (continued)
Define the indicator random variable Znk as
1 if the root has rank k,
Znk =
0 otherwise.
Thus, Pr{Znk = 1} = E[Znk] = 1/n, and

n
Yn = ∑ Z nk (2 ⋅ max{Yk −1 , Yn−k }) .
k =1
Exponential height recurrence
⎡n ⎤
E [Yn ] = E ⎢∑ Z nk (2 ⋅ max{Yk −1 , Yn−k })⎥
⎣k =1 ⎦
Take expectation of both sides.
⎡n ⎤
⎣k =1 ⎦
n
= ∑ E [Z nk (2 ⋅ max{Yk −1 , Yn−k })]
k =1
Linearity of expectation.
⎡n ⎤
⎣k =1 ⎦
n
= ∑ E [Z nk (2 ⋅ max{Yk −1 , Yn−k })]
k =1
n
= 2∑ E[ Z nk ] ⋅ E[max{Yk −1 , Yn−k }]
k =1
Independence of the rank of the root
from the ranks of subtree roots.
⎡n ⎤
⎣k =1 ⎦
n
= ∑ E [Z nk (2 ⋅ max{Yk −1 , Yn−k })]
k =1
n
= 2∑ E[ Z nk ] ⋅ E[max{Yk −1 , Yn−k }]
k =1
n
≤ 2 ∑ E[Yk −1 + Yn−k ]
n k =1
The max of two nonnegative numbers
is at most their sum, and E[Znk] = 1/n.
⎡n ⎤
E[Yn ] = E ⎢∑ Z nk (2 ⋅ max{Yk −1 , Yn−k })⎥
⎣k =1 ⎦
n
= ∑ E[Z nk (2 ⋅ max{Yk −1 , Yn−k })]
k =1
n
= 2∑ E[ Z nk ] ⋅ E[max{Yk −1 , Yn−k }]
k =1
n
≤ 2 ∑ E[Yk −1 + Yn−k ]
n k =1
n −1
= 4 ∑ E[Yk ]
Each term appears
n k =0 twice, and reindex.
Solving the recurrence
Use substitution to n −1
show that E[Yn] ≤ cn3 E [Yn ] = 4 ∑ E[Yk ]

n k =0
for some positive
constant c, which we
can pick sufficiently
large to handle the
initial conditions.

n k =0
for some positive n −1
constant c, which we ≤ 4 ∑ ck 3
can pick sufficiently n k =0
large to handle the
initial conditions. Substitution.
n −1
Use substitution to
n k =0
large to handle the n 3
4 c
≤ ∫ x dx
initial conditions.
n 0
Integral method.

n k =0
4 c
≤ ∫ x dx
initial conditions.
n 0
4 c
= ⎜ ⎟⎛ n 4⎞
n⎝ 4⎠
Solve the integral.

n k =0
4 c
≤ ∫ x dx
initial conditions.
n 0
4 c
= ⎜ ⎟ ⎛ n 4⎞
n⎝ 4⎠
= cn3. Algebra.
The grand finale
Putting it all together, we have

2E[Xn] ≤ E[2Xn ]
Jensen’s inequality, since
f(x) = 2x is convex.
The grand finale

2E[Xn] ≤ E[2Xn ]
= E[Yn]
Definition.
The grand finale

2E[Xn] ≤ E[2Xn ]
= E[Yn]
≤ cn3 .
What we just showed.
The grand finale

2E[Xn] ≤ E[2Xn ]
= E[Yn]
≤ cn3 .
Taking the lg of both sides yields
E[Xn] ≤ 3 lg n +O(1) .
Post mortem
Q. Does the analysis have to be this hard?
Q. Why bother with analyzing exponential

height?
Q. Why not just develop the recurrence on

Xn = 1 + max{Xk–1, Xn–k}
directly?
Post mortem (continued)
A. The inequality
max{a, b} ≤ a + b .
provides a poor upper bound, since the RHS
approaches the LHS slowly as |a – b| increases.
The bound
max{2a, 2b} ≤ 2a + 2b
allows the RHS to approach the LHS far more
quickly as |a – b| increases. By using the
convexity of f(x) = 2x via Jensen’s inequality,
we can manipulate the sum of exponentials,
resulting in a tight analysis.
Thought exercises
• See what happens when you try to do the
analysis on Xn directly.
• Try to understand better why the proof
uses an exponential. Will a quadratic do?
• See if you can find a simpler argument.
(This argument is a little simpler than the
one in the book—I hope it’s correct!)

Introduction To Algorithms: Randomly Built Binary Search Trees

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction To Algorithms: Randomly Built Binary Search Trees

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction to Algorithms

Convexity lemma (infinite case).

Thus, Pr{Znk = 1} = E[Znk] = 1/n, and

show that E[Yn] ≤ cn3 E [Yn ] = 4 ∑ E[Yk ]

show that E[Yn] ≤ cn3 E [Yn ] = 4 ∑ E[Yk ]

show that E[Yn] ≤ cn3 E [Yn ] = 4 ∑ E[Yk ]

show that E[Yn] ≤ cn3 E [Yn ] = 4 ∑ E[Yk ]

Putting it all together, we have

Putting it all together, we have

Putting it all together, we have

Putting it all together, we have

Q. Why bother with analyzing exponential

Q. Why not just develop the recurrence on

You might also like