An In-Place Sorting with O(n log n) Comparisons and O(n) Moves

We present the first in-place algorithm for sorting an array of size n that performs, in the worst case, at most O(n log n) element comparisons and O(n) element transports. This solves a long-standing open problem, stated explicitly, e.g., in [J.I. Munro and V. Raman, Sorting with minimum data movement, J. Algorithms, 13, 374-93, 1992], of whether there exists a sorting algorithm that matches the asymptotic lower bounds on all computational resources simultaneously

QuickXsort: Efficient Sorting with n log n - 1.399n +o(n) Comparisons on Average

In this paper we generalize the idea of QuickHeapsort leading to the notion of QuickXsort. Given some external sorting algorithm X, QuickXsort yields an internal sorting algorithm if X satisfies certain natural conditions. With QuickWeakHeapsort and QuickMergesort we present two examples for the QuickXsort-construction. Both are efficient algorithms that incur approximately n log n - 1.26n +o(n) comparisons on the average. A worst case of n log n + O(n) comparisons can be achieved without significantly affecting the average case. Furthermore, we describe an implementation of MergeInsertion for small n. Taking MergeInsertion as a base case for QuickMergesort, we establish a worst-case efficient sorting algorithm calling for n log n - 1.3999n + o(n) comparisons on average. QuickMergesort with constant size base cases shows the best performance on practical inputs: when sorting integers it is slower by only 15% to STL-Introsort

Average-Case Complexity of Shellsort

We prove a general lower bound on the average-case complexity of Shellsort: the average number of data-movements (and comparisons) made by a $p$-pass Shellsort for any incremental sequence is \Omega (pn^{1 + 1/p) for all $p \leq \log n$. Using similar arguments, we analyze the average-case complexity of several other sorting algorithms.Comment: 11 pages. Submitted to ICALP'9

Strengthened Lazy Heaps: Surpassing the Lower Bounds for Binary Heaps

Let $n$ denote the number of elements currently in a data structure. An in-place heap is stored in the first $n$ locations of an array, uses $O(1)$ extra space, and supports the operations: minimum, insert, and extract-min. We introduce an in-place heap, for which minimum and insert take $O(1)$ worst-case time, and extract-min takes $O(\lg{} n)$ worst-case time and involves at most $\lg{} n + O(1)$ element comparisons. The achieved bounds are optimal to within additive constant terms for the number of element comparisons. In particular, these bounds for both insert and extract-min -and the time bound for insert- surpass the corresponding lower bounds known for binary heaps, though our data structure is similar. In a binary heap, when viewed as a nearly complete binary tree, every node other than the root obeys the heap property, i.e. the element at a node is not smaller than that at its parent. To surpass the lower bound for extract-min, we reinforce a stronger property at the bottom levels of the heap that the element at any right child is not smaller than that at its left sibling. To surpass the lower bound for insert, we buffer insertions and allow $O(\lg^2{} n)$ nodes to violate heap order in relation to their parents

Insertion Sort is O(n log n)

Traditional Insertion Sort runs in O(n^2) time because each insertion takes O(n) time. When people run Insertion Sort in the physical world, they leave gaps between items to accelerate insertions. Gaps help in computers as well. This paper shows that Gapped Insertion Sort has insertion times of O(log n) with high probability, yielding a total running time of O(n log n) with high probability.Comment: 6 pages, Latex. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Fun With Algorithms, FUN 200