A Tight Lower Bound for Decrease-Key in the Pure Heap Model

We improve the lower bound on the amortized cost of the decrease-key operation in the pure heap model and show that any pure-heap-model heap (that has a \bigoh{\log n} amortized-time extract-min operation) must spend \bigom{\log\log n} amortized time on the decrease-key operation. Our result shows that sort heaps as well as pure-heap variants of numerous other heaps have asymptotically optimal decrease-key operations in the pure heap model. In addition, our improved lower bound matches the lower bound of Fredman [J. ACM 46(4):473-501 (1999)] for pairing heaps [M.L. Fredman, R. Sedgewick, D.D. Sleator, and R.E. Tarjan. Algorithmica 1(1):111-129 (1986)] and surpasses it for pure-heap variants of numerous other heaps with augmented data such as pointer rank-pairing heaps.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1302.664

A Back-to-Basics Empirical Study of Priority Queues

The theory community has proposed several new heap variants in the recent past which have remained largely untested experimentally. We take the field back to the drawing board, with straightforward implementations of both classic and novel structures using only standard, well-known optimizations. We study the behavior of each structure on a variety of inputs, including artificial workloads, workloads generated by running algorithms on real map data, and workloads from a discrete event simulator used in recent systems networking research. We provide observations about which characteristics are most correlated to performance. For example, we find that the L1 cache miss rate appears to be strongly correlated with wallclock time. We also provide observations about how the input sequence affects the relative performance of the different heap variants. For example, we show (both theoretically and in practice) that certain random insertion-deletion sequences are degenerate and can lead to misleading results. Overall, our findings suggest that while the conventional wisdom holds in some cases, it is sorely mistaken in others

Improved Bounds for Multipass Pairing Heaps and Path-Balanced Binary Search Trees

We revisit multipass pairing heaps and path-balanced binary search trees (BSTs), two classical algorithms for data structure maintenance. The pairing heap is a simple and efficient "self-adjusting" heap, introduced in 1986 by Fredman, Sedgewick, Sleator, and Tarjan. In the multipass variant (one of the original pairing heap variants described by Fredman et al.) the minimum item is extracted via repeated pairing rounds in which neighboring siblings are linked. Path-balanced BSTs, proposed by Sleator (cf. Subramanian, 1996), are a natural alternative to Splay trees (Sleator and Tarjan, 1983). In a path-balanced BST, whenever an item is accessed, the search path leading to that item is re-arranged into a balanced tree. Despite their simplicity, both algorithms turned out to be difficult to analyse. Fredman et al. showed that operations in multipass pairing heaps take amortized O(log n * log log n / log log log n) time. For searching in path-balanced BSTs, Balasubramanian and Raman showed in 1995 the same amortized time bound of O(log n * log log n / log log log n), using a different argument. In this paper we show an explicit connection between the two algorithms and improve both bounds to O(log n * 2^{log^* n} * log^* n), respectively O(log n * 2^{log^* n} * (log^* n)^2), where log^* denotes the slowly growing iterated logarithm function. These are the first improvements in more than three, resp. two decades, approaching the information-theoretic lower bound of Omega(log n)

Pairing heaps: the forward variant

The pairing heap is a classical heap data structure introduced in 1986 by Fredman, Sedgewick, Sleator, and Tarjan. It is remarkable both for its simplicity and for its excellent performance in practice. The "magic" of pairing heaps lies in the restructuring that happens after the deletion of the smallest item. The resulting collection of trees is consolidated in two rounds: a left-to-right pairing round, followed by a right-to-left accumulation round. Fredman et al. showed, via an elegant correspondence to splay trees, that in a pairing heap of size n all heap operations take O(log n) amortized time. They also proposed an arguably more natural variant, where both pairing and accumulation are performed in a combined left-to-right round (called the forward variant of pairing heaps). The analogy to splaying breaks down in this case, and the analysis of the forward variant was left open. In this paper we show that inserting an item and deleting the minimum in a forward-variant pairing heap both take amortized time O(log(n) * 4^(sqrt(log n))). This is the first improvement over the O(sqrt(n)) bound showed by Fredman et al. three decades ago. Our analysis relies on a new potential function that tracks parent-child rank-differences in the heap