Can a permutation be sorted by best short swaps?

A short swap switches two elements with at most one element caught between them. Sorting permutation by short swaps asks to find a shortest short swap sequence to transform a permutation into another. A short swap can eliminate at most three inversions. It is still open for whether a permutation can be sorted by short swaps each of which can eliminate three inversions. In this paper, we present a polynomial time algorithm to solve the problem, which can decide whether a permutation can be sorted by short swaps each of which can eliminate 3 inversions in O(n) time, and if so, sort the permutation by such short swaps in O(n^2) time, where n is the number of elements in the permutation. A short swap can cause the total length of two element vectors to decrease by at most 4. We further propose an algorithm to recognize a permutation which can be sorted by short swaps each of which can cause the element vector length sum to decrease by 4 in O(n) time, and if so, sort the permutation by such short swaps in O(n^2) time. This improves upon the O(n^2) algorithm proposed by Heath and Vergara to decide whether a permutation is so called lucky

Complexity of Token Swapping and its Variants

In the Token Swapping problem we are given a graph with a token placed on each vertex. Each token has exactly one destination vertex, and we try to move all the tokens to their destinations, using the minimum number of swaps, i.e., operations of exchanging the tokens on two adjacent vertices. As the main result of this paper, we show that Token Swapping is $W[1]$-hard parameterized by the length $k$ of a shortest sequence of swaps. In fact, we prove that, for any computable function $f$, it cannot be solved in time $f(k)n^{o(k / \log k)}$ where $n$ is the number of vertices of the input graph, unless the ETH fails. This lower bound almost matches the trivial $n^{O(k)}$-time algorithm. We also consider two generalizations of the Token Swapping, namely Colored Token Swapping (where the tokens have different colors and tokens of the same color are indistinguishable), and Subset Token Swapping (where each token has a set of possible destinations). To complement the hardness result, we prove that even the most general variant, Subset Token Swapping, is FPT in nowhere-dense graph classes. Finally, we consider the complexities of all three problems in very restricted classes of graphs: graphs of bounded treewidth and diameter, stars, cliques, and paths, trying to identify the borderlines between polynomial and NP-hard cases.Comment: 23 pages, 7 Figure

Analysis of pivot sampling in dual-pivot Quicksort: A holistic analysis of Yaroslavskiy's partitioning scheme

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00453-015-0041-7The new dual-pivot Quicksort by Vladimir Yaroslavskiy-used in Oracle's Java runtime library since version 7-features intriguing asymmetries. They make a basic variant of this algorithm use less comparisons than classic single-pivot Quicksort. In this paper, we extend the analysis to the case where the two pivots are chosen as fixed order statistics of a random sample. Surprisingly, dual-pivot Quicksort then needs more comparisons than a corresponding version of classic Quicksort, so it is clear that counting comparisons is not sufficient to explain the running time advantages observed for Yaroslavskiy's algorithm in practice. Consequently, we take a more holistic approach and give also the precise leading term of the average number of swaps, the number of executed Java Bytecode instructions and the number of scanned elements, a new simple cost measure that approximates I/O costs in the memory hierarchy. We determine optimal order statistics for each of the cost measures. It turns out that the asymmetries in Yaroslavskiy's algorithm render pivots with a systematic skew more efficient than the symmetric choice. Moreover, we finally have a convincing explanation for the success of Yaroslavskiy's algorithm in practice: compared with corresponding versions of classic single-pivot Quicksort, dual-pivot Quicksort needs significantly less I/Os, both with and without pivot sampling.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Analysis of Quickselect under Yaroslavskiy's Dual-Pivoting Algorithm

There is excitement within the algorithms community about a new partitioning method introduced by Yaroslavskiy. This algorithm renders Quicksort slightly faster than the case when it runs under classic partitioning methods. We show that this improved performance in Quicksort is not sustained in Quickselect; a variant of Quicksort for finding order statistics. We investigate the number of comparisons made by Quickselect to find a key with a randomly selected rank under Yaroslavskiy's algorithm. This grand averaging is a smoothing operator over all individual distributions for specific fixed order statistics. We give the exact grand average. The grand distribution of the number of comparison (when suitably scaled) is given as the fixed-point solution of a distributional equation of a contraction in the Zolotarev metric space. Our investigation shows that Quickselect under older partitioning methods slightly outperforms Quickselect under Yaroslavskiy's algorithm, for an order statistic of a random rank. Similar results are obtained for extremal order statistics, where again we find the exact average, and the distribution for the number of comparisons (when suitably scaled). Both limiting distributions are of perpetuities (a sum of products of independent mixed continuous random variables).Comment: full version with appendices; otherwise identical to Algorithmica versio