Introduction to Algorithms

Transcription

1 Instructor s Manual by Thomas H. Cormen Clara Lee Erica Lin to Accompany Introduction to Algorithms Second Edition by Thomas H. Cormen Charles E. Leiserson Ronald L. Rivest Clifford Stein

2

3 Contents Revision History R-1 Preface P-1 Chapter 2: Getting Started Lecture Notes 2-1 Solutions 2-16 Chapter 3: Growth of Functions Lecture Notes 3-1 Solutions 3-7 Chapter 4: Recurrences Lecture Notes 4-1 Solutions 4-8 Chapter 5: Probabilistic Analysis and Randomized Algorithms Lecture Notes 5-1 Solutions 5-8 Chapter 6: Heapsort Lecture Notes 6-1 Solutions 6-10 Chapter 7: Quicksort Lecture Notes 7-1 Solutions 7-9 Chapter 8: Sorting in Linear Time Lecture Notes 8-1 Solutions 8-9 Chapter 9: Medians and Order Statistics Lecture Notes 9-1 Solutions 9-9 Chapter 11: Hash Tables Lecture Notes 11-1 Solutions Chapter 12: Binary Search Trees Lecture Notes 12-1 Solutions Chapter 13: Red-Black Trees Lecture Notes 13-1 Solutions Chapter 14: Augmenting Data Structures Lecture Notes 14-1 Solutions 14-9

4 iv Contents Chapter 15: Dynamic Programming Lecture Notes 15-1 Solutions Chapter 16: Greedy Algorithms Lecture Notes 16-1 Solutions 16-9 Chapter 17: Amortized Analysis Lecture Notes 17-1 Solutions Chapter 21: Data Structures for Disjoint Sets Lecture Notes 21-1 Solutions 21-6 Chapter 22: Elementary Graph Algorithms Lecture Notes 22-1 Solutions Chapter 23: Minimum Spanning Trees Lecture Notes 23-1 Solutions 23-8 Chapter 24: Single-Source Shortest Paths Lecture Notes 24-1 Solutions Chapter 25: All-Pairs Shortest Paths Lecture Notes 25-1 Solutions 25-8 Chapter 26: Maximum Flow Lecture Notes 26-1 Solutions Chapter 27: Sorting Networks Lecture Notes 27-1 Solutions 27-8 Index I-1

5 Revision History Revisions are listed by date rather than being numbered. 14 January Changed the exposition of indicator random variables in the Chapter 5 notes to correct for an error in the text. Affected pages: 5-4 through 5-6. (The only content changes are on page 5-4; in pages 5-5 and 5-6 only pagination changes.) Affected files: manual.pdf, fmatter.pdf, chap5.pdf. 14 January Corrected an error in the pseudocode for the solution to Exercise on page Affected files: manual.pdf, fmatter.pdf, chap2.pdf. 7 October Corrected an typo in EUCLIDEAN-TSP on page Affected files: manual.pdf, fmatter.pdf, chap15.pdf. 1 August Initial release.

6

7 Preface This document is an instructor s manual to accompany Introduction to Algorithms, Second Edition, by Thomas H. Cormen, Charles E. Leiserson, Ronald L. Rivest, and Clifford Stein. It is intended for use in a course on algorithms. You might also find some of the material herein to be useful for a CS 2-style course in data structures. Unlike the instructor s manual for the first edition of the text which was organized around the undergraduate algorithms course taught by Charles Leiserson at MIT in Spring 1991 we have chosen to organize the manual for the second edition according to chapters of the text. That is, for most chapters we have provided a set of lecture notes and a set of exercise and problem solutions pertaining to the chapter. This organization allows you to decide how to best use the material in the manual in your own course. We have not included lecture notes and solutions for every chapter, nor have we included solutions for every exercise and problem within the chapters that we have selected. We felt that Chapter 1 is too nontechnical to include here, and Chapter 10 consists of background material that often falls outside algorithms and datastructures courses. We have also omitted the chapters that are not covered in the courses that we teach: Chapters and 28 35, as well as Appendices A C; future editions of this manual may include some of these chapters. There are two reasons that we have not included solutions to all exercises and problems in the selected chapters. First, writing up all these solutions would take a long time, and we felt it more important to release this manual in as timely a fashion as possible. Second, if we were to include all solutions, this manual would be longer than the text itself! We have numbered the pages in this manual using the format CC-PP, wherecc is a chapter number of the text and PP is the page number within that chapter s lecture notes and solutions. The PP numbers restart from 1 at the beginning of each chapter s lecture notes. We chose this form of page numbering so that if we add or change solutions to exercises and problems, the only pages whose numbering is affected are those for the solutions for that chapter. Moreover, if we add material for currently uncovered chapters, the numbers of the existing pages will remain unchanged. The lecture notes The lecture notes are based on three sources:

8 P-2 Preface Some are from the first-edition manual, and so they correspond to Charles Leiserson s lectures in MIT s undergraduate algorithms course, Some are from Tom Cormen s lectures in Dartmouth College s undergraduate algorithms course, CS 25. Some are written just for this manual. You will find that the lecture notes are more informal than the text, as is appropriate for a lecture situation. In some places, we have simplified the material for lecture presentation or even omitted certain considerations. Some sections of the text usually starred are omitted from the lecture notes. (We have included lecture notes for one starred section: 12.4, on randomly built binary search trees, which we cover in an optional CS 25 lecture.) In several places in the lecture notes, we have included asides to the instructor. The asides are typeset in a slanted font and are enclosed in square brackets. [Here is an aside.] Some of the asides suggest leaving certain material on the board, since you will be coming back to it later. If you are projecting a presentation rather than writing on a blackboard or whiteboard, you might want to mark slides containing this material so that you can easily come back to them later in the lecture. We have chosen not to indicate how long it takes to cover material, as the time necessary to cover a topic depends on the instructor, the students, the class schedule, and other variables. There are two differences in how we write pseudocode in the lecture notes and the text: Lines are not numbered in the lecture notes. We find them inconvenient to number when writing pseudocode on the board. We avoid using the length attribute of an array. Instead, we pass the array length as a parameter to the procedure. This change makes the pseudocode more concise, as well as matching better with the description of what it does. We have also minimized the use of shading in figures within lecture notes, since drawing a figure with shading on a blackboard or whiteboard is difficult. The solutions The solutions are based on the same sources as the lecture notes. They are written a bit more formally than the lecture notes, though a bit less formally than the text. We do not number lines of pseudocode, but we do use the length attribute (on the assumption that you will want your students to write pseudocode as it appears in the text). The index lists all the exercises and problems for which this manual provides solutions, along with the number of the page on which each solution starts. Asides appear in a handful of places throughout the solutions. Also, we are less reluctant to use shading in figures within solutions, since these figures are more likely to be reproduced than to be drawn on a board.

9 Preface P-3 Source files For several reasons, we are unable to publish or transmit source files for this manual. We apologize for this inconvenience. Reporting errors and suggestions Undoubtedly, instructors will find errors in this manual. Please report errors by sending to If you have a suggestion for an improvement to this manual, please feel free to submit it via to clrs-manual-suggestions@mhhe.com As usual, if you find an error in the text itself, please verify that it has not already been posted on the errata web page before you submit it. You can use the MIT Press web site for the text, locate the errata web page and to submit an error report. We thank you in advance for your assistance in correcting errors in both this manual and the text. Acknowledgments This manual borrows heavily from the first-edition manual, which was written by Julie Sussman, P.P.A. Julie did such a superb job on the first-edition manual, finding numerous errors in the first-edition text in the process, that we were thrilled to have her serve as technical copyeditor for the second-edition text. Charles Leiserson also put in large amounts of time working with Julie on the first-edition manual. The other three Introduction to Algorithms authors Charles Leiserson, Ron Rivest, and Cliff Stein provided helpful comments and suggestions for solutions to exercises and problems. Some of the solutions are modifications of those written over the years by teaching assistants for algorithms courses at MIT and Dartmouth. At this point, we do not know which TAs wrote which solutions, and so we simply thank them collectively. We also thank McGraw-Hill and our editors, Betsy Jones and Melinda Dougharty, for moral and financial support. Thanks also to our MIT Press editor, Bob Prior, and to David Jones of The MIT Press for help with TEX macros. Wayne Cripps, John Konkle, and Tim Tregubov provided computer support at Dartmouth, and the MIT sysadmins were Greg Shomo and Matt McKinnon. Phillip Meek of McGraw- Hill helped us hook this manual into their web site. THOMAS H. CORMEN CLARA LEE ERICA LIN Hanover, New Hampshire July 2002

10

11 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started Chapter 2 overview Goals: Start using frameworks for describing and analyzing algorithms. Examine two algorithms for sorting: insertion sort and merge sort. See how to describe algorithms in pseudocode. Begin using asymptotic notation to express running-time analysis. Learn the technique of divide and conquer in the context of merge sort. Insertion sort The sorting problem Input: A sequence of n numbers a 1, a 2,...,a n. Output: A permutation (reordering) a 1, a 2,...,a n of the input sequence such that a 1 a 2 a n. The sequences are typically stored in arrays. We also refer to the numbers as keys. Along with each key may be additional information, known as satellite data. [You might want to clarify that satellite data does not necessarily come from a satellite!] We will see several ways to solve the sorting problem. Each way will be expressed as an algorithm: a well-defined computational procedure that takes some value, or set of values, as input and produces some value, or set of values, as output. Expressing algorithms We express algorithms in whatever way is the clearest and most concise. English is sometimes the best way. When issues of control need to be made perfectly clear, we often use pseudocode.

12 2-2 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started Pseudocode is similar to C, C++, Pascal, and Java. If you know any of these languages, you should be able to understand pseudocode. Pseudocode is designed for expressing algorithms to humans. Software engineering issues of data abstraction, modularity, and error handling are often ignored. We sometimes embed English statements into pseudocode. Therefore, unlike for real programming languages, we cannot create a compiler that translates pseudocode to machine code. Insertion sort A good algorithm for sorting a small number of elements. It works the way you might sort a hand of playing cards: Start with an empty left hand and the cards face down on the table. Then remove one card at a time from the table, and insert it into the correct position in the left hand. To find the correct position for a card, compare it with each of the cards already in the hand, from right to left. At all times, the cards held in the left hand are sorted, and these cards were originally the top cards of the pile on the table. Pseudocode: We use a procedure INSERTION-SORT. Takes as parameters an array A[1..n] and the length n of the array. As in Pascal, we use.. to denote a range within an array. [We usually use 1-origin indexing, as we do here. There are a few places in later chapters where we use 0-origin indexing instead. If you are translating pseudocode to C, C++, or Java, which use 0-origin indexing, you need to be careful to get the indices right. One option is to adjust all index calculations in the C, C++, or Java code to compensate. An easier option is, when using an array A[1..n], to allocate the array to be one entry longer A[0..n] and just don t use the entry at index 0.] [In the lecture notes, we indicate array lengths by parameters rather than by using the length attribute that is used in the book. That saves us a line of pseudocode each time. The solutions continue to use the length attribute.] The array A is sorted in place: the numbers are rearranged within the array, with at most a constant number outside the array at any time.

13 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-3 INSERTION-SORT( A) cost times for j 2 to n c 1 n do key A[ j] c 2 n 1 Insert A[ j] into the sorted sequence A[1.. j 1]. 0 n 1 i j 1 c 4 n 1 while i > 0andA[i] > key c n 5 j=2 t j do A[i + 1] A[i] c n 6 j=2 (t j 1) i i 1 c n 7 j=2 (t j 1) A[i + 1] key c 8 n 1 [Leave this on the board, but show only the pseudocode for now. We ll put in the cost and times columns later.] Example: j j j j j [Read this figure row by row. Each part shows what happens for a particular iteration with the value of j indicated. j indexes the current card being inserted into the hand. Elements to the left of A[ j] that are greater than A[ j] move one position to the right, and A[ j] moves into the evacuated position. The heavy vertical lines separate the part of the array in which an iteration works A[1.. j] from the part of the array that is unaffected by this iteration A[ j + 1..n]. The last part of the figure shows the final sorted array.] Correctness We often use a loop invariant to help us understand why an algorithm gives the correct answer. Here s the loop invariant for INSERTION-SORT: Loop invariant: At the start of each iteration of the outer for loop the loop indexed by j the subarray A[1.. j 1] consists of the elements originally in A[1.. j 1] but in sorted order. To use a loop invariant to prove correctness, we must show three things about it: Initialization: It is true prior to the first iteration of the loop. Maintenance: If it is true before an iteration of the loop, it remains true before the next iteration. Termination: When the loop terminates, the invariant usually along with the reason that the loop terminated gives us a useful property that helps show that the algorithm is correct. Using loop invariants is like mathematical induction:

14 2-4 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started To prove that a property holds, you prove a base case and an inductive step. Showing that the invariant holds before the first iteration is like the base case. Showing that the invariant holds from iteration to iteration is like the inductive step. The termination part differs from the usual use of mathematical induction, in which the inductive step is used infinitely. We stop the induction when the loop terminates. We can show the three parts in any order. For insertion sort: Initialization: Just before the first iteration, j = 2. The subarray A[1.. j 1] is the single element A[1], which is the element originally in A[1], and it is trivially sorted. Maintenance: To be precise, we would need to state and prove a loop invariant for the inner while loop. Rather than getting bogged down in another loop invariant, we instead note that the body of the inner while loop works by moving A[ j 1], A[ j 2], A[ j 3], and so on, by one position to the right until the proper position for key (which has the value that started out in A[ j]) is found. At that point, the value of key is placed into this position. Termination: The outer for loop ends when j > n; this occurs when j = n + 1. Therefore, j 1 = n. Plugging n in for j 1 in the loop invariant, the subarray A[1..n] consists of the elements originally in A[1..n] but in sorted order. In other words, the entire array is sorted! Pseudocode conventions [Covering most, but not all, here. See book pages for all conventions.] Indentation indicates block structure. Saves space and writing time. Looping constructs are like in C, C++, Pascal, and Java. We assume that the loop variable in a for loop is still defined when the loop exits (unlike in Pascal). indicates that the remainder of the line is a comment. Variables are local, unless otherwise specified. We often use objects, which have attributes (equivalently, fields). For an attribute attr of object x, we write attr[x]. (This would be the equivalent of x. attr in Java or x-> attr in C++.) Objects are treated as references, like in Java. If x and y denote objects, then the assignment y x makes x and y reference the same object. It does not cause attributes of one object to be copied to another. Parameters are passed by value, as in Java and C (and the default mechanism in Pascal and C++). When an object is passed by value, it is actually a reference (or pointer) that is passed; changes to the reference itself are not seen by the caller, but changes to the object s attributes are. The boolean operators and and or are short-circuiting: if after evaluating the left-hand operand, we know the result of the expression, then we don t evaluate the right-hand operand. (If x is FALSE in x and y then we don t evaluate y. Ifx is TRUE in x or y then we don t evaluate y.)

15 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-5 Analyzing algorithms We want to predict the resources that the algorithm requires. Usually, running time. In order to predict resource requirements, we need a computational model. Random-access machine (RAM) model Instructions are executed one after another. No concurrent operations. It s too tedious to define each of the instructions and their associated time costs. Instead, we recognize that we ll use instructions commonly found in real computers: Arithmetic: add, subtract, multiply, divide, remainder, floor, ceiling). Also, shift left/shift right (good for multiplying/dividing by 2 k ). Data movement: load, store, copy. Control: conditional/unconditional branch, subroutine call and return. Each of these instructions takes a constant amount of time. The RAM model uses integer and floating-point types. We don t worry about precision, although it is crucial in certain numerical applications. There is a limit on the word size: when working with inputs of size n, assume that integers are represented by c lg n bits for some constant c 1. (lg n is a very frequently used shorthand for log 2 n.) c 1 we can hold the value of n we can index the individual elements. c is a constant the word size cannot grow arbitrarily. How do we analyze an algorithm s running time? The time taken by an algorithm depends on the input. Sorting 1000 numbers takes longer than sorting 3 numbers. A given sorting algorithm may even take differing amounts of time on two inputs of the same size. For example, we ll see that insertion sort takes less time to sort n elements when they are already sorted than when they are in reverse sorted order. Input size: Depends on the problem being studied. Usually, the number of items in the input. Like the size n of the array being sorted. But could be something else. If multiplying two integers, could be the total number of bits in the two integers. Could be described by more than one number. For example, graph algorithm running times are usually expressed in terms of the number of vertices and the number of edges in the input graph.

16 2-6 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started Running time: On a particular input, it is the number of primitive operations (steps) executed. Want to define steps to be machine-independent. Figure that each line of pseudocode requires a constant amount of time. One line may take a different amount of time than another, but each execution of line i takes the same amount of time c i. This is assuming that the line consists only of primitive operations. If the line is a subroutine call, then the actual call takes constant time, but the execution of the subroutine being called might not. If the line specifies operations other than primitive ones, then it might take more than constant time. Example: sort the points by x-coordinate. Analysis of insertion sort [Now add statement costs and number of times executed to INSERTION-SORT pseudocode.] Assume that the ith line takes time c i, which is a constant. (Since the third line is a comment, it takes no time.) For j = 2, 3,...,n, lett j be the number of times that the while loop test is executed for that value of j. Note that when a for or while loop exits in the usual way due to the test in the loop header the test is executed one time more than the loop body. The running time of the algorithm is (cost of statement) (number of times statement is executed). all statements Let T (n) = running time of INSERTION-SORT. n T (n) = c 1 n + c 2 (n 1) + c 4 (n 1) + c 5 t j + c 6 n + c 7 (t j 1) + c 8 (n 1). j=2 j=2 n (t j 1) The running time depends on the values of t j. These vary according to the input. Best case: The array is already sorted. Always find that A[i] key upon the first time the while loop test is run (when i = j 1). All t j are 1. Running time is T (n) = c 1 n + c 2 (n 1) + c 4 (n 1) + c 5 (n 1) + c 8 (n 1) = (c 1 + c 2 + c 4 + c 5 + c 8 )n (c 2 + c 4 + c 5 + c 8 ). Can express T (n) as an + b for constants a and b (that depend on the statement costs c i ) T (n) is a linear function of n. j=2

17 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-7 Worst case: The array is in reverse sorted order. Always find that A[i] > key in while loop test. Have to compare key with all elements to the left of the jth position compare with j 1elements. Since the while loop exits because i reaches 0, there s one additional test after the j 1 tests t j = j. n n n n t j = j and (t j 1) = ( j 1). j=2 j=2 j=2 j=2 n j is known as an arithmetic series, and equation (A.1) shows that it equals j=1 n(n + 1). 2 ( ) n n Since j = j 1, it equals j=2 j=1 n(n + 1) 2 1. [The parentheses around the summation are not strictly necessary. They are there for clarity, but it might be a good idea to remind the students that the meaning of the expression would be the same even without the parentheses.] Letting k = j 1, we see that n n 1 ( j 1) = k = j=2 k=1 n(n 1). 2 Running time is ( ) n(n + 1) T (n) = c 1 n + c 2 (n 1) + c 4 (n 1) + c ( ) ( ) n(n 1) n(n 1) + c 6 + c 7 + c 8 (n 1) 2 2 ( c5 = 2 + c c ) ( 7 n 2 + c 1 + c 2 + c 4 + c c 6 2 c ) c 8 n (c 2 + c 4 + c 5 + c 8 ). Can express T (n) as an 2 + bn + c for constants a, b, c (that again depend on statement costs) T (n) is a quadratic function of n. Worst-case and average-case analysis We usually concentrate on finding the worst-case running time: the longest running time for any input of size n. Reasons: The worst-case running time gives a guaranteed upper bound on the running time for any input. For some algorithms, the worst case occurs often. For example, when searching, the worst case often occurs when the item being searched for is not present, and searches for absent items may be frequent. Why not analyze the average case? Because it s often about as bad as the worst case.

18 2-8 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started Example: Suppose that we randomly choose n numbers as the input to insertion sort. On average, the key in A[ j] is less than half the elements in A[1.. j 1] and it s greater than the other half. On average, the while loop has to look halfway through the sorted subarray A[1.. j 1] to decide where to drop key. t j = j/2. Although the average-case running time is approximately half of the worst-case running time, it s still a quadratic function of n. Order of growth Another abstraction to ease analysis and focus on the important features. Look only at the leading term of the formula for running time. Drop lower-order terms. Ignore the constant coefficient in the leading term. Example: For insertion sort, we already abstracted away the actual statement costs to conclude that the worst-case running time is an 2 + bn + c. Drop lower-order terms an 2. Ignore constant coefficient n 2. But we cannot say that the worst-case running time T (n) equals n 2. It grows like n 2. But it doesn t equal n 2. We say that the running time is (n 2 ) to capture the notion that the order of growth is n 2. We usually consider one algorithm to be more efficient than another if its worstcase running time has a smaller order of growth. Designing algorithms There are many ways to design algorithms. For example, insertion sort is incremental: having sorted A[1.. j 1], place A[ j] correctly, so that A[1.. j] is sorted. Divide and conquer Another common approach. Divide the problem into a number of subproblems. Conquer the subproblems by solving them recursively. Base case: If the subproblems are small enough, just solve them by brute force. [It would be a good idea to make sure that your students are comfortable with recursion. If they are not, then they will have a hard time understanding divide and conquer.] Combine the subproblem solutions to give a solution to the original problem.

19 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-9 Merge sort A sorting algorithm based on divide and conquer. Its worst-case running time has a lower order of growth than insertion sort. Because we are dealing with subproblems, we state each subproblem as sorting a subarray A[p..r]. Initially, p = 1andr = n, but these values change as we recurse through subproblems. To sort A[p..r]: Divide by splitting into two subarrays A[p..q] anda[q + 1..r], where q is the halfway point of A[p..r]. Conquer by recursively sorting the two subarrays A[ p..q] and A[q + 1..r]. Combine by merging the two sorted subarrays A[ p..q] and A[q + 1..r] topro- duce a single sorted subarray A[ p..r]. To accomplish this step, we ll define a procedure MERGE(A, p, q, r). The recursion bottoms out when the subarray has just 1 element, so that it s trivially sorted. MERGE-SORT(A, p, r) if p < r then q (p + r)/2 MERGE-SORT( A, p, q) MERGE-SORT(A, q + 1, r) MERGE(A, p, q, r) Check for base case Divide Conquer Conquer Combine Initial call: MERGE-SORT( A, 1, n) [It is astounding how often students forget how easy it is to compute the halfway point of p and r as their average (p + r)/2. We of course have to take the floor to ensure that we get an integer index q. But it is common to see students perform calculations like p + (r p)/2, or even more elaborate expressions, forgetting the easy way to compute an average.] Example: Bottom-up view for n = 8: [Heavy lines demarcate subarrays used in subproblems.] sorted array initial array merge merge merge

20 2-10 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started [Examples when n isapowerof2 are most straightforward, but students might also want an example when n is not a power of 2.] Bottom-up view for n = 11: sorted array merge merge merge merge initial array [Here, at the next-to-last level of recursion, some of the subproblems have only 1 element. The recursion bottoms out on these single-element subproblems.] Merging What remains is the MERGE procedure. Input: Array A and indices p, q, r such that p q < r. Subarray A[p..q] is sorted and subarray A[q + 1..r] is sorted. By the restrictions on p, q, r, neither subarray is empty. Output: The two subarrays are merged into a single sorted subarray in A[ p..r]. We implement it so that it takes (n) time, where n = r p + 1 = the number of elements being merged. What is n? Until now, n has stood for the size of the original problem. But now we re using it as the size of a subproblem. We will use this technique when we analyze recursive algorithms. Although we may denote the original problem size by n, in general n will be the size of a given subproblem. Idea behind linear-time merging: Think of two piles of cards. Each pile is sorted and placed face-up on a table with the smallest cards on top. We will merge these into a single sorted pile, face-down on the table. A basic step: Choose the smaller of the two top cards.

21 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-11 Remove it from its pile, thereby exposing a new top card. Place the chosen card face-down onto the output pile. Repeatedly perform basic steps until one input pile is empty. Once one input pile empties, just take the remaining input pile and place it face-down onto the output pile. Each basic step should take constant time, since we check just the two top cards. There are n basic steps, since each basic step removes one card from the input piles, and we started with n cards in the input piles. Therefore, this procedure should take (n) time. We don t actually need to check whether a pile is empty before each basic step. Put on the bottom of each input pile a special sentinel card. It contains a special value that we use to simplify the code. We use, since that s guaranteed to lose to any other value. The only way that cannot lose is when both piles have exposed as their top cards. But when that happens, all the nonsentinel cards have already been placed into the output pile. We know in advance that there are exactly r p + 1 nonsentinel cards stop once we have performed r p + 1 basic steps. Never a need to check for sentinels, since they ll always lose. Rather than even counting basic steps, just fill up the output array from index p up through and including index r. Pseudocode: MERGE(A, p, q, r) n 1 q p + 1 n 2 r q create arrays L[1..n 1 + 1] and R[1..n 2 + 1] for i 1 to n 1 do L[i] A[p + i 1] for j 1 to n 2 do R[ j] A[q + j] L[n 1 + 1] R[n 2 + 1] i 1 j 1 for k p to r do if L[i] R[ j] then A[k] L[i] i i + 1 else A[k] R[ j] j j + 1 [The book uses a loop invariant to establish that MERGE works correctly. In a lecture situation, it is probably better to use an example to show that the procedure works correctly.]

22 2-12 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started Example: A call of MERGE(9, 12, 16) L A A k k R i j 5 L R i j 5 L A A k R i j 5 L k R i j 5 L A 8 k R i A j 5 L k R i 17 j 5 L A A k R i j 5 L k R i 17 5 j L A k R i 17 5 j [Read this figure row by row. The first part shows the arrays at the start of the for k p to r loop, where A[p..q] is copied into L[1..n 1 ] and A[q+1..r] is copied into R[1..n 2 ]. Succeeding parts show the situation at the start of successive iterations. Entries in A with slashes have had their values copied to either L or R and have not had a value copied back in yet. Entries in L and R with slashes have been copied back into A. The last part shows that the subarrays are merged back into A[ p..r], which is now sorted, and that only the sentinels ( ) are exposed in the arrays L and R.] Running time: The first two for loops take (n 1 + n 2 ) = (n) time. The last for loop makes n iterations, each taking constant time, for (n) time. Total time: (n).

23 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-13 Analyzing divide-and-conquer algorithms Use a recurrence equation (more commonly, a recurrence) to describe the running time of a divide-and-conquer algorithm. Let T (n) = running time on a problem of size n. If the problem size is small enough (say, n c for some constant c), we have a base case. The brute-force solution takes constant time: (1). Otherwise, suppose that we divide into a subproblems, each 1/b the size of the original. (In merge sort, a = b = 2.) Let the time to divide a size-n problem be D(n). There are a subproblems to solve, each of size n/b each subproblem takes T (n/b) time to solve we spend at(n/b) time solving subproblems. Let the time to combine solutions be C(n). We get the recurrence { (1) if n c, T (n) = at(n/b) + D(n) + C(n) otherwise. Analyzing merge sort For simplicity, assume that n isapowerof2 each divide step yields two subproblems, both of size exactly n/2. The base case occurs when n = 1. When n 2, time for merge sort steps: Divide: Just compute q as the average of p and r D(n) = (1). Conquer: Recursively solve 2 subproblems, each of size n/2 2T (n/2). Combine: MERGE on an n-element subarray takes (n) time C(n) = (n). Since D(n) = (1) and C(n) = (n), summed together they give a function that is linear in n: (n) recurrence for merge sort running time is { (1) if n = 1, T (n) = 2T (n/2) + (n) if n > 1. Solving the merge-sort recurrence: By the master theorem in Chapter 4, we can show that this recurrence has the solution T (n) = (n lg n). [Reminder: lg n stands for log 2 n.] Compared to insertion sort ( (n 2 ) worst-case time), merge sort is faster. Trading a factor of n for a factor of lg n is a good deal. On small inputs, insertion sort may be faster. But for large enough inputs, merge sort will always be faster, because its running time grows more slowly than insertion sort s. We can understand how to solve the merge-sort recurrence without the master theorem.

24 2-14 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started Let c be a constant that describes the running time for the base case and also is the time per array element for the divide and conquer steps. [Of course, we cannot necessarily use the same constant for both. It s not worth going into this detail at this point.] We rewrite the recurrence as { c if n = 1, T (n) = 2T (n/2) + cn if n > 1. Draw a recursion tree, which shows successive expansions of the recurrence. For the original problem, we have a cost of cn, plus the two subproblems, each costing T (n/2): cn T(n/2) T(n/2) For each of the size-n/2 subproblems, we have a cost of cn/2, plus two subproblems, each costing T (n/4): cn cn/2 cn/2 T(n/4) T(n/4) T(n/4) T(n/4) Continue expanding until the problem sizes get down to 1: cn cn cn/2 cn/2 cn lg n cn/4 cn/4 cn/4 cn/4 cn c c c c c c c cn n Total: cn lg n + cn

25 Lecture Notes for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-15 Each level has cost cn. The top level has cost cn. The next level down has 2 subproblems, each contributing cost cn/2. The next level has 4 subproblems, each contributing cost cn/4. Each time we go down one level, the number of subproblems doubles but the cost per subproblem halves cost per level stays the same. There are lg n + 1 levels (height is lg n). Use induction. Base case: n = 1 1level,andlg1+ 1 = = 1. Inductive hypothesis is that a tree for a problem size of 2 i has lg 2 i +1 = i +1 levels. Because we assume that the problem size is a power of 2, the next problem size up after 2 i is 2 i+1. A tree for a problem size of 2 i+1 has one more level than the size-2 i tree i + 2 levels. Since lg 2 i = i + 2, we re done with the inductive argument. Total cost is sum of costs at each level. Have lg n + 1 levels, each costing cn total cost is cn lg n + cn. Ignore low-order term of cn and constant coefficient c (n lg n).

26 Solutions for Chapter 2: Getting Started Solution to Exercise SELECTION-SORT(A) n length[a] for j 1 to n 1 do smallest j for i j + 1 to n do if A[i] < A[smallest] then smallest i exchange A[ j] A[smallest] The algorithm maintains the loop invariant that at the start of each iteration of the outer for loop, the subarray A[1.. j 1] consists of the j 1 smallest elements in the array A[1..n], and this subarray is in sorted order. After the first n 1 elements, the subarray A[1..n 1] contains the smallest n 1 elements, sorted, and therefore element A[n] must be the largest element. The running time of the algorithm is (n 2 ) for all cases. Solution to Exercise Modify the algorithm so it tests whether the input satisfies some special-case condition and, if it does, output a pre-computed answer. The best-case running time is generally not a good measure of an algorithm. Solution to Exercise The base case is when n = 2, and we have n lg n = 2lg2= 2 1 = 2.

27 Solutions for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-17 For the inductive step, our inductive hypothesis is that T (n/2) = (n/2) lg(n/2). Then T (n) = 2T (n/2) + n = 2(n/2) lg(n/2) + n = n(lg n 1) + n = n lg n n + n = n lg n, which completes the inductive proof for exact powers of 2. Solution to Exercise Since it takes (n) time in the worst case to insert A[n] into the sorted array A[1..n 1], we get the recurrence { (1) if n = 1, T (n) = T (n 1) + (n) if n > 1. The solution to this recurrence is T (n) = (n 2 ). Solution to Exercise Procedure BINARY-SEARCH takes a sorted array A, a value v, and a range [low..high] of the array, in which we search for the value v. The procedure compares v to the array entry at the midpoint of the range and decides to eliminate half the range from further consideration. We give both iterative and recursive versions, each of which returns either an index i such that A[i] = v, ornil if no entry of A[low..high] contains the value v. The initial call to either version should have the parameters A, v, 1, n. ITERATIVE-BINARY-SEARCH( A, v, low, high) while low high do mid (low + high)/2 if v = A[mid] then return mid if v>a[mid] then low mid +1 else high mid 1 return NIL

28 2-18 Solutions for Chapter 2: Getting Started RECURSIVE-BINARY-SEARCH( A, v, low, high) if low > high then return NIL mid (low + high)/2 if v = A[mid] then return mid if v>a[mid] then return RECURSIVE-BINARY-SEARCH( A, v, mid +1, high) else return RECURSIVE-BINARY-SEARCH( A, v, low, mid 1) Both procedures terminate the search unsuccessfully when the range is empty (i.e., low > high) and terminate it successfully if the value v has been found. Based on the comparison of v to the middle element in the searched range, the search continues with the range halved. The recurrence for these procedures is therefore T (n) = T (n/2) + (1), whose solution is T (n) = (lg n). Solution to Exercise The while loop of lines 5 7 of procedure INSERTION-SORT scans backward through the sorted array A[1.. j 1] to find the appropriate place for A[ j]. The hitch is that the loop not only searches for the proper place for A[ j],butthatitalso moves each of the array elements that are bigger than A[ j] one position to the right (line 6). These movements can take as much as ( j) time, which occurs when all the j 1 elements preceding A[ j] are larger than A[ j]. We can use binary search to improve the running time of the search to (lg j), but binary search will have no effect on the running time of moving the elements. Therefore, binary search alone cannot improve the worst-case running time of INSERTION-SORT to (n lg n). Solution to Exercise The following algorithm solves the problem: 1. Sort the elements in S. 2. Form the set S = {z : z = x y for some y S}. 3. Sort the elements in S. 4. If any value in S appears more than once, remove all but one instance. Do the same for S. 5. Merge the two sorted sets S and S. 6. There exist two elements in S whose sum is exactly x if and only if the same value appears in consecutive positions in the merged output. To justify the claim in step 4, first observe that if any value appears twice in the merged output, it must appear in consecutive positions. Thus, we can restate the condition in step 5 as there exist two elements in S whose sum is exactly x if and only if the same value appears twice in the merged output.

29 Solutions for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-19 Suppose that some value w appears twice. Then w appeared once in S and once in S. Because w appeared in S, there exists some y S such that w = x y, or x = w + y. Sincew S, the elements w and y are in S and sum to x. Conversely, suppose that there are values w, y S such that w + y = x. Then, since x y = w, thevaluew appears in S. Thus, w is in both S and S,andsoit will appear twice in the merged output. Steps 1 and 3 require O(n lg n) steps. Steps 2, 4, 5, and 6 require O(n) steps. Thus the overall running time is O(n lg n). Solution to Problem 2-1 [It may be better to assign this problem after covering asymptotic notation in Section 3.1; otherwise part (c) may be too difficult.] a. Insertion sort takes (k 2 ) time per k-element list in the worst case. Therefore, sorting n/k lists of k elements each takes (k 2 n/k) = (nk) worst-case time. b. Just extending the 2-list merge to merge all the lists at once would take (n (n/k)) = (n 2 /k) time (n from copying each element once into the result list, n/k from examining n/k lists at each step to select next item for result list). To achieve (n lg(n/k))-time merging, we merge the lists pairwise, then merge the resulting lists pairwise, and so on, until there s just one list. The pairwise merging requires (n) work at each level, since we are still working on n elements, even if they are partitioned among sublists. The number of levels, starting with n/k lists (with k elements each) and finishing with 1 list (with n elements), is lg(n/ k). Therefore, the total running time for the merging is (n lg(n/k)). c. The modified algorithm has the same asymptotic running time as standard merge sort when (nk + n lg(n/k)) = (n lg n). The largest asymptotic value of k as a function of n that satisfies this condition is k = (lg n). To see why, first observe that k cannot be more than (lg n) (i.e., it can t have a higher-order term than lg n), for otherwise the left-hand expression wouldn t be (n lg n) (because it would have a higher-order term than n lg n). So all we need to do is verify that k = (lg n) works, which we can do by plugging k = lg n into (nk + n lg(n/k)) = (nk + n lg n n lg k) to get (n lg n + n lg n n lg lg n) = (2n lg n n lg lg n), which, by taking just the high-order term and ignoring the constant coefficient, equals (n lg n). d. In practice, k should be the largest list length on which insertion sort is faster than merge sort.

30 2-20 Solutions for Chapter 2: Getting Started Solution to Problem 2-2 a. We need to show that the elements of A form a permutation of the elements of A. b. Loop invariant: At the start of each iteration of the for loop of lines 2 4, A[ j] = min {A[k] : j k n} and the subarray A[ j..n] is a permutation of the values that were in A[ j..n] at the time that the loop started. Initialization: Initially, j = n, and the subarray A[ j..n] consists of single element A[n]. The loop invariant trivially holds. Maintenance: Consider an iteration for a given value of j. By the loop invariant, A[ j] is the smallest value in A[ j..n]. Lines 3 4 exchange A[ j] and A[ j 1] if A[ j] is less than A[ j 1], and so A[ j 1] will be the smallest value in A[ j 1..n] afterward. Since the only change to the subarray A[ j 1..n] is this possible exchange, and the subarray A[ j..n] is a permutation of the values that were in A[ j..n] at the time that the loop started, we see that A[ j 1..n] is a permutation of the values that were in A[ j 1..n] at the time that the loop started. Decrementing j for the next iteration maintains the invariant. Termination: The loop terminates when j reaches i. By the statement of the loop invariant, A[i] = min {A[k] :i k n} and A[i..n] is a permutation of the values that were in A[i..n] at the time that the loop started. c. Loop invariant: At the start of each iteration of the for loop of lines 1 4, the subarray A[1..i 1] consists of the i 1 smallest values originally in A[1..n], in sorted order, and A[i..n] consists of the n i + 1 remaining values originally in A[1..n]. Initialization: Before the first iteration of the loop, i = 1. The subarray A[1..i 1] is empty, and so the loop invariant vacuously holds. Maintenance: Consider an iteration for a given value of i. By the loop invariant, A[1..i 1] consists of the i smallest values in A[1..n], in sorted order. Part (b) showed that after executing the for loop of lines 2 4, A[i] isthe smallest value in A[i..n], and so A[1..i] isnowthei smallest values originally in A[1..n], in sorted order. Moreover, since the for loop of lines 2 4 permutes A[i..n], the subarray A[i + 1..n] consists of the n i remaining values originally in A[1..n]. Termination: The for loop of lines 1 4 terminates when i = n + 1, so that i 1 = n. By the statement of the loop invariant, A[1..i 1] is the entire array A[1..n], and it consists of the original array A[1..n], in sorted order. Note: We have received requests to change the upper bound of the outer for loop of lines 1 4 tolength[a] 1. That change would also result in a correct algorithm. The loop would terminate when i = n, so that according to the loop invariant, A[1..n 1] would consist of the n 1 smallest values originally in A[1..n], in sorted order, and A[n] would contain the remaining element, which must be the largest in A[1..n]. Therefore, A[1..n] would be sorted.

31 Solutions for Chapter 2: Getting Started 2-21 In the original pseudocode, the last iteration of the outer for loop results in no iterations of the inner for loop of lines 1 4. With the upper bound for i set to length[a] 1, the last iteration of outer loop would result in one iteration of the inner loop. Either bound, length[a]or length[a] 1, yields a correct algorithm. d. The running time depends on the number of iterations of the for loop of lines 2 4. For a given value of i, this loop makes n i iterations, and i takes on the values 1, 2,...,n. The total number of iterations, therefore, is n n n (n i) = n i i=1 i=1 i=1 = n 2 n(n + 1) 2 = n 2 n2 2 n 2 = n2 2 n 2. Thus, the running time of bubblesort is (n 2 ) in all cases. The worst-case running time is the same as that of insertion sort. Solution to Problem 2-4 a. The inversions are (1, 5), (2, 5), (3, 4), (3, 5), (4, 5). (Remember that inversions are specified by indices rather than by the values in the array.) b. The array with elements from {1, 2,...,n} with the most inversions is n, n 1, n 2,...,2, 1. Forall1 i < j n, there is an inversion (i, j). The number of such inversions is ( n 2) = n(n 1)/2. c. Suppose that the array A starts out with an inversion (k, j). Thenk < j and A[k] > A[ j]. At the time that the outer for loop of lines 1 8 sets key A[ j], the value that started in A[k] is still somewhere to the left of A[ j]. That is, it s ina[i], where 1 i < j, and so the inversion has become (i, j). Some iteration of the while loop of lines 5 7 moves A[i] one position to the right. Line 8 will eventually drop key to the left of this element, thus eliminating the inversion. Because line 5 moves only elements that are less than key, it moves only elements that correspond to inversions. In other words, each iteration of the while loop of lines 5 7 corresponds to the elimination of one inversion. d. We follow the hint and modify merge sort to count the number of inversions in (n lg n) time. To start, let us define a merge-inversion as a situation within the execution of merge sort in which the MERGE procedure, after copying A[p..q] tol and A[q + 1..r] tor, has values x in L and y in R such that x > y. Consider an inversion (i, j), andletx = A[i] andy = A[ j], so that i < j and x > y. We claim that if we were to run merge sort, there would be exactly one mergeinversion involving x and y. To see why, observe that the only way in which array elements change their positions is within the MERGE procedure. Moreover,

32 2-22 Solutions for Chapter 2: Getting Started since MERGE keeps elements within L in the same relative order to each other, and correspondingly for R, the only way in which two elements can change their ordering relative to each other is for the greater one to appear in L and the lesser one to appear in R. Thus, there is at least one merge-inversion involving x and y. To see that there is exactly one such merge-inversion, observe that after any call of MERGE that involves both x and y, they are in the same sorted subarray and will therefore both appear in L or both appear in R in any given call thereafter. Thus, we have proven the claim. We have shown that every inversion implies one merge-inversion. In fact, the correspondence between inversions and merge-inversions is one-to-one. Suppose we have a merge-inversion involving values x and y, wherex originally was A[i] andy was originally A[ j]. Since we have a merge-inversion, x > y. And since x is in L and y is in R, x must be within a subarray preceding the subarray containing y. Therefore x started out in a position i preceding y s original position j,andso(i, j) is an inversion. Having shown a one-to-one correspondence between inversions and mergeinversions, it suffices for us to count merge-inversions. Consider a merge-inversion involving y in R. Letz be the smallest value in L that is greater than y. At some point during the merging process, z and y will be the exposed values in L and R, i.e., we will have z = L[i] andy = R[ j] in line 13 of MERGE. At that time, there will be merge-inversions involving y and L[i], L[i + 1], L[i + 2],...,L[n 1 ], and these n 1 i + 1 merge-inversions will be the only ones involving y. Therefore, we need to detect the first time that z and y become exposed during the MERGE procedure and add the value of n 1 i + 1 at that time to our total count of merge-inversions. The following pseudocode, modeled on merge sort, works as we have just described. It also sorts the array A. COUNT-INVERSIONS(A, p, r) inversions 0 if p < r then q (p + r)/2 inversions inversions +COUNT-INVERSIONS(A, p, q) inversions inversions +COUNT-INVERSIONS(A, q + 1, r) inversions inversions +MERGE-INVERSIONS(A, p, q, r) return inversions