Exact balancing is not always good (Q1072369): Difference between revisions

From MaRDI portal
Importer (talk | contribs)
Created a new Item
 
ReferenceBot (talk | contribs)
Changed an Item
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Property / MaRDI profile type
 
Property / MaRDI profile type: MaRDI publication profile / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / full work available at URL
 
Property / full work available at URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0190(86)90148-1 / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / OpenAlex ID
 
Property / OpenAlex ID: W2079755555 / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Q4773298 / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Divide and conquer for linear expected time / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Recurrence relations based on minimization / rank
 
Normal rank
links / mardi / namelinks / mardi / name
 

Latest revision as of 13:17, 17 June 2024

scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
Exact balancing is not always good
scientific article

    Statements

    Exact balancing is not always good (English)
    0 references
    0 references
    1986
    0 references
    The following recurrence relation frequently occurs in the analysis of divide-and-conquer algorithms: \[ M_ f(0)=0,\quad M_ f(n+1)=f(n+1)+\min_{i+j=n}(M_ f(i)+M_ f(j)). \] In these applications, f is the cost of merging two subproblems, wereas \(M_ f(i)\) and \(M_ f(j)\) are the costs of solving each subproblem; f is monotonic nondecreasing. In this paper we consider such recurrences, when f is not assumed to be convex.
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    balanced trees
    0 references
    optimization problem on binary trees
    0 references
    analysis of divide- and-conquer algorithms
    0 references
    merging
    0 references
    0 references