4.7 KiB
| title | draft | aliases | sr-due | sr-interval | sr-ease |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| analysis of recursive algorithms | true | Proof by induction, induction | 2022-05-02 | 29 | 250 |
#review
1 Review Questions
Do one practice problem
1.1 MaxNum
maxNum = -1
for num in numbers
if num < maxNum then
maxNum = num;
end
end
parameter n is length of the array of number
we will prove that, for every non-negative integer n, the maximum time to find the max num is Ο(n)
for n = 1 this is true because the maximum number is always the first number we check for n =2 this is true because the maximum number is always on of the first two numbers we check
for any n >0, assuming this is true for all n-1, this is true at n because the maximum amount of number to check is never greater than n
∴ by induction, the time comnplexity is Ο(n)
Analysis of recursion algorithms
- induction and recursion are linked
- inductive approach is esential for understanding time-complexity of resursive algorithms
2 Proof by induction
Induction Find a (positive integer) parameter that gets smaller in all recursive calls Prove inductively that "for all values of the parameter, the result computed is correct" To do that:
- check correctness is all non-recursive cases
- check correctness in recursive cases assuming correcness in the recursive calls
3 Examples
3.1 Quicksort
divide and conquer algorithm
sorts a range in an array (a group of elements between some lower index, lo inclusive and some upper index hi exclusive) as follows:
- If length of range
(hi - lo)is at most 1 -> do nothing - otherwise, choose a pivot p (e.g., the element at
lo) and:- place all items less that p in positions
lotolo +r - place all items >= p in positions
lo +r+1tohi - place p in position
lo+r - call quicksort on the ranges
lotolo + randlo+r+1tohi
- place all items less that p in positions
3.1.1 Proof
parameter is hi - lo
the parameter gets smaller in all recusive call because we always remove the element p so, even if it is the smallest or largest element of the range ,,the recursive call has a range of size at most hi - lo - 1
the non-recursive case is correct because if we have 1 or fewer elements in a range they are already sorted
in the recirsive case, since all the elements before p are smaller than it and we assume they get sorted correctly be quicksort, and the same happens for the elements larger than p, we will get a correctly sorted array
3.2 Fibonacci 1
def fib(n)
if n <= 1
return 1
return fib(n-1) + fib(n-2)
line 1 -> always executed line 2 -> executed if n<=1 line 4 -> executed if n>1, cost equal to cost of callling fib(n-1), fib(n-2), and some constant cost for the addition and return
3.2.1 Cost bounds/Proof
if we let T(n) denote the time required for evaluating fib(n) using this algorithm this analysis gives:
T(0) = T(1) = C
T(n) = D + T(n-1) + T(n-2)
where c and d are some positive (non-zero) constants.
- this shows that T(n) grows at least as quick as fib(n)
- even if
D=0we'd getT(n) = C \times fib(n) - growth rates are the same
\thereforeexponential (at least1.6^n) and far too slow
A recurive algorithm that makes two or more recurive calls with parameter values close to the original will generally have exponential time complexity
3.3 Fibonacci 2
def fibPair()
if n == 1
return 1, 1
a,b = fibpair(n-1)
return b, a+b
line 1 -> always executed some constant cost line 2-> executed if n=1, some constant cost line 4-> executed if n>1, cost equal to cost of calling fibPair(n-1) line 5 -> executed if n>1, some constant cost
3.3.1 Proof
it's true for $n-1 by design$ If it's true at n-1 then the result of computing fibpair(n) is:
(f_{n-1}, f_{n-1} + f_{n-1}) = (f_{n-1}, f_n)
which is what we want
3.3.2 Cost bounds
if we let P(n) denote the time required for evaluating fib(n) using this algorithm this analysis gives:
$P(1) = C$
P(n) = P(n-1) + D\ for\ n>1
where C and D are some positive (non-zero) constants.
Claim: P(n) = C + D(n-1)
By induction: it's true for n = 1 since,
$P(1) = C$
C+D\times(1-1)=C
suppose that it's true for n-1. Then it's true for n as well because
$P(n) = P(n-1) + D$
$\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ = C+D\times(n-2)+D$
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ = C+D\times(n-1)
\therefore By induction it's true for all n>=1
P(n) is the time for evaluating fibPair(n) using this algorithm. This analysis gives:
$P(1) = C$
P(n) = P(n-1) +D
where C and D are some positive constants
#theorem
P(n) = C+D\times(n-1)in particular,
P(n) = \theta(n)
A recursive algorithm that make one recurive call with a smaller value and a constant amount of additional work will have at most linear time complexity