Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Splay trees and treaps are self-balancing but not height-balanced, as their height is not guaranteed to be logarithmic in the number of items. Self-balancing binary search trees provide efficient implementations for mutable ordered lists, and can be used for other abstract data structures such as associative arrays, priority queues and sets.
Fig. 1: AVL tree with balance factors (green) In computer science, an AVL tree (named after inventors Adelson-Velsky and Landis) is a self-balancing binary search tree. In an AVL tree, the heights of the two child subtrees of any node differ by at most one; if at any time they differ by more than one, rebalancing is done to restore this property.
In computer science, weight-balanced binary trees (WBTs) are a type of self-balancing binary search trees that can be used to implement dynamic sets, dictionaries (maps) and sequences. [1] These trees were introduced by Nievergelt and Reingold in the 1970s as trees of bounded balance, or BB[α] trees. [2] [3] Their more common name is due to ...
In computer science, a B-tree is a self-balancing tree data structure that maintains sorted data and allows searches, sequential access, insertions, and deletions in logarithmic time. The B-tree generalizes the binary search tree , allowing for nodes with more than two children. [ 2 ]
Various height-balanced binary search trees were introduced to confine the tree height, such as AVL trees, Treaps, and red–black trees. [5] The AVL tree was invented by Georgy Adelson-Velsky and Evgenii Landis in 1962 for the efficient organization of information. [6] [7] It was the first self-balancing binary search tree to be invented. [8]
In computer science, a red–black tree is a self-balancing binary search tree data structure noted for fast storage and retrieval of ordered information. The nodes in a red-black tree hold an extra "color" bit, often drawn as red and black, which help ensure that the tree is always approximately balanced.
Unlike splay trees and tango trees, Iacono's data structure is not known to be implementable in constant time per access sequence step, so even if it is dynamically optimal, it could still be slower than other search tree data structures by a non-constant factor. The interleave lower bound is an asymptotic lower bound on dynamic optimality.
The number of different binary trees on nodes is , the th Catalan number (assuming we view trees with identical structure as identical). For large n {\displaystyle n} , this is about 4 n {\displaystyle 4^{n}} ; thus we need at least about log 2 4 n = 2 n {\displaystyle \log _{2}4^{n}=2n} bits to encode it.