Paper detail

Insertion Time of Random Walk Cuckoo Hashing below the Peeling Threshold

Most hash tables have an insertion time of $O(1)$, possibly qualified as expected and/or amortised. While insertions into cuckoo hash tables indeed seem to take $O(1)$ expected time in practice, only polylogarithmic guarantees are proven in all but the simplest of practically relevant cases. Given the widespread use of cuckoo hashing to implement compact dictionaries and Bloom filter alternatives, closing this gap is an important open problem for theoreticians. In this paper, we show that random walk insertions into cuckoo hash tables take $O(1)$ expected amortised time when any number $k \geq 3$ of hash functions is used and the load factor is below the corresponding peeling threshold (e.g. $\approx 0.81$ for $k = 3$). To our knowledge, this is the first meaningful guarantee for constant time insertion for cuckoo hashing that works for $k \in \{3,\dots,9\}$. In addition to being useful in its own right, we hope that our key-centred analysis method can be a stepping stone on the path to the true end goal: $O(1)$ time insertions for all load factors below the load threshold (e.g. $\approx 0.91$ for $k = 3$).

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.