Should Static Search Trees Ever Be Unbalanced?

In this paper we study the question of whether or not a static search tree should ever be unbalanced. We present several methods to restructure an unbalanced k-ary search tree $T$ into a new tree $R$ that preserves many of the properties of $T$ while having a height of $\log_k n +1$ which is one unit off of the optimal height. More specifically, we show that it is possible to ensure that the depth of the elements in $R$ is no more than their depth in $T$ plus at most $\log_k \log_k n +2$. At the same time it is possible to guarantee that the average access time $P(R)$ in tree $R$ is no more than the average access time $P(T)$ in tree $T$ plus $O(\log_k P(T))$. This suggests that for most applications, a balanced tree is always a better option than an unbalanced one since the balanced tree has similar average access time and much better worst case access time.

No reviews yet.

No comments yet.