210 Maps PDF
210 Maps PDF
• READING:
• GT textbook chapter 9.1 and 9.2
Map ADT
• A Map is an abstract data structure similar to a Dictionary
• it stores key-value (k,v) pairs
• there cannot be duplicate keys
• Maps are useful in situations where a key can be viewed as a unique identifier for the object
• the key is used to decide where to store the object in the structure
• in other words, the key associated with an object can be viewed as the address for the
object
• maps are sometimes called associative arrays
Map ADT
• size()
• isEmpty()
• get(k):
• if M contains an entry with key k, return it; else return null
• put(k,v):
• if M does not have an entry with key k, add entry (k,v) and return null
• else replace existing value of entry with v and return the old value
• remove(k):
• remove entry (k,*) from M
Map example
(k,v) key=integer, value=letter
M={}
• put(5,A) M={(5,A)}
• get(7) return B
• get(2) return E
• Implementation?
Class-work
• Write a program that reads from the user the name of a text file, counts the word frequencies
of all words in the file, and outputs a list of words and their frequency.
• e.g. text file: article, poem, science, etc
• Questions:
• Think in terms of a Map data structure that associates keys to values.
• What will be your <key-value> pairs?
• Hash tables
A LinkedList implementation of Maps
• store the (k,v) pairs in a doubly linked list
• get(k)
• hop through the list until find the element with key k
• put(k,v)
• Node x = get(k)
• if (x != null)
• replace the value in x with v
• else create a new node(k,v) and add it at the front
• remove(k)
• Node x = get(k)
• if (x == null) return null
• else remove node x from the list
• Note: why doubly-linked? need to delete at an arbitrary position
• A new approach
• Hash tables:
• we’ll see that (under some assumptions) search, insert, delete: O(1)
Hashing
• A completely different approach to searching from the comparison-based methods (binary
search, binary search trees)
• rather than navigating through a dictionary data structure comparing the search key with
the elements, hashing tries to reference an element in a table directly based on its key
direct addressing:
x x x x x ...
store key k at index k
(0,v) x x (3,v) (4,v) ...
• put(k, value)
• store <k, value> in H[k] issues:
- keys need to be integers in a small range
• get(k)
- space may be wasted is H not full
• check if H[K] is empty
Hashing
• Hashing has 2 components
• the hash table: an array A of size N
• each entry is thought of a bucket: a bucket array
• a hash function: maps each key to a bucket
• h is a function : {all possible keys} ----> {0, 1, 2, ..., N-1}
• key k is stored in bucket h(k)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8
A ...
• The size of the table N and the hash function are decided by the user
• Goal: chose a hash function that distributes keys uniformly throughout the table
Example
• keys: integers
• chose N = 10
• chose h(k) = k % 10
• [ k % 10 is the remainder of k/10 ]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
• Under some assumptions, hashing supports insert, delete and search in in O(1) time
Hashing
• Notation:
• U = universe of keys
• N = hash table size
• n = number of entries
• note: n may be unknown beforehand
• the probability of any two keys hashing to the same slot is 1/N
• Essentially this means that the hash function throws the keys uniformly at random into the
table
• If a hash function satisfies the universal hashing property, then the expected number of
elements that hash to the same entry is n/N
• If n > N, then the best one can hope for is that each bucket has O(n/N) elements
• need a good hash function
• search, insert, delete in O(n/N) time
• If n <= N, then the best one can hope for is that each bucket has O(1) elements
• need a good hash function
• search, insert, delete in O(1) time
• If N is large==> less collisions and easier for the hash function to perform well
• Best: if you can guess n beforehand, chose N order of n
• no space waste
Hash functions
• How to define a good hash function?
• An ideal has function approximates a random function: for each input element, every output
should be in some sense equally likely
• Every hash function has a worst-case scenario where all elements map to the same entry
• Rule of thumb: want to use all bits of k when deciding the hash code of k
• better chances of hash spreading the keys
Hashing strategies
• Summing components
• let the binary representation of key k = <x0,x1,x2,...,xk-1>
• e.g. String s;
• sum the integer representation of each character
• (int)s[0] + (int)s[1] + (int) s[2] + ...
Hashing strategies
• summation is not a good choice for strings/character arrays
• e.g. s1 = “temp10” and s2 = “temp01” collide
• e.g. “stop”, “tops”, “pots”, “spot” collide
• experimentally, a = 33, 37, 39, 41 are good choices when working with English words
• produce less than 7 collision for 50,000 words!!!
• Java hashCode for Strings uses one of these constants
Hashing strategies
• Need to take into account the size of the table
• Modular hashing
• h(k) = i mod N
• If take N to be a prime number, this helps the spread out the hashed values
• If N is not prime, there is a higher likelihood that patterns in the distribution of the input
keys will be repeated in the distribution of the hash values
• empirically:
• a popular choice is a = 0.618033 (the golden ratio)
• chose N = power of 2
Hashing strategies
• If keys are not integers
• transform the key piece by piece into an integer
• need to deal with large values
• chose N prime
• chose p a prime number larger than N
• chose a, b at random from {0,1,...p-1}
• gets very close to having two keys collide with probability 1/N
• i.e. to throwing the keys into the hash table randomly
• Many other variations of these have been studied, particularly has functions that can be
implemented with efficient machine instructions such as shifting
Hashing
• Hashing
1. hash function
convert keys into table addresses
2. collision handling
• Collision: two keys that hash to the same value
Decide how to handle when two kets hash to the same address
A ...
• Store all elements that hash to the same entry in a linked list (array/vector)
• Can chose to store the lists in sorted order or not
• Insert(k)
• insert k in the linked list of h(k) under universal hashing:
• Search(k) each list has size O(n/N) with high probability
• search in the linked list of h(k) insert, delete, search: O(n/N)
• Delete(k)
• find and delete k from the linked list of h(k)
Collisions with chaining
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8
A ...
• Pros:
• can handle arbitrary number of collisions as there is no cap on the list size
• don’t need to guess n ahead: if N is smaller than n, the elements will be chained
• Idea: when inserting key k, if slot h(k) is full, then try some other slots in the table until
finding one that is empty
• the set of slots tried for key k is called the probing sequence of k
• Linear probing:
• if slot h(k) is full, try next, try next, ...
• probing sequence: h(k), h(k) + 1, h(k) + 2, ...
• insert(k)
• search(k)
• delete(k)
• In general performance of probing degrades inversely proportional with the load of the hash
• for a sparse table (small alpha) we expect most searches to find an empty position within a few
probes
• for a nearly full table (alpha close to 1) a search could require a large number of probess
• Proposition:
• Under certain randomness assumption it can be shown that the average number of probes
examined when searching for key k in a hash table with linear probing is 1/2 (1 + 1/(1 - alpha))
• [No proof]
• alpha = 0: 1 probe
• alpha = 1/2: 1.5 probes (half-full)
• alpha= 2/3: 2 probes (2/3 full)
• alpha = 9/10: 5.5 probes
• Collisions with probing: cannot insert more than N items in the table
• need to guess n ahead
• if at any point n is > N, need to re-allocate a new hash table, and re-hash everything. Expensive!
Linear probing
• Pros:
• space efficiency
• Con:
• need to guess n correctly and set N > n
• if alpha gets large ==> high penalty
• the table is resized and and all objects re-inserted into the new table
• Rule of thumb: good performance with probing if alpha stays less than 2/3.
Double hashing
• Empirically linear hashing introduces a phenomenon called clustering:
• insertion of one key can increase the time for other keys with other hash values
• groups of keys clustered together in the table
• Double hashing:
• instead of examining every successive position, use a second hash function to get a fixed
increment
• probing sequence: h1(k), h1(k) + h2(k), h1(k) + 2h2(k), h1(k) + 3h2(k),...
• Performance:
• double hashing and linear hashing have the same performance for sparse tables
• empirically double hashing eliminates clustering
• we can allow the table to become more full with double hashing than with linear hashing
before performance degrades
Java.util.Hashtable
• This class implements a hash table, which maps keys to values. Any non-null object can be
used as a key or as a value.
• java.lang.Object
• java.util.Dictionary
• java.util.Hashtable
• implements Map
• Example
//retrieve a string
Integer n = (Integer)numbers.get("two");
if (n != null) {
System.out.println("two = " + n);
}
Hash functions in Java
• The generic Object class comes with a default hashCode() method that maps an Object to an
integer
• int hashCode()
• Inherited by every Object
• The default hashCode() returns the address of the Object’s location in memory
• too generic
• poor choice for most situations
• Typically you want to override it
• e.g. class String
• overrides Strng.hashCode() with a hash function that works well on Strings
Perspective
• Best hashing method depends on application
• Hashing can provide better performance than binary search trees if the keys are sufficiently
random so that a good hash function can be developed
• when hashing works, better use hashing than BST
• However
• Hashing does not guarantee worst-case performance
• Binary search trees support a wider range of operations
Exercises
• What is the worst-case running time for inserting n key-value pairs into an initially empty map
that is implemented with a list?
• Describe how to use a map to implement the basic ops in a dictionary ADT, assuming that the
user does not attempt to insert entries with the same key
• Describe how an ordered list implemented as a doubly linked list could be used to implement
the map ADT.
• Draw the 11-entry hash that results from using the hash function h(i) = (2i+5) mod 11 to hash
keys 12, 44, 13, 88, 23, 94, 11, 39, 20, 16, 5.
• (a) Assume collisions are handled by chaining.
• (b) Assume collisions are handled by linear probing.
• (c) Assume collisions are handled with double hashing, with the secondary hash function
h’(k) = 7 - (k mod 7).
• Show the result of rehashing this table in a table of size 19, using teh new hasah function h(k)
= 2k mod 19.
• Think of a reason that you would not use a hash table to implement a dictionary.