Searching

Kruse and Ryba

Ch 7.1-7.3 and 9.6
 Problem: Search
We are given a list of records.
Each record has an associated key.
Give efficient algorithm for searching for a
record containing a particular key.
Efficiency is quantified in terms of average
time analysis (number of comparisons) to
retrieve an item.
 Search
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [ 700 ]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685
Number 701466868 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

Each record in list has an associated key. Number 580625685

In this example, the keys are ID numbers.

Given a particular key, how can we

efficiently retrieve the record from the list?
 Serial Search
Step through array of records, one at a time.
Look for record with matching key.
Search stops when
record with matching key is found
or when search has examined all records
without success.
 Pseudocode for Serial Search
// Search for a desired item in the n array elements
// starting at a[first].
// Returns pointer to desired record if found.
// Otherwise, return NULL

for(i = first; i < n; ++i )

if(a[first+i] is desired item)
return &a[first+i];

// if we drop through loop, then desired item was not found

return NULL;
 Serial Search Analysis
What are the worst and average case
running times for serial search?
We must determine the O-notation for the
number of operations required in search.
Number of operations depends on n, the
number of entries in the list.
Worst Case Time for Serial Search
For an array of n elements, the worst case time
for serial search requires n array accesses: O(n).
Consider cases where we must loop over all n
records:
desired record appears in the last position of
the array
desired record does not appear in the array at
all
 Average Case for Serial Search
Assumptions:
1. All keys are equally likely in a search
2. We always search for a key that is in the array
Example:
We have an array of 10 records.
If search for the first record, then it requires 1 array
access; if the second, then 2 array accesses. etc.
The average of all these searches is:
(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10)/10 = 5.5
Average Case Time for Serial Search

Generalize for array size n.

Expression for average-case running time:

(1+2++n)/n = n(n+1)/2n = (n+1)/2

Therefore, average case time complexity for serial

search is O(n).
 Binary Search
Perhaps we can do better than O(n) in the
average case?
Assume that we are give an array of records
that is sorted. For instance:
an array of records with integer keys sorted
from smallest to largest (e.g., ID numbers), or
an array of records with string keys sorted in
alphabetical order (e.g., names).
 Binary Search Pseudocode

if(size == 0)
found = false;
else {
middle = index of approximate midpoint of array segment;
if(target == a[middle])
target has been found!
else if(target < a[middle])
search for target in area before midpoint;
else
search for target in area after midpoint;
}

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53
 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Find approximate midpoint

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Is 7 = midpoint key? NO.

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Is 7 < midpoint key? YES.

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Search for the target in the area before midpoint.

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Find approximate midpoint

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Target = key of midpoint? NO.

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Target < key of midpoint? NO.

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Target > key of midpoint? YES.

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Search for the target in the area after midpoint.

 Binary Search
Example: sorted array of integer keys. Target=7.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Find approximate midpoint.

Is target = midpoint key? YES.
 Binary Search Implementation
void search(const int a[ ], size_t first, size_t size, int target, bool& found, size_t& location)
{
size_t middle;
if(size == 0) found = false;
else {
middle = first + size/2;
if(target == a[middle]){
location = middle;
found = true;
}
else if (target < a[middle])
// target is less than middle, so search subarray before middle
search(a, first, size/2, target, found, location);
else
// target is greater than middle, so search subarray after middle
search(a, middle+1, (size-1)/2, target, found, location);
}
}
 Relation to Binary Search Tree
Array of previous example:
3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Corresponding complete binary search tree

11
6 33

3 7 32 53
 Search for target = 7
Find midpoint:
3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Start at root:

11
6 33

3 7 32 53
 Search for target = 7
Search left subarray:
3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Search left subtree:

11
6 33

3 7 32 53
 Search for target = 7
Find approximate midpoint of subarray:
3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Visit root of subtree:

11
6 33

3 7 32 53
 Search for target = 7
Search right subarray:
3 6 7 11 32 33 53

Search right subtree:

11
6 33

3 7 32 53
 Binary Search: Analysis
Worst case complexity?
What is the maximum depth of recursive
calls in binary search as function of n?
Each level in the recursion, we split the
array in half (divide by two).
Therefore maximum recursion depth is
floor(log2n) and worst case = O(log2n).
Average case is also = O(log2n).
 Can we do better than O(log2n)?
Average and worst case of serial search = O(n)
Average and worst case of binary search = O(log2n)

Can we do better than this?

YES. Use a hash table!

 What is a Hash Table ?
The simplest kind of hash
table is an array of records.
This example has 701
records.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

...
 [4]
What is a Hash Table ?
Number 506643548

Each record has a special

field, called its key.
In this example, the key is a
long integer field called
Number.
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

...
 [4]

What is a Hash Table ?

Number 506643548

The number might be a

person's identification
number, and the rest of the
record has information
about the person.
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

...
 What is a Hash Table ?
When a hash table is in use,
some spots contain valid
records, and other spots are
"empty".

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
Open Address Hashing Number 580625685

In order to insert a new

record, the key must
somehow be converted to an
array index.
The index is called the hash
value of the key.
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]
Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
Inserting a New Record Number 580625685

Typical way create a hash

value:
(Number mod 701)

What is (580625685 % 701) ?

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
 Number 580625685

Typical way to create a hash

value:
(Number mod 701)
3
What is (580625685 % 701) ?

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
 Number 580625685

The hash value is used for

the location of the new
record.

[3]

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
 Inserting a New Record
The hash value is used for
the location of the new
record.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
 Collisions Number 701466868

Here is another new record

to insert, with a hash value
of 2.
My hash
value is [2].

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
 Collisions Number 701466868

This is called a collision,

because there is already
another valid record at [2].

When
When aa collision
collision occurs,
occurs,
move
move forward
forward until
until you
you
find
find an
an empty
empty spot.
spot.
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]
Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
 Collisions Number 701466868

This is called a collision,

because there is already
another valid record at [2].

When
When aa collision
collision occurs,
occurs,
move
move forward
forward until
until you
you
find
find an
an empty
empty spot.
spot.
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]
Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
 Collisions Number 701466868

This is called a collision,

because there is already
another valid record at [2].

When
When aa collision
collision occurs,
occurs,
move
move forward
forward until
until you
you
find
find an
an empty
empty spot.
spot.
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]
Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 155778322

...
 Collisions
This is called a collision,
because there is already
another valid record at [2].

The
The newnewrecord
record goes
goes
in
in the
the empty
empty spot.
spot.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
Searching for a Key Number 701466868

The data that's attached to a

key can be found fairly
quickly.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Number 701466868

Calculate the hash value.

Check that location of the array
for the key.
My hash
value is [2].
Not me.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Number 701466868

Keep moving forward until you

find the key, or you reach an
empty spot.
My hash
value is [2].
Not me.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Number 701466868

Keep moving forward until you

find the key, or you reach an
empty spot.
My hash
value is [2].
Not me.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Number 701466868

Keep moving forward until you

find the key, or you reach an
empty spot.
My hash
value is [2].
Yes!

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Number 701466868

When the item is found, the

information can be copied to
the necessary location.
My hash
value is [2].
Yes!

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Deleting a Record
Records may also be deleted from a hash table.

Please
delete me.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 506643548 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Deleting a Record
Records may also be deleted from a hash table.
But the location must not be left as an ordinary
"empty spot" since that could interfere with searches.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Deleting a Record
Records may also be deleted from a hash table.
But the location must not be left as an ordinary
"empty spot" since that could interfere with searches.
The location must be marked in some special way so
that a search can tell that the spot used to have
something in it.

[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [ 700]

Number 281942902 Number 233667136 Number 580625685 Number 701466868 Number 155778322

...
 Hashing
Hash tables store a collection of records with keys.
The location of a record depends on the hash value of
the record's key.
Open address hashing:
When a collision occurs, the next available location is used.
Searching for a particular key is generally quick.
When an item is deleted, the location must be marked in a
special way, so that the searches know that the spot used to
be used.
See text for implementation.
 Open Address Hashing
To reduce collisions
Use table CAPACITY = prime number of form 4k+3
Hashing functions:
Division hash function: key % CAPACITY
Mid-square function: (key*key) % CAPACITY
Multiplicative hash function: key is multiplied by
positive constant less than one. Hash function
returns first few digits of fractional result.
 Clustering
In the hash method described, when the insertion
encounters a collision, we move forward in the
table until a vacant spot is found. This is called
linear probing.
Problem: when several different keys are hashed to
the same location, adjacent spots in the table will be
filled. This leads to the problem of clustering.
As the table approaches its capacity, these clusters
tend to merge. This causes insertion to take a long
time (due to linear probing to find vacant spot).
 Double Hashing
One common technique to avoid cluster is called double
hashing.
Lets call the original hash function hash1
Define a second hash function hash2

Double hashing algorithm:

1. When an item is inserted, use hash1(key) to determine
insertion location i in array as before.
2. If collision occurs, use hash2(key) to determine how far to
move forward in the array looking for a vacant spot:

next location = (i + hash2(key)) % CAPACITY

 Double Hashing
Clustering tends to be reduced, because hash2() has
different values for keys that initially map to the same initial
location via hash1().
This is in contrast to hashing with linear probing.
Both methods are open address hashing, because the methods
take the next open spot in the array.
In linear probing
hash2(key) = (i+1)%CAPACITY
In double hashing hash2() can be a general function of the
form
hash2(key) = (I+f(key))%CAPACITY
 Chained Hashing
In open address hashing, a collision is
handled by probing the array for the next
vacant spot.
When the array is full, no new items can be
added.
We can solve this by resizing the table.
Alternative: chained hashing.
 Chained Hashing
In chained hashing, each location in the hash table
contains a list of records whose keys map to that
location: [0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [n]

Record whose
Record whose Record whose
key hashes
key hashes key hashes
to 0
to 3

to 1

Record whose
Record whose Record whose
key hashes
key hashes key hashes
to 0
to 1 to 3

 Time Analysis of Hashing
Worst case: every key gets hashed to same
array index! O(n) search!!
Luckily, average case is more promising.
First we define a fraction called the hash
table load factor:

= number of occupied table locations

size of tables array
 Average Search Times
For open addressing with linear probing, average
number of table elements examined in a successful
search is approximately:

(1+ 1/(1-))

Double hashing: -ln(1-)/

Chained hashing
Average number of table elements examined during successful search
Open addressing, Open addressing
Load linear probing double hashing Chained hashing
factor( (1+1/(1-)) -ln(1-)/
0.5 1.50 1.39 1.25
0.6 1.75 1.53 1.30
0.7 2.17 1.72 1.35
0.8 3.00 2.01 1.40
0.9 5.50 2.56 1.45
1.0 Not applicable Not applicable 1.50
2.0 Not applicable Not applicable 2.00
3.0 Not applicable Not applicable 2.50
 Summary
Serial search: average case O(n)
Binary search: average case O(log2n)
Hashing
Open address hashing
Linear probing
Double hashing
Chained hashing
Average number of elements examined is function of
load factor