DecreaseKeys are Expensive for External Memory Priority Queues

November 03, 2016 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Symposium on the Theory of Computing

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Kasper Eenberg, Kasper Green Larsen, Huacheng Yu arXiv ID 1611.00911 Category cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms Cross-listed cs.CC Citations 11 Venue Symposium on the Theory of Computing Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
One of the biggest open problems in external memory data structures is the priority queue problem with DecreaseKey operations. If only Insert and ExtractMin operations need to be supported, one can design a comparison-based priority queue performing $O((N/B)\lg_{M/B} N)$ I/Os over a sequence of $N$ operations, where $B$ is the disk block size in number of words and $M$ is the main memory size in number of words. This matches the lower bound for comparison-based sorting and is hence optimal for comparison-based priority queues. However, if we also need to support DecreaseKeys, the performance of the best known priority queue is only $O((N/B) \lg_2 N)$ I/Os. The big open question is whether a degradation in performance really is necessary. We answer this question affirmatively by proving a lower bound of $Ξ©((N/B) \lg_{\lg N} B)$ I/Os for processing a sequence of $N$ intermixed Insert, ExtraxtMin and DecreaseKey operations. Our lower bound is proved in the cell probe model and thus holds also for non-comparison-based priority queues.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Data Structures & Algorithms

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted