Find it on GitHub

Along with the Kruskal’s minimum spanning tree algorithm, there’s another general algorithm that solves the problem. The algorithm of Prim.

As we already know the algorithm of Kruskal works in a pretty natural and logical way. Since we’re trying to build a MST, which is naturally build by the minimal edges of the graph (G), we sort them in a non-descending order and we start building the tree.

During the whole process of building the final minimum spanning tree Kruskal’s algorithm keeps a forest of trees. The number of trees in that forest decreases on each step and finally we get the minimum weight spanning tree.

A key point in the Kruskal’s approach is the way we get the “next” edge from G that should be added to one of the trees of the forest (or to connect two trees from the forest). The only thing we should be aware of is to choose an edge that’s connecting two vertices – u and v and these two shouldn’t be in the same tree. That’s all.

An important feature of the Kruskal’s algorithm is that it builds the MST just by sorting the edges by their weight and doesn’t care about a particular starting vertex.

In the same time there’s another algorithm that builds a MST – the algorithm of Prim designed by Robert Prim in 1957.

Overview

The idea behind the Prim’s algorithm is rather different from Kruskal’s approach. During the process of building the MST this algorithm keeps a single tree, which is finally sub-tree of the final minimum weight spanning tree.

On each step we chose an edge which we add to the growing tree that finally forms the MST.

It is somehow unnatural approach! We start from a given vertex and initially we don’t choose the lightest edge. Thus during the whole process the tree grows, but outside the tree (T) there might be edges that are lighter than those in the tree (i.e. the edge (5, 1) from the tree above is lighter than (2, 5) but (2, 5) is added to the growing tree before the edge (5, 1)).

Compared to the Kruskal’s algorithm this time everything seems to be really unnatural. How we should be sure the final tree (T) will be a minimum spanning tree since we don’t get the lightest edge on each step?

Actually we are sure that the final tree is a MST because of another obvious feature of the minimum spanning trees. They should “connect” all the vertices of G, thus somehow at least one edge reaching each vertex will appear in the MST. Thus we shouldn’t care where do we start, the only important thing is to choose the lightest edge that’s visible so far.

This algorithm looks much like Dijkstra’s shortest path in a graph, because we start from a vertex, we push all the edges starting from this node to a priority queue and we chose the lightest edge. Going to the next node connected by this edge we append to the queue all the edges that aren’t in the queue.

That way the queue grows and we get always the lightest edge – thus forming a priority queue.

Now let’s summarize the algorithm of Prim

Pseudo Code

As an initial input we have the graph (G) and a starting vertex (s).

1.  Make a queue (Q) with all the vertices of G (V);
2.  For each member of Q set the priority to INFINITY;
3.  Only for the starting vertex (s) set the priority to 0;
4.  The parent of (s) should be NULL;
5.  While Q isn’t empty
6.     Get the minimum from Q – let’s say (u); (priority queue);
7.     For each adjacent vertex to (v) to (u)
8.        If (v) is in Q and weight of (u, v) < priority of (v) then
9.           The parent of (v) is set to be (u)
10.          The priority of (v) is the weight of (u, v)

Indeed it looks much like the Dijkstra’s algorithm.

Code

Here’s a PHP implementation of the algorithm of Prim, which directly follows the pseudo code.

// Prim's algorithm

define('INFINITY', 100000000);

// the graph
$G = array(
    0 => array( 0,  4,  0,  0,  0,  0,  0,  0,  8),
    1 => array( 4,  0,  8,  0,  0,  0,  0,  0,  11),
    2 => array( 0,  8,  0,  7,  0,  4,  2,  0,  0),
    3 => array( 0,  0,  7,  0,  9,  14,  0,  0,  0),
    4 => array( 0,  0,  0,  9,  0,  10,  0,  0,  0),
    5 => array( 0,  0,  4,  14,  10,  0,  0,  2,  0),
    6 => array( 0,  0,  2,  0,  0,  0,  0,  6,  7),
    7 => array( 0,  0,  0,  0,  0,  2,  6,  0,  1),
    8 => array( 8,  11,  0,  0,  0,  0,  7,  1,  0),
);

function prim(&$graph, $start)
{
    $q = array(); // queue
    $p = array(); // parent
    
    foreach (array_keys($graph) as $k) {
        $q[$k] = INFINITY;
    }
    
    $q[$start] = 0;
    $p[$start] = NULL;
    
    asort($q);
    
    while ($q) {
        // get the minimum value
        $keys = array_keys($q);
        $u = $keys[0];
        
        foreach ($graph[$u] as $v => $weight) {
            if ($weight > 0 && in_array($v, $keys) && $weight < $q[$v]) {
                $p[$v] = $u;
                $q[$v] = $weight;
            }
        }
        
        unset($q[$u]);
        asort($q);
    }
    
    return $p;
}

prim($G, 5);

History

It’s curious to say that the algorithm developed by Robert Prim isn’t developed by him. It’s considered that a Czech mathematician Vojtech Jarnik discovered back in 1930. However now we know this algorithm as the algorithm of Prim, which independently discovered it in 1957 as I said above, and finally Edsger Dijkstra described it in 1959. That’s why his algorithm on finding the single-source shortest paths in a graph looks so much to this algorithm. Perhaps by finding this algorithm on minimum spanning tree Dijkstra discovered how we can find the shortest paths to all vertices using a priority queue. Indeed the paths to all other vertices use the edges of the minimum spanning tree.

Just because Jarnik found and described this algorithm 27 years earlier than Robert Prim, today it’s more convenient to call this algorithm the Prim-Jarnik algorithm.

One of the two main algorithms in finding the minimum spanning tree algorithms is the algorithm of Kruskal. Before getting into the details, let’s get back to the principles of the minimum spanning tree.

We have a weighted graph and of all spanning trees we’d like to find the one with minimal weight. As an example on the picture above you see a spanning tree (T) on the graph (G), but that isn’t the minimum weight spanning tree!

We can think of a group of islands and the possible connections of bridges connecting them. Of course building bridges is expensive and time consuming, so we must be aware of what kind of bridges we want to build. Nevertheless there is an important question, what’s the minimum price we’d like to pay to build such set of bridges connecting all the islands.

Thus we practically need to build a minimum spanning tree, where the vertices will be the islands, while the edges will be the possible bridges between them. Every possible bridge has a weight (the price or the time we need to build it, etc.).

This scenario is only one of possible use cases of where minimum spanning trees can be used in practice.

The two main approaches – the Kruskal’s and the Prim’s algorithms however differ.

Overview

The algorithm of Kruskal starts by initializing a set of |V| trees.

During the process of building the final spanning tree we keep a forest. Obviously we start with a forest with |V| trees, where each tree is a single node tree.

On some point we have a forest of “k” trees which are all a sub-trees of the minimum spanning tree.

Finally one step before building the final MST we have two trees and we connect them with the less weighted edge left that connects them.

It’s important to note that during the process of building the tree we sort the edges in ascending order by their weight.

Than we start getting edges and check whether their ends (the two vertices making the edge) belong to a different sub-trees.

Pseudo Code

1. T (the final spanning tree) is defined to be the empty set;
2. For each vertex v of G, make the empty set out of v;
3. Sort the edges of G in ascending (non-decreasing) order;
4. For each edge (u, v) from the sored list of step 3.
      If u and v belong to different sets
         Add (u,v) to T;
         Get together u and v in one single set;
5. Return T

A great feature about the Kruskal’s algorithm is that it also work on disconnected graphs.

History

Kruskal’s algorithm is named after Joseph Kruskal, who wasn’t only computer scientist, but also prominent mathematician and statistician. Although he is best known for its algorithm for computing the minimum spanning tree, described in this post, he’s also known with his work as a statistician and his contribution to the formulation of multidimensional scaling.

Kruskal also explored the Indo-European languages contributing the studies of the linguistics along with other scientists. His “Indo-European Lexicographical List” (http://www.wordgumbo.com/ie/cmp/) is still widely used.

Since with graphs we can represent real-life problems it’s almost clear why we would need an efficient algorithm that calculates the shortest path between two vertices. Getting back to our example of a road map we can use such an algorithm in order to find the shortest path between two cities. This example, of course, is very basic indeed, but it can give us a clear example of where shortest path can be applied.

In the other hand, we can model an enormous field of real-life problems using graphs – not only road maps. As we already know, whenever we have relations between different abstract objects we can refer an efficient graph algorithm.

OK, so we need a shortest path algorithm, but before we proceed with the exact algorithm first we’ll need to answer some questions and give some definitions.

Overview

First we need a definition of the terms distance and path between two nodes. A path is considered to be the sequence of vertices (or edges if you wish) between two vertices i and j. Of course we assume that there might be no path between any to vertices in the graph! Also we assume that this definition relates both for directed and undirected graphs. After we have the definition of a path we can proceed by defining a “distance”, which is said to be the number of edges in the path between i and j.

Using this terms, if there’s an edge between i and j, the path between them is [i, j], while the distance is 1. Of course, for an undirected graph (i, j) equals to (j, i) and the path [i, j] equals the path [j, i], but that isn’t true for directed graphs where the path [i, j] differs in general from [j, i].

Here we talk about the path between two adjacent vertices, but we can go with the more general case of a path between two vertices that aren’t adjacent.

Now, getting back to the road map example, there might be many paths between city A and city B.

What we actually need to find is the shortest one. This can be very important, because we often want to get from A to B as quickly as possible using the shortest path.

So first, what is a shortest path between i and j. Well, besides the strict definition, I’ll give a simplified one that might be clearer. The shortest path between i and j is such a path, which has the lowest distance compared to all other paths between i and j.

In our algorithm we will use breadth-first search. Why? That is because by using BFS by starting at a given point we expand our search consecutively starting with the closest vertices.

Is breadth-first search enough and will it give us the correct answer – the shortest path between i and j. Actually breadth-first search will gives us even more – the shortest paths to each reachable vertex from a given starting point – the staring vertex.

Why this is correct? Well, because of the nature of the breadth-first search algorithm. As we already know BFS uses a queue in order to store the front of the expansion. Usually as an abstraction BFS colors the vertices in white, gray and black, where the white vertices are those that aren’t visited yet, the gray are in the queue and the black vertices are already visited.

However how can be sure that BFS will give us the shortest paths to each vertex? To answer this question and to be sure that BFS will work for us we must take a closer look at the queue. Clearly by starting at a given point the algorithm is correct – the distance is 0.

Now the second step is to put into the queue all the vertices adjacent to s (where s is the starting point). Clearly this will give us the shortest paths to all adjacent vertices of s.

Continuing by induction we can assume that at level k we have all the shortest paths from s to all the vertices at the level k. It is clear the path between s and the vertices at level k is k, since we assume that each edge adds 1 to the path from s to i. Now by adding all the vertices adjacent (and not visited yet) to the paths of level k we get paths with length k+1 which is again the shortest paths from s to level k+1.

Actually we can talk about a tree built out of the graph by staring at s (which is the root of the tree).

Code

OK, now we know that BFS will find us the shortest paths from s to all the reachable vertices from s. Here’s a simple PHP implementation, that makes use of the Standard PHP Library data structures. Of course, everyone can code and use his own implementation of lists in order to keep the information of the adjacency lists.

The important thing to note is that we keep an additional information in each vertex – the distance between it and s, which is initially infinite. First we go with the modification of BFS in order to find all the distances between s and the other vertices.

Here’s our graph:

class vertex
{
    public $key = null;
    public $color = 'white';
    public $distance = -1;  // infinite
    
    public function __construct($key) 
    {
        $this->key = $key;
    }
}

$v0 = new vertex(0);
$v1 = new vertex(1);
$v2 = new vertex(2);
$v3 = new vertex(3);
$v4 = new vertex(4);
$v5 = new vertex(5);

$list0 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list0->push($v1);
$list0->push($v3);
$list0->rewind();

$list1 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list1->push($v0);
$list1->push($v2);
$list1->rewind();

$list2 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list2->push($v1);
$list2->push($v3);
$list2->push($v4);
$list2->rewind();

$list3 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list3->push($v1);
$list3->push($v2);
$list3->rewind();

$list4 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list4->push($v2);
$list4->push($v5);
$list4->rewind();

$list5 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list5->push($v4);
$list5->rewind();

$adjacencyList = array(
    $list0,
    $list1,
    $list2,
    $list3,
    $list4,
    $list5,
);

function calcDistances(vertex $start, &$adjLists)
{
    // define an empty queue
    $q = array();
    
    // push the starting vertex into the queue
    array_push($q, $start);
    
    // color it gray
    $start->color = 'gray';
    
    // mark the distance to it 0
    $start->distance = 0;
    
    while ($q) {
        // 1. pop from the queue
        $t = array_pop($q);
        
        // 2. foreach poped item find it's adjacent white vertices
        $l = $adjLists[$t->key];
        while ($l->valid()) {
            // 3. mark them gray, increment their length with one from their parent
            if ($l->current()->color == 'white') {
                $l->current()->color = 'gray';
                $l->current()->distance = $t->distance + 1;
                // 4. push them to the queue
                array_push($q, $l->current());
            }
            
            $l->next();
        }
    }
}

calcDistances($v0, $adjacencyList);

print_r($adjacencyList);

Now we can modify the algorithm even more and we add the path property of each vertex. Now each vertex will keep the path from s.

class vertex
{
    public $key         = null;
    public $color       = 'white';
    public $distance    = -1;  // infinite
    public $path        = null;
    
    public function __construct($key) 
    {
        $this->key  = $key;
    }
}

$v0 = new vertex(0);
$v1 = new vertex(1);
$v2 = new vertex(2);
$v3 = new vertex(3);
$v4 = new vertex(4);
$v5 = new vertex(5);

$list0 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list0->push($v1);
$list0->push($v3);
$list0->rewind();

$list1 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list1->push($v0);
$list1->push($v2);
$list1->rewind();

$list2 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list2->push($v1);
$list2->push($v3);
$list2->push($v4);
$list2->rewind();

$list3 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list3->push($v1);
$list3->push($v2);
$list3->rewind();

$list4 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list4->push($v2);
$list4->push($v5);
$list4->rewind();

$list5 = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
$list5->push($v4);
$list5->rewind();

$adjacencyList = array(
    $list0,
    $list1,
    $list2,
    $list3,
    $list4,
    $list5,
);

function calcShortestPaths(vertex $start, &$adjLists)
{
    // define an empty queue
    $q = array();
    
    // push the starting vertex into the queue
    array_push($q, $start);
    
    // color it gray
    $start->color = 'gray';
    
    // mark the distance to it 0
    $start->distance = 0;
    
    // the path to the starting vertex
    $start->path = new SplDoublyLinkedList();
    $start->path->push($start->key);
    
    while ($q) {
        // 1. pop from the queue
        $t = array_pop($q);
        
        // 2. foreach poped item find it's adjacent white vertices
        $l = $adjLists[$t->key];
        while ($l->valid()) {
            // 3. mark them gray, increment their length with one from their parent
            if ($l->current()->color == 'white') {
                $l->current()->color = 'gray';
                $l->current()->distance = $t->distance + 1;
                $l->current()->path = clone $t->path;
                $l->current()->path->push($l->current()->key);
                
                // 4. push them to the queue
                array_push($q, $l->current());
            }
            
            $l->next();
        }
    }
}

calcShortestPaths($v0, $adjacencyList);

print_r($adjacencyList);

Complexity

Clearly the complexity of enqueue and dequeue is O(V), while searching for adjacent vertices is O(E), thus the complexity of this algorithm is O(V + E)!

Application

Finding the shortest path between two nodes is obviousely a very handy algorithm. Applied almost everywhere graphs exists this algorithm is widely used. However there’s one very reasonable question. We’re searching for the shortest path between two vertices and we end with the shortest paths between a starting node an all other vertices? Why we need this “useless” information? Acutally the question should be: is there a faster and more efficient algorithm compared to this one. Well, we’ll see that!

Let’s assume we have a list of tasks to accomplish. Some of the tasks depend on others, so we must be very careful with the order of their execution. If the relationship between these tasks were simple enough we could represent them as a linked list, which would be great, and we would know the exact order of their execution. The problem is that sometimes the relations between the different tasks are more complex and some tasks depend on two or more other tasks, which in their turn depend on one or more tasks, etc.

Thus we can’t model this problem using linked lists or trees. The only rational solution is to model the problem using a graph. What kind of graph do we need? Well, we definitely need a directed graph, to desribe the relations, and this graph shouldn’t have cycles. So we need the so called directed acyclic graph (DAG).

Why we don’t what a cycle in the graph? The answer of this question is simple and obvious. In case of cyclic graph, we wouldn’t be able to determine the priority of task execution, thus we won’t be able to sort the tasks properly.

Now the solution we want is to sort the vertices of the graph in some order so for each edge (u, v) u will precede v. Then we’ll have a linear order of all tasks and by starting their execution we’ll know that everything will be OK.

This kind of sort is also known as “topological” sort (or topsort) and it is one of the very basic graph algorithms.

Overview

OK, so we have an acyclic directed graph, how do we proceed to get a linked list with all the vertices sorted? Since it’s an acyclic graph we know that there is at least one vertex without predecessor. Thus at first place, we can put all the vertices without predecessors into our linked list.

This approach answers the question – is there a possibility to have more than one valid topological sort of a graph? Indeed, the only thing we’d like to do is to put all the vertices in the correct order, but since there might be vertices with no predecessors any combination of them will be a valid topological sort for a graph.

As we can see from the picture above even for vertices with predecessors our topological sort can vary. Thus [9, 6, 2, 7, 4, 1] is a valid topological sorted graph, but [6, 9, 2, 7, 4, 1] is also a valid topological sort out of the same graph!

Now we can generalize the algorithm in some basic steps.

1. Make an empty list L and an empty list S;
2. Put all the vertices with no predecessors in L;
3. While L has items in it;
3.1. Pop an item from L – n, and push it to S;
3.2. For each vertex m adjacent to n;
3.2.1. Remove (n, m);
3.2.2. If m has no predecessors – push it to L;

Code

Here’s the very basic PHP implementation. As you can see the short implementation shows us how easy this algorithm is. However its importance to computer science and programming is enormous.

class G
{
    protected $_g = array(
        array(0, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0),
        array(0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0),
        array(0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0),
        array(0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0),
        array(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1),
        array(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1),
        array(0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0),
    );
    protected $_list = array();
    protected $_ts   = array();
    protected $_len  = null;
    
    public function __construct()
    {
        $this->_len = count($this->_g);
        
        // finds the vertices with no predecessors
        $sum = 0;
        for ($i = 0; $i < $this->_len; $i++) {
            for ($j = 0; $j < $this->_len; $j++) {
                $sum += $this->_g[$j][$i];
            }
            
            if (!$sum) {
                // append to list
                array_push($this->_list, $i);
            }
            $sum = 0;
        }
    }
    
    public function topologicalSort() 
    {
        while ($this->_list) {
            $t = array_shift($this->_list);
            array_push($this->_ts, $t);
            
            foreach ($this->_g[$t] as $key => $vertex) {
                if ($vertex == 1) {
                    $this->_g[$t][$key] = 0;
                    
                    $sum = 0;
                    for ($i = 0; $i < $this->_len; $i++) {
                        $sum += $this->_g[$i][$key];
                    }
                    
                    if (!$sum) {
                        array_push($this->_list, $key);
                    }
                }
                $sum = 0;
            }
        }
        
        print_r($this->_ts);
    }
}

$g = new G();
/*
Array
(
    [0] => 0
    [1] => 5
    [2] => 1
    [3] => 2
    [4] => 3
    [5] => 4
    [6] => 6
)*/
$g->topologicalSort();

Application

As I already mentioned above this algorithm is practically used to sort the execution of different tasks that depend on each other. However this isn’t its only use. Actually any kind of objects that depend on each other can be modeled with a graph. Indeed sometimes these graphs may be a trees, but most of the cases that isn’t true.

Here’s one task related to the tree data structure. Given two nodes, can you find their lowest common ancestor?

In a matter of fact this task always has a proper solution, because at least the root node is a common ancestor of all pairs of nodes. However here the task is to find the lowest one, which can be quite far from the root.

We don’t care what kind of trees we have. However the solution, as we will see, can be very different depending on the tree type. Indeed finding the lowest common ancestor can have linear complexity for binary search trees, which isn’t true for ordinary trees.

Overview

Let’s say we have a tree (not binary!) and two nodes from this tree. The task is to find their lowest common ancestor. The thing is that we don’t know much about where they appear to be in the tree.

We can think of this tree as a DOM tree of any single HTML page online. It is not binary or balanced and can’t be sure where these nodes are.

First we must find both paths from the root to each one of the target nodes. Note that this requires additional memory! Then, in linear time we can pass through these “paths” and scan them from the root down to the nodes. We expect these to arrays to be equal at least in their first element (the root). Using this scenario the lowest common ancestor is the last equal element in both arrays.

To see how this algorithm can be dramatically changed depending on the data structure, let’s see another example. Now let’s say we have a binary search tree (BST). We know that in a BST all the elements in the left sub-tree are smaller than the root and all the items on the right sub-tree are greater than the root. This is true also for the left and the right sub-trees.

Now because we’re searching the lowest common ancestor, we don’t need to collect the paths from the root to the nodes in two arrays. We just know that the greater items are on the right, while the smaller items are on the left. This can help us find the lowest ancestor starting directly from the root.

What we do is to compare the two keys of the target nodes with the root key. If one of the keys are smaller, and the other is greater than the root’s key, then obviously the root is the lowest common ancestor. This is true because one of the items will be somewhere in the left sub-tree, while the other will be in the right sub-tree.

In case both values are greater (or smaller) than the root, we can move to the right (or to the left) sub-tree and try again with the same procedure. Thus the first node which key is in between the two target values will be the lowest common ancestor.

Code

Here’s a very simple PHP implementation showing us these two algorithms.

class Tree
{
    public $node = null;
    public $id = null;
    public $parent = null;
    public $children = array();
    
    public function __construct($node, $id = null)
    {
        $this->node = $node;
        $this->id = $id;
    }
    
    public function addChild(Node &$n)
    {
        $n->parent = $this;
        $this->children[] = $n;
    }
    
    /**
     * Returns an element by its id
     * 
     * @param mixed $id
     * @return Node 
     */
    public function search($id)
    {
        if ($this->id == $id) {
            return $this;
        }

        $a = false;
        
        // search all the children starting from the left-most
        foreach ($this->children as $child) {
            $a = $child->search($id);
        }
        
        return $a;
    }
    
    /**
     * Finds a path from the root to the 
     * item and returns it as a list
     * 
     * @param mixed $id 
     * @return array
     */
    public function find_path($id, &$path)
    {
        array_push($path, $this->id);
        
        if ($this->id == $id) {
            return 1;
        }
        
        foreach ($this->children as $child)  {
            if (1 == $child->find_path($id, $path)) return 1;
            array_pop($path);
        }
    }
    
    public function __toString()
    {
        return $this->node . ' ' . $this->id . "\n";
    }
}

$dom = new Tree('DOM', 'ROOT');

$body = new Tree('BODY', 1);
$div1 = new Tree('DIV', 'div-1');
$div2 = new Tree('DIV', 'my-id');

$a = new Tree("A", 'some-link');

$dom->addChild($body);
$body->addChild($div1);
$body->addChild($div2);
$div2->addChild($a);

$path1 = $path2 = array();
$dom->find_path('div-1', $path1);
$dom->find_path('some-link', $path2);

Finding Lowest Common Ancestor in a BST

class Tree
{
    public $key;
    
    public $parent  = null;
    public $left    = null;
    public $right   = null;
    
    public function __construct($key) 
    {
        $this->key = $key;
    }
    
    public function insert(Tree $n) 
    {
        if ($this->key < $n->key) {
            if ($this->right == null) {
                // insert
                $this->right = $n;
                $n->parent = $this;
            } else {
                $this->right->insert($n);
            }
        }
        if ($this->key > $n->key) {
            if ($this->left == null) {
                // insert
                $this->left = $n;
                $n->parent = $this;
            } else {
                $this->left->insert($n);
            }
        }
    }
}

$t = new Tree(10);

$n1 = new Tree(20);
$n2 = new Tree(5);
$n3 = new Tree(7);
$n4 = new Tree(13);

$t->insert($n1);
$t->insert($n2);
$t->insert($n3);

function find_common($node1, $node2, $tree) 
{
    if ($node1->key < $tree->key && $node2->key > $tree->key) {
        return $tree;
    } else if ($node1->key < $tree->key && $node2->key < $tree->key) {
        find_common($node1, $node2, $tree->left);
    } else if ($node1->key > $tree->key && $node2->key > $tree->key) {
        find_common($node1, $node2, $tree->right);
    }
}

$node = find_common($n3, $n4, $t);

Application

A typical use-case of this algorithm is finding the lowest common ancestor of two nodes in a DOM tree. Sometimes we just need to attach an event listener to both items (even before they are attached to the DOM!). Although attaching this event to the “document” will work just fine, all the elements from the nodes up to the root will be “capturing” these events due to event bubbling. Thus attaching the event to the lowest common ancestor is a better solution.

Heapsort is one of the general sorting algorithms that performs in O(n.log(n)) in the worst-case, just like merge sort and quicksort, but sorts in place – as quicksort. Although quicksort’s worst-case sorting time is O(n²) it’s often considered that it beats other sorting algorithms in practice. Thus in practice quicksort is “faster” than heapsort. In the same time developers tend to consider heapsort as more difficult to implement than other n.log(n) sorting algorithms.

In the other hand heapsort uses a special data structure, called heap, in order to sort items in place and this data structure is quite useful in some specific cases. Thus to understand heapsort we first need to understand what is a heap.

So first let’s take a look at what is a heap.

Overview

A heap is a complete binary tree, where all the parents are greater than their children (max heap). If all the children are greater than their parents it is considered to call the heap a min-heap. But first what is a complete binary tree? Well, this is a binary tree, where all the levels are full, except the last one, where all the items are placed on the left (just like on the image below).

Combined with the fact that each node contains a greater key than its children, a heap may look like the tree on the following diagram.

The thing is that if we put indices next to each node of this tree, starting from the root (index 1) and continuing from left to right on each level, we’ll get the following tree.

Now if we take a closer look to the picture above we can see that the indices of a node and its children are closely related. Thus for a node of an index i we see that its left child has the index 2*i, while its right child’s index is 2*i + 1.

This particular order gives us the possibility to store each heap in an array.

Since in a heap its greater element is in the root of the tree (for max-heap, respectively in a min-heap its smallest element is the root) we need to answer two questions.

1. How to build a heap out of an ordinary array?
2. After extracting the root, which is the greatest (smallest) item, how can we rebuild the heap in order to keep it a heap again?

First let’s try to answer the first question. How to build a heap? Well, let’s forget about the array for a while and let’s take a look on a ordinary binary tree with only three nodes.

We see that the three green nodes destroy the structure of our heap, because the root (1) is smaller than its children (4) and (5). Thus we need to fix this problem and what we’re going to do is to swap the root with its biggest child.

As you can see on the picture above the i-th item is first compared to its left child. The greater of these two items is compared to the right child. Note that we don’t swap them – we just compare them to get which one is greater. Once we find the greatest of these three values we swap them with the root in case it’s not the root value.

Although now these three elements form a heap, by swapping the root with one of its children may destroy the heap constructed out of this child. That is why we continue the same procedure with it.

This actually gives us the procedure to heapify the three nodes constructed out of the i-th item and its children. However to build a heap from an arbitrary array we should perform this operation starting from floor(len[A] / 2) down to the first item in the array.

Why? Well, a complete binary tree with a full last level contains n/2 + 1 nodes in it. They don’t have children, thus we don’t need to check them – they are “sorted”. Indeed if we start from an item on the right of floor(len[A] / 2) there won’t be items with indices 2*i and 2*i + 1.

Code

So far we know how to build the heap. Next thing is to swap the first and the last element of the array and rebuild the heap. Here’s the PHP code of how to do this.

$a = array(1, 6, 3, 8, 2, 5, 4);

function heapify(&$a, &$i, &$heap_size)
{
    $l = $i*2 + 1;
    $r = $i*2 + 2;
    
    if ($l < $heap_size && $a[$i] < $a[$l]) {
        $largest = $l;
    } else {
        $largest = $i;
    }
    
    if ($r < $heap_size && $a[$largest] < $a[$r]) {
        $largest = $r;
    }
    
    if ($largest != $i) {
        $t = $a[$i];
        $a[$i] = $a[$largest];
        $a[$largest] = $t;
        
        heapify($a, $largest, $heap_size);
    }
}

function build_heap(&$a, &$heap_size)
{
    $len = floor($heap_size / 2);
    for ($i = $len; $i > -1; $i--) {
        heapify($a, $i, $heap_size);
    }
}

function heapsort(&$a)
{
    $heap_size = count($a);
    build_heap($a, $heap_size);
    
    while ($heap_size--) {
        $t = $a[$heap_size];
        $a[$heap_size] = $a[0];
        $a[0] = $t;
        build_heap($a, $heap_size);
    }
}

// 1 2 3 4 5 6 8
heapsort($a);

Complexity

OK, the last question is – how do we know that this algorithm sorts in place in n.log(n) time? Let’s explore the algorithm one more time. The heapify worst-case is when we start from the root down to the lowest level of the tree. In these terms if the tree height is h, the time is O(h), but because the tree is balanced (complete) the time in terms of n is O(log(n)).

In the other hand to build a heap we walk from floor(len[A] / 2) to 0, which makes it run in O(n.log(n)). However there is only one case when the heapify may run in log(n), and that is when it starts from the root, so it’s not absolutely true that building the heap runs in n.log(n).

Indeed heapify depend on the level it has been started. It doesn’t run for the last ceil(n/2) items and it runs in O(1) for another 2^h-1. Thus in practice we can build a heap in O(n).

Once we have the heap built, the only thing to do is to extract its first element and rebuild – heapify from the first item. This makes the sorting algorithm run in O(n.log(n)) – just like quicksort and mergesort.

Application

As I said in the beginning of this post quicksort is often the fastest general purpose algorithm in practice. This makes both merge sort and heapsort not so popular. However heapsort introduces an interesting data structure which can help us in many other cases.

It’s initially used to implement priority queues. What is great about a heap is that after we build it, which we know how to do in linear time, we can extract the greatest value – thus taking the highest priority task. Then with rebuilding the heap we can extract the next priority and so on, without fully sorting the array.

This makes the heapsort the only sorting algorithm that can sort the first k items out of a set of n items without sorting the whole set.

Indeed let’s say we have a set of positive integers and we’d like to get the biggest sum out of three items. Obviously we can sort the array and take the greatest three numbers, but this will cost us n.log(n) time, while using heapsort we can do it much faster! And all this without extra space – in place!

The binary search tree is a very useful data structure, where searching can be significantly faster than searching into a linked list. However in some cases searching into a binary tree can be as slow as searching into a linked list and this mainly depends on the input sequence. Indeed in case the input is sorted the binary tree will seem much like a linked list and the search will be slow.

To overcome this we must change a bit the data structure in order to stay well balanced. It’s intuitively clear that the searching process will be better if the tree is well branched. This is when finding an item will become faster with minimal effort.

Since we know how to construct a binary search tree the only thing left is to keep it balanced. Obviously we will need to re-balance the tree on each insert and delete, which will make this data structure more difficult to maintain compared to non-balanced search trees, but searching into it will be significantly faster.

Overview

In order to balance a tree we can go for the very basic and intuitive approach. First let’s take a look of one non-balanced tree.

Compared to the balanced tree on the right from the image above with the same items we see that the root is approximately equal to its middle item. I.e. 4 is the middle item of the sequence [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]!

If we take a look of the sequence [2 3 4], clearly by building a binary tree it will look like a linked list. However if we choose the middle item for a root – we’ll easy build a balanced tree. So the only thing to do is to get the middle item out of a list.

We now see that building a balanced binary tree out of a sorted linked list isn’t that difficult. In the other hand, as I said above, on each insert we’ll have to rebalance the tree. You can think of the tree out of the values [1,2,3,4,5] and the same tree after inserting [44,45,46,47,48]. Clearly the root of the resulting tree will no longer be 3.

So we need to implement the re-balancing in three basic operations. First we need to build a linked list out of a balanced binary tree. On the second place we’ll have to find the middle item and on the third place we’ll have to build again a balanced search tree.

Hopefully the first two tasks are easy to implement, because making out a sorted list out of a binary search tree is very easy. We need just to walk through the tree from left-root-right recursively. Because smaller items are in the left sub-tree and greater items are on the right we’re sure that the resulting list will be sorted. Then finding the middle item is as easy as finding the middle index of an array know its length.

Balancing Optimization

Of course the main problem of re-balancing a tree on each insert/delete is that this operations will be slow and soon or later we’ll have problems. That can happen if we change often our data structure. That’s why we should think of some optimization.

Normally we insert and re-balance on each step, which is slow. In the other hand we can do bulk insert forgetting about the re-balancing for a while. Only after the inserts are done we can go for re-balancing the entire tree.

The same approach we can use with bulk delete. We can just set to NIL the items we want to delete, but we can keep them in memory for a while. Thus the search will stay relatively fast without rebalancing the tree. However this approach can be used carefully because we’ll keep some data in the memory without actually using it.

Implementation

Implementing balanced binary trees is more difficult than just implementing binary search trees. Here’s an example in PHP.

class Node
{
	protected   $_parent = null;
	protected   $_left = null;
	protected   $_right = null;
	protected   $_key;
    protected   $_data = null;
	
    /**
     * @param int $key
     * @param mixed $data 
     */
	public function __construct($key, $data)
	{
		$this->_key = $key;
        $this->_data = $data;
	}
    
    /**
     * Empty the node by keeping up the key, but
     * setting up the data to NULL 
     */
    public function doEmpty() 
    {
        $this->_data = null;
    }
	
    /**
     * Print the key
     * 
     * @return string
     */
	public function __toString()
	{
		return 'First name: ' . $this->_data['f_name']
                . '
'
                . 'Last name: ' . $this->_data['l_name']
                . '
' 
                . 'Birthday: ' . $this->_data['b_day'];
	}
    
    public function &getParent() { return $this->_parent; }
    public function setParent($parent) { $this->_parent = $parent; }
    
    public function &getLeft() { return $this->_left; }
    public function setLeft($left) { $this->_left = $left; }
    
    public function &getRight() { return $this->_right; }
    public function setRight($right) { $this->_right = $right; }
    
    public function &getKey() { return $this->_key; }
    public function setKey($key) { $this->_key = $key; }
    
    public function &getData() { return $this->_data; }
    public function setData($data) { $this->_data = $data; }
}

class BalancedBinaryTree
{
    /**
     * Reference to the root tree
     * 
     * @var Node 
     */
	protected $_root = null;
	
    /**
     * @param type $new
     * @param type $node
     * @return type 
     */
	protected function _insert($new, &$root)
	{
        // in case the tree is empty
        // make the new node the root of
        // the tree
		if ($root == null) {
			$root = $new;
			return;
		}
		
		if ($new->getKey() <= $root->getKey()) {
			if ($root->getLeft() == null) {
				$root->setLeft($new);
				$new->setParent($root);
			} else {
				$this->_insert($new, $root->getLeft());
			}
		} else {
			if ($root->getRight() == null) {
				$root->setRight($new);
				$new->setParent($root);
			} else {
				$this->_insert($new, $root->getRight());
			}
		}		
	}
	
    /**
     * FALSE on not found
     * 
     * @param string $firstName
     * @param BalancedBinaryTree $tree
     * @return boolean 
     */
	protected function _search($firstName, &$tree)
	{
        if ($tree == null) {
            return FALSE;
        }

        $data = $tree->getData();
		
        if ($firstName == $data['f_name']) {
			return $tree;
		}
        
        // search the left sub-tree
        return $this->_search($firstName, $tree->getLeft())
                . $this->_search($firstName, $tree->getRight());
	}
    
    /**
     *
     * @param int $key
     * @param Node $tree
     * @return FALSE or Node 
     */
    protected function _searchByKey($key, &$tree)
    {
        if ($tree == null) {
            return FALSE;
        }
        
        if ($tree->getKey() == $key) {
            return $tree;
        } else if ($tree->getKey() > $key) {
            return $this->_searchByKey($key, $tree->getLeft());
        } else {
            return $this->_searchByKey($key, $tree->getRight());
        }
    }
    
    /**
     * Returns a list out of the tree by emptying the tree. 
     * In other way the tree and the list will allocate memory
     * 
     * @param BalancedBinaryTree $tree 
     */
    protected function _leftRootRight($tree)
    {
        if ($tree == null) {
            return array();
        }
        
        return array_merge(
                $this->_leftRootRight($tree->getLeft()),
                array(array('key' => $tree->getKey(), 'data' => $tree->getData())),
                $this->_leftRootRight($tree->getRight()));
    }
    
    public function _balance($list)
    {
        if (empty($list)) {
            return;
        }
        
        // split the list
        $chunks = array_chunk($list, ceil(count($list) / 2));
        $mid = array_pop($chunks[0]);
        
        $node = new Node($mid['key'], $mid['data']);
        $this->insert($node);
        
        $this->_balance($chunks[0]);
        if (isset($chunks[1]))
            $this->_balance($chunks[1]);
    }
    
    /**
     * Balance a binary search tree 
     */
    public function balance()
    {
        $list = array();
        // make a list out of the tree
        $list = $this->_leftRootRight($this->_root);
        
        // find the medium! Because the list is ordered
        // we can find the middle element in various ways
        $chunks = array_chunk($list, ceil(count($list) / 2));
        $mid = array_pop($chunks[0]);
        
        // empty the tree
        $this->_root = null;
        
        // inser the root
        $node = new Node($mid['key'], $mid['data']);
        $this->insert($node);
        
        $this->_balance($chunks[0]);
        $this->_balance($chunks[1]);
    }
	
    /**
     * Insert a new item into the tree
     * 
     * @param type $node 
     */
	public function insert($newNode)
	{
		$this->_insert($newNode, $this->_root);
	}
	
    /**
     * Search by item key
     * 
     * @param int $key
     * @return Node or FALSE
     */
    public function searchByKey($key)
    {
        return $this->_searchByKey($key, $this->_root);
    }
    
    /**
     * @param BalancedBinary $tree
     * @return string 
     */
    protected function _print($tree)
    {
        if ($tree == null) { return ''; }
        
        return $this->_print($tree->getLeft()) . ' ' 
                . $tree->getKey() . ' ' 
                . $this->_print($tree->getRight());
    }
    
    /**
     * Print the tree from left through the root and the right 
     */
    public function __toString()
    {
        if ($this->_root == null) {
            return 'The tree is empty!';
        }

        return $this->_print($this->_root->getLeft()) . ' '
                . $this->_root->getKey() . ' '
                . $this->_print($this->_root->getRight());
    }
}

$a = new Node(90, array(
    'f_name' => 'W.A.',
    'l_name' => 'Mozart',
    'b_day' => '1756-01-27',
));

$b = new Node(100, array(
    'f_name' => 'John',
    'l_name' => 'Smith',
    'b_day' => '23.05.2039',
));

$c = new Node(80, array(
    'f_name' => 'Sarah',
    'l_name' => 'Johnnes',
    'b_day' => 'tomorrow',
));

$d = new Node(60, array(
    'f_name' => 'Ludwig Van',
    'l_name' => 'Beethoven',
    'b_day' => '1770-12-17',
));

$e = new Node(70, array(
    'f_name' => 'Barbara',
    'l_name' => 'Stefanel',
    'b_day' => 'today',
));

$t = new BalancedBinaryTree();

$t->insert($a);
$t->insert($b);
$t->insert($c);
$t->insert($d);
$t->insert($e);

echo $t;

echo $t->searchByKey(70);

$t->balance();

echo $t->searchByKey(70);

Complexity of Searching

Compared to non-balanced binary search trees we’re sure that searching into a balanced trees is quick enough. The maximum height of the tree is log(n) so the worst-case searching is O(log(n)).

Application

Searching into a balanced binary tree is fast. What is more important is that we’re sure that in the worst-case scenario the search is O(log(n)). The only problem is that keeping a tree balanced is a slow operation that consumes too much resources and must be performed carefully.

Constructing a linked list is a fairly simple task. Linked lists are a linear structure and the items are located one after another, each pointing to its predecessor and its successor. Almost every operation is easy to code in few lines and doesn’t require advanced skills. Operations like insert, delete, etc. over linked lists are performed in a linear time. Of course on small data sets this works fine, but as the data grows these operations, especially the search operation becomes too slow.

Indeed searching in a linked list has a linear complexity and in the worst case we must go through the entire list in order to find the desired element. The worst case is when the item doesn’t belong to the list and we must check every single item of the list even the last one without success. This approach seems much like the sequential search over arrays. Of course this is bad when we talk about large data sets.

In terms of arrays, we could perform binary search and go directly in the middle of the array, then jump back or forward. That is because we can access array items directly using their index. However as we saw the linked lists unlike arrays can’t benefit of a direct access and we must go item by item.

Because of this natural problem of linked lists searching is slow and obviously we can’t make it better. The only way to improve searching over dynamic data structures is to use different data structure.

The tree is a data structure where each item, except of keeping some data, keeps a reference (pointer) to its children and its parent.

Of course if the item doesn’t have children, they are NIL, then this is considered a leaf in the tree terminology. In the other hand if the item doesn’t have parent item it is considered the root.

If there is no item in the tree the tree is considered empty.

In these terms only the root has no parent, and each item can have as many children as possible. Here are some trees in form of a diagrams.

If we’re looking at the root of the tree we can assume there are two sub-trees – one left and one right. However if we isolate only one of these sub-trees we can again think of it as a tree and assume that it has one left and one right sub-trees and go recursively with this definition.

Overview

A binary tree is a tree where each item can have at most two children.

Binary trees are especially important because they can contain ordered data in a specific manner. Building a binary tree isn’t difficult at all and it’s very similar to building a linked list.
However a binary tree isn’t more successful in searching than any other tree or data structure. If the items aren’t placed in a specific order we must go through the entire tree in order to find the searched item. This isn’t a great optimization, so we must put an order in it to improve the searching process.

Binary Search Tree

The binary search tree is a specific kind of binary tree, where the each item keeps greater elements on the right, while the smaller items are on the left.

Constructing a binary search tree is easy, because we can go for inserting each item only by comparing it with the root and decide where to go (left or right) based on its value.

Implementation

The following code in PHP describes the basic principles of a binary search tree.

class Node
{
	public $parent = null;
	public $left = null;
	public $right = null;
	public $data = null;
	
	public function __construct($data)
	{
		$this->data = $data;
	}
	
	public function __toString()
	{
		return $this->data;
	}
}

class BinaryTree
{
	protected $_root = null;
	
	protected function _insert(&$new, &$node)
	{
		if ($node == null) {
			$node = $new;
			return;
		}
		
		if ($new->data <= $node->data) {
			if ($node->left == null) {
				$node->left = $new;
				$new->parent = $node;
			} else {
				$this->_insert($new, $node->left);
			}
		} else {
			if ($node->right == null) {
				$node->right = $new;
				$new->parent = $node;
			} else {
				$this->_insert($new, $node->right);
			}
		}		
	}
	
	protected function _search(&$target, &$node)
	{
		if ($target == $node) {
			return 1;
		} else if ($target->data > $node->data && isset($node->right)) {
			return $this->_search($target, $node->right);
		} else if ($target->data <= $node->data && isset($node->left)) {
			return $this->_search($target, $node->left);
		}
		
		return 0;
	}
	
	public function insert($node)
	{
		$this->_insert($node, $this->_root);
	}
	
	public function search($item) 
	{
		return $this->_search($item, $this->_root);
	}
}

$a = new Node(3);
$b = new Node(2);
$c = new Node(4);
$d = new Node(7);
$e = new Node(6);

$t = new BinaryTree();

$t->insert($a);
$t->insert($b);
$t->insert($c);
$t->insert($d);
$t->insert($e);

echo $t->search($e);

Search Complexity

Searching in binary search trees is supposed to be faster than searching into linked list. However the searching process in a BST can be very fast, but also can be as slow as on linked list. That is because depending on the input of items they can be placed only on the one side of the root.

That makes the worst-case searching as slow as on linked list which is linear O(n). However if the tree is somehow balanced we can search very quickly with O(log(n)) time.

Further Optimization

We now see how ineffective binary search trees can be, so the only thing we must care is how to keep them balanced, so the search will be faster. The answer is to maintain (during insertion) a balanced binary search tree, which is another very handy data structure.

A balanced binary search tree, or only balanced tree, is a data structure where the height of left and the right sub-trees can vary by one level at most.

Application

Binary search trees are easy to build and maintain. The great thing is that if the data is well balanced they can be very useful for searching. The only problem is that these structures can be ineffective depending on the insertion order. However if we are somehow sure that the items aren’t ordered on the input, we may expect some optimized searching compared to a linked list. Compared to balanced binary search trees, BST require much less time to build and maintain (insert, delete).

Trees are very useful when working with graphs. Actually one of the very common tasks is walking through the entire tree, which can be done in several ways. First we can go to the left sub-tree, then the root and then the right sub-tree. Or right-root-left. Or root-left-right.

However we can go in depth first often called depth-first-search or a breadth-first-search.

These two methods are designed to walk through the items in a specific order, which is very handy for some specific tasks – at least each tree is also a graph.