# Binary options c program for binary search using divide and conquer strategy analysis software

Quicksort sometimes called partition-exchange sort is an efficient sorting algorithmserving as a systematic method for placing the elements of an array in order. Developed by Tony Hoare in [1] and published in[2] it is still a commonly used algorithm for sorting. When implemented well, it can be about two or three times faster than its main competitors, merge sort and heapsort.

Quicksort is a comparison sortmeaning that it can sort items of any type for which a "less-than" relation formally, a total order is defined. In efficient implementations it is not a stable sortmeaning that the relative order of equal sort items is not preserved. Quicksort can operate in-place on an array, requiring small additional amounts of memory to perform the sorting. It is very similar to selection sortexcept that it does not always choose worst-case partition.

In the worst caseit makes O n 2 comparisons, though this behavior is rare. The quicksort algorithm was developed in by Binary options c program for binary search using divide and conquer strategy analysis software Hoare while in the Soviet Unionas a visiting student at Moscow State University.

At that time, Hoare worked in a project on machine translation for the National Physical Laboratory. As a part of the translation process, he needed to sort the words of Russian sentences prior to looking them up in a Russian-English dictionary that was already sorted in alphabetic order on magnetic tape. He wrote a program in Mercury Autocode for the partition but couldn't write the program to account for the list of unsorted segments. On return to England, he was asked to write code for Shellsort as part of his new job.

Hoare mentioned to his boss that binary options c program for binary search using divide and conquer strategy analysis software knew of a faster algorithm and his boss bet sixpence that he didn't. His boss ultimately accepted that he had lost the bet. Later, Hoare learned about ALGOL and its ability to do recursion that enabled him to publish the code in Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, the premier computer science journal of the time. Quicksort gained widespread adoption, appearing, for example, in Unix as the default library sort subroutine.

Hence, it lent its name to the C standard library subroutine qsort [7] and in the reference implementation of Java. Robert Sedgewick 's Ph. Later Binary options c program for binary search using divide and conquer strategy analysis software wrote that he used Hoare's version for years but never really understood it but Lomuto's version was simple enough to prove correct.

Lomuto's partition scheme was also popularized by the textbook Introduction to Algorithms although it is inferior to Hoare's scheme because it does three times more swaps on average and degrades to O n 2 runtime when all elements are equal.

InVladimir Yaroslavskiy proposed the new dual pivot Quicksort implementation. Quicksort is a divide and conquer algorithm. Quicksort first divides a large array into two smaller sub-arrays: Quicksort can then recursively sort the sub-arrays. The base case of the recursion is arrays of size zero or one, which are in order by definition, so they never need to be sorted.

The pivot selection and partitioning steps can be done in several different ways; the choice of specific implementation schemes greatly affects the algorithm's performance.

This scheme is attributed to Nico Lomuto and popularized by Bentley in his book Programming Pearls [14] and Cormen et al. As this scheme is more compact and easy to understand, it is frequently used in introductory material, although it is less efficient than Hoare's original scheme. In pseudocodea quicksort that sorts elements lo through hi inclusive of an array A can be expressed as: Sorting the entire array is accomplished by quicksort A, 0, length A - 1.

The original partition scheme described by C. Hoare uses two indices that start at the ends of the array being partitioned, then move toward each other, until they detect an inversion: The inverted elements are then swapped. There are many variants of this algorithm, for example, selecting pivot from A[hi] instead of A[lo]. Hoare's scheme is more efficient than Lomuto's partition scheme because it does three times fewer swaps on average, and it creates efficient partitions even when all values are equal.

Note that in this scheme, the pivot's final location is not necessarily at the index that was returned, and the next two segments that the main algorithm recurs on are lo. In pseudocode[15]. The entire array is sorted by quicksort A, 0, length A In the very early versions of quicksort, the leftmost element of the partition would often be chosen as the pivot element.

Unfortunately, this causes worst-case behavior on already sorted arrays, which is a rather common use-case. The problem was easily solved by choosing either a random index for the pivot, choosing the middle index of the partition or especially for longer partitions choosing the median of the first, middle and last element of the partition for the pivot as recommended by Sedgewick.

Selecting a pivot element is also complicated by the existence of integer overflow. Similar issues arise in some other methods of selecting the pivot element.

With a partitioning algorithm such as the ones described above even with one that chooses good pivot valuesquicksort exhibits poor performance for inputs that contain many repeated elements. The problem is clearly apparent when all the input elements are equal: Consequently, the algorithm takes quadratic time to sort an array of equal values.

To solve this problem sometimes called the Dutch national flag problem [7]an alternative linear-time partition routine can be used that separates the values into three groups: Bentley and McIlroy call this a "fat partition" and note that it was already implemented in the qsort of Version 7 Unix. In binary options c program for binary search using divide and conquer strategy analysis software, the quicksort algorithm becomes.

The partition algorithm returns indices to the first 'leftmost' and to the last 'rightmost' item of the middle partition. Every item of the partition is equal to p and is therefore sorted.

Consequently, the items of the partition need not be included in the recursive calls to quicksort. In the case of all equal elements, the modified quicksort will perform only two recursive calls on empty subarrays and thus finish in linear time assuming the partition subroutine takes no longer than linear time. Two other important optimizations, also suggested by Sedgewick and widely used in practice, are: Quicksort's divide-and-conquer formulation makes it amenable to parallelization using task parallelism.

The partitioning step is accomplished through the use of a parallel prefix sum algorithm to compute an index for each array element in its section of the partitioned array.

After the array has been partitioned, the two partitions can be sorted recursively in parallel. More details could be found in Parallel quicksort. Quicksort has some disadvantages when compared to alternative sorting algorithms, like merge sortwhich complicate its efficient parallelization.

The depth of quicksort's divide-and-conquer tree directly impacts the algorithm's scalability, and this depth is highly dependent on the algorithm's choice of pivot. Additionally, it is difficult to parallelize the partitioning step efficiently in-place. The use of scratch space simplifies the partitioning step, but increases the algorithm's memory footprint and constant overheads.

Other more sophisticated parallel sorting algorithms can achieve even better time bounds. This may occur if the pivot happens to be the smallest or largest element in the list, or in some implementations e.

If this binary options c program for binary search using divide and conquer strategy analysis software repeatedly in every partition, then each recursive call processes a list of size one less than the previous list. In the most balanced case, each time we perform a partition we divide the list into two nearly equal pieces. This means each recursive call processes a list of half the size.

Consequently, we can make only log 2 n nested calls before we reach a list of size 1. This means that the depth of the call tree is log 2 n. But no two calls at the same level of the call tree process the same part of the original list; thus, each level of calls needs only O n time all together each call has some constant overhead, but since there are only O n calls at each level, this is subsumed in the O n factor.

The result is that the algorithm uses only O n log n time. To sort an array of n distinct elements, quicksort takes O n log n time in expectation, averaged over all n! We list here three common proofs to this claim providing different insights into quicksort's workings.

When the input is a random permutation, the pivot has a random rank, and so it is not guaranteed to be in the middle 50 percent. However, when we start from a random permutation, in each recursive call the pivot has a random rank in its list, and so it is in the middle 50 percent about half the time.

That is good enough. Imagine that you flip a coin: Imagine that you are flipping a coin over and over until you get k heads. Although this could take a long time, on average only 2 k flips are required, and the chance that you won't get k heads after k flips is highly improbable this can be made rigorous using Chernoff bounds.

But if its average call depth is O log nand each level of the call tree processes at most n elements, the total amount of work done on average is the product, O n log n. Note that the algorithm does not have to verify that the pivot is in the middle half—if we hit it any constant fraction of the times, that is enough for the desired complexity. An alternative approach is to set up a recurrence relation for the T n factor, the time needed to sort a list of size n. The outline of a formal proof of the O n log n expected time complexity follows.

Assume that there are no duplicates as duplicates could be handled with linear time pre- and post-processing, or considered cases easier than the analyzed. In this sense, it is closer to the best case than the worst case. This fast average runtime is another reason for quicksort's practical dominance **binary options c program for binary search using divide and conquer strategy analysis software** other sorting algorithms.

To each execution of quicksort corresponds the following binary search tree BST: The number of comparisons of the execution of quicksort equals the number of comparisons during the construction of the BST by a sequence of insertions. Let C denote the cost of creation of the BST.

The in-place version of quicksort has a binary options c program for binary search using divide and conquer strategy analysis software complexity of O log neven in the worst case, when it is carefully implemented using the following strategies:.

Quicksort with in-place and unstable partitioning uses only constant additional space before making any recursive call. Quicksort must store a constant amount of information for each nested recursive call. Since the best case makes at most O log n nested recursive calls, it uses O log n space.

However, without Sedgewick's trick to limit the recursive calls, in the worst case quicksort could make O n nested recursive calls and need O n auxiliary space.

From a bit complexity viewpoint, variables such as lo and hi do not use constant space; it takes O log n bits to index into a list of n items. This space requirement isn't too terrible, though, since if the list contained distinct elements, it would need at least O n log n bits of space. Another, less common, not-in-place, version of quicksort uses O n space for working storage and can implement a stable sort.

The working storage allows the input array to be easily partitioned in a stable manner and then copied back to the input array for successive recursive calls.