An empirical study for inversions-sensitive sorting algorithms

Authors:
Amr Elmasry;Abdelrahman Hammad
Affiliations:
Dept of Computer Engineering and Systems, Alexandria University, Egypt;Dept of Computer Engineering and Systems, Alexandria University, Egypt
Venue:
WEA'05 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Experimental and Efficient Algorithms
Year:
2005

Citing 11
Cited 2

A class of sorting algorithms based on Quicksort

Communications of the ACM - Lecture notes in computer science Vol. 174
Self-adjusting binary search trees

Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Splitsort—an adaptive sorting algorithm

Information Processing Letters
A survey of adaptive sorting algorithms

ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)
Adaptive heapsort

Journal of Algorithms
Splaysort: fast, versatile, practical

Software—Practice & Experience
A unifying look at data structures

Communications of the ACM
Best sorting algorithm for nearly sorted lists

Communications of the ACM
Algorithm 64: Quicksort

Communications of the ACM
On the Dynamic Finger Conjecture for Splay Trees. Part II: The Proof

SIAM Journal on Computing
A new representation for linear lists

STOC '77 Proceedings of the ninth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing

On the adaptiveness of Quicksort

Journal of Experimental Algorithmics (JEA)
Bulk-Insertion Sort: Towards Composite Measures of Presortedness

SEA '09 Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Experimental Algorithms

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

We study the performance of the most practical internal adaptive sorting algorithms. Experimental results show that adaptive AVL sort performs the least number of comparisons unless the number of inversions is fewer than 1%. In such case, Splaysort performs the fewest number of comparisons. On the other hand, the running time of Quicksort is superior unless the number of inversions is fewer than 1.5%. In such case, Splaysort consumes the smallest running time.