On the Average Case of MergeInsertion

MergeInsertion, also known as the Ford-Johnson algorithm, is a sorting algorithm which, up to today, for many input sizes achieves the best known upper bound on the number of comparisons. Indeed, it gets extremely close to the information-theoretic lower bound. While the worst-case behavior is well understood, only little is known about the average case. This work takes a closer look at the average case behavior. In particular, we establish an upper bound of $n \log n - 1.4005n + o(n)$ n log n − 1.4005 n + o ( n ) comparisons. We also give an exact description of the probability distribution of the length of the chain a given element is inserted into and use it to approximate the average number of comparisons numerically. Moreover, we compute the exact average number of comparisons for n up to 148. Furthermore, we experimentally explore the impact of different decision trees for binary insertion. To conclude, we conduct experiments showing that a slightly different insertion order leads to a better average case and we compare the algorithm to Manacher’s combination of merging and MergeInsertion as well as to the recent combined algorithm with (1,2)-Insertionsort by Iwama and Teruyama.

Best-Case and Worst-Case Behavior of Greedy Best-First Search

We study the impact of tie-breaking on the behavior of greedy best-first search with a fixed state space and fixed heuristic. We prove that it is NP-complete to determine the number of states that need to be expanded by greedy best-first search in the best case or in the worst case. However, the best- and worst-case behavior can be computed in polynomial time for undirected state spaces. We perform computational experiments on benchmark tasks from the International Planning Competitions that compare the best and worst cases of greedy best-first search to FIFO, LIFO and random tie-breaking. The experiments demonstrate the importance of tie-breaking in greedy best-first search.