1. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees1 Binary Search Trees 6 9 2 4 1 8   

2. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees2 Ordered Dictionaries Keys are assumed to come from a total order. New operations: first(): first entry in the dictionary ordering last(): last entry in the dictionary ordering successors(k): iterator of entries with keys greater than or equal to k; increasing order predecessors(k): iterator of entries with keys less than or equal to k; decreasing order

3. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees3 Binary Search (§ 8.3.3) Binary search can perform operation find(k) on a dictionary implemented by means of an array-based sequence, sorted by key similar to the high-low game at each step, the number of candidate items is halved terminates after O(log n) steps Example: find(7) 13457 8 91114161819 1 3 457891114161819 134 5 7891114161819 1345 7 891114161819 0 0 0 0 m l h m l h m l h l  m  h

4. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees4 Search Tables A search table is a dictionary implemented by means of a sorted sequence We store the items of the dictionary in an array-based sequence, sorted by key We use an external comparator for the keys Performance: find takes O(log n) time, using binary search insert takes O(n) time since in the worst case we have to shift n  2 items to make room for the new item remove take O(n) time since in the worst case we have to shift n  2 items to compact the items after the removal The lookup table is effective only for dictionaries of small size or for dictionaries on which searches are the most common operations, while insertions and removals are rarely performed (e.g., credit card authorizations)

5. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees5 Binary Search Trees (§ 9.1) A binary search tree is a binary tree storing keys (or key-value entries) at its internal nodes and satisfying the following property: Let u, v, and w be three nodes such that u is in the left subtree of v and w is in the right subtree of v. We have key(u)  key(v)  key(w) External nodes do not store items An inorder traversal of a binary search trees visits the keys in increasing order 6 92 418

6. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees6 Search (§ 9.1.1) To search for a key k, we trace a downward path starting at the root The next node visited depends on the outcome of the comparison of k with the key of the current node If we reach a leaf, the key is not found and we return nukk Example: find(4): Call TreeSearch(4,root) Algorithm TreeSearch(k, v) if T.isExternal (v) return v if k  key(v) return TreeSearch(k, T.left(v)) else if k  key(v) return v else { k  key(v) } return TreeSearch(k, T.right(v)) 6 9 2 4 1 8   

7. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees7 Insertion To perform operation inser(k, o), we search for key k (using TreeSearch) Assume k is not already in the tree, and let let w be the leaf reached by the search We insert k at node w and expand w into an internal node Example: insert 5 6 92 418 6 9 2 4 18 5    w w

8. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees8 Deletion To perform operation remove( k ), we search for key k Assume key k is in the tree, and let let v be the node storing k If node v has a leaf child w, we remove v and w from the tree with operation removeExternal( w ), which removes w and its parent Example: remove 4 6 9 2 4 18 5 v w 6 9 2 5 18  

9. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees9 Deletion (cont.) We consider the case where the key k to be removed is stored at a node v whose children are both internal we find the internal node w that follows v in an inorder traversal we copy key(w) into node v we remove node w and its left child z (which must be a leaf) by means of operation removeExternal( z ) Example: remove 3 3 1 8 6 9 5 v w z 2 5 1 8 6 9 v 2

10. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees10 Performance Consider a dictionary with n items implemented by means of a binary search tree of height h the space used is O(n) methods find, insert and remove take O(h) time The height h is O(n) in the worst case and O(log n) in the best case

11. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees11 AVL Trees 6 3 8 4 v z

12. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees12 AVL Tree Definition (§ 9.2) AVL trees are balanced. An AVL Tree is a binary search tree such that for every internal node v of T, the heights of the children of v can differ by at most 1. An example of an AVL tree where the heights are shown next to the nodes:

13. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees13 Height of an AVL Tree Fact: The height of an AVL tree storing n keys is O(log n). Proof: Let us bound n(h): the minimum number of internal nodes of an AVL tree of height h. We easily see that n(1) = 1 and n(2) = 2 For n > 2, an AVL tree of height h contains the root node, one AVL subtree of height n-1 and another of height n-2. That is, n(h) = 1 + n(h-1) + n(h-2) Knowing n(h-1) > n(h-2), we get n(h) > 2n(h-2). So n(h) > 2n(h-2), n(h) > 4n(h-4), n(h) > 8n(n-6), … (by induction), n(h) > 2 i n(h-2i) Solving the base case we get: n(h) > 2 h/2-1 Taking logarithms: h < 2log n(h) +2 Thus the height of an AVL tree is O(log n) 3 4 n(1) n(2)

14. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees14 Insertion in an AVL Tree Insertion is as in a binary search tree Always done by expanding an external node. Example: 44 1778 325088 4862 54 w b=x a=y c=z 44 1778 325088 4862 before insertionafter insertion

15. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees15 Trinode Restructuring let (a,b,c) be an inorder listing of x, y, z perform the rotations needed to make b the topmost node of the three b=y a=z c=x T0T0 T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 b=y a=z c=x T0T0 T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 c=y b=x a=z T0T0 T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 b=x c=ya=z T0T0 T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 case 1: single rotation (a left rotation about a) case 2: double rotation (a right rotation about c, then a left rotation about a) (other two cases are symmetrical)

16. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees16 Insertion Example, continued 88 44 17 78 3250 48 62 2 4 1 1 2 2 3 1 54 1 T 0 T 1 T 2 T 3 x y z unbalanced......balanced T 1

17. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees17 Restructuring (as Single Rotations) Single Rotations:

18. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees18 Restructuring (as Double Rotations) double rotations:

19. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees19 Removal in an AVL Tree Removal begins as in a binary search tree, which means the node removed will become an empty external node. Its parent, w, may cause an imbalance. Example: 44 17 783250 88 48 62 54 44 17 7850 88 48 62 54 before deletion of 32after deletion

20. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees20 Rebalancing after a Removal Let z be the first unbalanced node encountered while travelling up the tree from w. Also, let y be the child of z with the larger height, and let x be the child of y with the larger height. We perform restructure(x) to restore balance at z. As this restructuring may upset the balance of another node higher in the tree, we must continue checking for balance until the root of T is reached 44 17 7850 88 48 62 54 w c=x b=y a=z 44 17 78 5088 48 62 54

21. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees21 Running Times for AVL Trees a single restructure is O(1) using a linked-structure binary tree find is O(log n) height of tree is O(log n), no restructures needed insert is O(log n) initial find is O(log n) Restructuring up the tree, maintaining heights is O(log n) remove is O(log n) initial find is O(log n) Restructuring up the tree, maintaining heights is O(log n)

22. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees22 (2,4) Trees 9 10 14 2 5 7

23. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees23 Multi-Way Search Tree (§ 9.4.1) A multi-way search tree is an ordered tree such that Each internal node has at least two children and stores d  1 key-element items (k i, o i ), where d is the number of children For a node with children v 1 v 2 … v d storing keys k 1 k 2 … k d  1  keys in the subtree of v 1 are less than k 1  keys in the subtree of v i are between k i  1 and k i (i = 2, …, d  1)  keys in the subtree of v d are greater than k d  1 The leaves store no items and serve as placeholders 11 24 2 6 815 30 27 32

24. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees24 Multi-Way Inorder Traversal We can extend the notion of inorder traversal from binary trees to multi-way search trees Namely, we visit item (k i, o i ) of node v between the recursive traversals of the subtrees of v rooted at children v i and v i    1 An inorder traversal of a multi-way search tree visits the keys in increasing order 11 24 2 6 815 30 27 32 13579111319 1517 2461418 812 10 16

25. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees25 Multi-Way Searching Similar to search in a binary search tree A each internal node with children v 1 v 2 … v d and keys k 1 k 2 … k d  1 k  k i (i = 1, …, d  1) : the search terminates successfully k  k 1 : we continue the search in child v 1 k i  1  k  k i (i = 2, …, d  1) : we continue the search in child v i k  k d  1 : we continue the search in child v d Reaching an external node terminates the search unsuccessfully Example: search for 30 11 24 2 6 815 30 27 32

26. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees26 (2,4) Trees (§ 9.4.2) A (2,4) tree (also called 2-4 tree or 2-3-4 tree) is a multi-way search with the following properties Node-Size Property: every internal node has at most four children Depth Property: all the external nodes have the same depth Depending on the number of children, an internal node of a (2,4) tree is called a 2-node, 3-node or 4-node 10 15 24 2 81227 3218

27. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees27 Height of a (2,4) Tree Theorem: A (2,4) tree storing n items has height O(log n) Proof: Let h be the height of a (2,4) tree with n items Since there are at least 2 i items at depth i  0, …, h  1 and no items at depth h, we have n  1  2  4  …  2 h  1  2 h  1 Thus, h  log (n  1) Searching in a (2,4) tree with n items takes O(log n) time 1 2 2h12h1 0 items 0 1 h1h1 h depth

28. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees28 Insertion We insert a new item (k, o) at the parent v of the leaf reached by searching for k We preserve the depth property but We may cause an overflow (i.e., node v may become a 5-node) Example: inserting key 30 causes an overflow 27 32 35 10 15 24 2 81218 10 15 24 2 812 27 30 32 35 18 v v

29. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees29 Overflow and Split We handle an overflow at a 5-node v with a split operation: let v 1 … v 5 be the children of v and k 1 … k 4 be the keys of v node v is replaced nodes v' and v"  v' is a 3-node with keys k 1 k 2 and children v 1 v 2 v 3  v" is a 2-node with key k 4 and children v 4 v 5 key k 3 is inserted into the parent u of v (a new root may be created) The overflow may propagate to the parent node u 15 24 12 27 30 32 35 18 v u v1v1 v2v2 v3v3 v4v4 v5v5 15 24 32 12 27 30 18 v'v' u v1v1 v2v2 v3v3 v4v4 v5v5 35 v"v"

30. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees30 Analysis of Insertion Algorithm insert(k, o) 1.We search for key k to locate the insertion node v 2.We add the new entry (k, o) at node v 3. while overflow(v) if isRoot(v) create a new empty root above v v  split(v) Let T be a (2,4) tree with n items Tree T has O(log n) height Step 1 takes O(log n) time because we visit O(log n) nodes Step 2 takes O(1) time Step 3 takes O(log n) time because each split takes O(1) time and we perform O(log n) splits Thus, an insertion in a (2,4) tree takes O(log n) time

31. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees31 Deletion We reduce deletion of an entry to the case where the item is at the node with leaf children Otherwise, we replace the entry with its inorder successor (or, equivalently, with its inorder predecessor) and delete the latter entry Example: to delete key 24, we replace it with 27 (inorder successor) 27 32 35 10 15 24 2 81218 32 35 10 15 27 2 81218

32. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees32 Underflow and Fusion Deleting an entry from a node v may cause an underflow, where node v becomes a 1-node with one child and no keys To handle an underflow at node v with parent u, we consider two cases Case 1: the adjacent siblings of v are 2-nodes Fusion operation: we merge v with an adjacent sibling w and move an entry from u to the merged node v' After a fusion, the underflow may propagate to the parent u 9 14 2 5 710 u v 9 10 14 u v'v'w 2 5 7

33. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees33 Underflow and Transfer To handle an underflow at node v with parent u, we consider two cases Case 2: an adjacent sibling w of v is a 3-node or a 4-node Transfer operation: 1. we move a child of w to v 2. we move an item from u to v 3. we move an item from w to u After a transfer, no underflow occurs 4 9 6 82 u vw 4 8 62 9 u vw

34. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees34 Analysis of Deletion Let T be a (2,4) tree with n items Tree T has O(log n) height In a deletion operation We visit O(log n) nodes to locate the node from which to delete the entry We handle an underflow with a series of O(log n) fusions, followed by at most one transfer Each fusion and transfer takes O(1) time Thus, deleting an item from a (2,4) tree takes O(log n) time

35. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees35 Implementing a Dictionary Comparison of efficient dictionary implementations SearchInsertDeleteNotes Hash Table 1 expected no ordered dictionary methods simple to implement Skip List log n high prob. randomized insertion simple to implement (2,4) Tree log n worst-case complex to implement

36. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees36 Red-Black Trees 6 3 8 4 v z

37. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees37 From (2,4) to Red-Black Trees A red-black tree is a representation of a (2,4) tree by means of a binary tree whose nodes are colored red or black In comparison with its associated (2,4) tree, a red-black tree has same logarithmic time performance simpler implementation with a single node type 2 6 73 54 4 6 27 5 3 3 5 OR

38. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees38 Red-Black Trees (§ 9.5) A red-black tree can also be defined as a binary search tree that satisfies the following properties: Root Property: the root is black External Property: every leaf is black Internal Property: the children of a red node are black Depth Property: all the leaves have the same black depth 9 15 4 62 12 7 21

39. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees39 Height of a Red-Black Tree Theorem: A red-black tree storing n entries has height O(log n) Proof: The height of a red-black tree is at most twice the height of its associated (2,4) tree, which is O(log n) The search algorithm for a binary search tree is the same as that for a binary search tree By the above theorem, searching in a red-black tree takes O(log n) time

40. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees40 Insertion To perform operation insert (k, o), we execute the insertion algorithm for binary search trees and color red the newly inserted node z unless it is the root We preserve the root, external, and depth properties If the parent v of z is black, we also preserve the internal property and we are done Else ( v is red ) we have a double red (i.e., a violation of the internal property), which requires a reorganization of the tree Example where the insertion of 4 causes a double red: 6 3 8 6 3 8 4 z vv z

41. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees41 Remedying a Double Red Consider a double red with child z and parent v, and let w be the sibling of v 4 6 7 z vw 2 4 6 7.. 2.. Case 1: w is black The double red is an incorrect replacement of a 4-node Restructuring: we change the 4-node replacement Case 2: w is red The double red corresponds to an overflow Recoloring: we perform the equivalent of a split 4 6 7 z v 2 4 6 7 2 w

42. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees42 Restructuring A restructuring remedies a child-parent double red when the parent red node has a black sibling It is equivalent to restoring the correct replacement of a 4-node The internal property is restored and the other properties are preserved 4 6 7 z v w 2 4 6 7.. 2.. 4 6 7 z v w 2 4 6 7.. 2..

43. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees43 Restructuring (cont.) There are four restructuring configurations depending on whether the double red nodes are left or right children 2 4 6 6 2 4 6 4 2 2 6 4 2 6 4

44. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees44 Recoloring A recoloring remedies a child-parent double red when the parent red node has a red sibling The parent v and its sibling w become black and the grandparent u becomes red, unless it is the root It is equivalent to performing a split on a 5-node The double red violation may propagate to the grandparent u 4 6 7 z v 2 4 6 7 2 w 4 6 7 z v 6 7 2 w … 4 … 2

45. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees45 Analysis of Insertion Recall that a red-black tree has O(log n) height Step 1 takes O(log n) time because we visit O(log n) nodes Step 2 takes O(1) time Step 3 takes O(log n) time because we perform O(log n) recolorings, each taking O(1) time, and at most one restructuring taking O(1) time Thus, an insertion in a red- black tree takes O(log n) time Algorithm insert(k, o) 1.We search for key k to locate the insertion node z 2.We add the new entry (k, o) at node z and color z red 3. while doubleRed(z) if isBlack(sibling(parent(z))) z  restructure(z) return else { sibling(parent(z) is red } z  recolor(z)

46. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees46 Deletion To perform operation remove (k), we first execute the deletion algorithm for binary search trees Let v be the internal node removed, w the external node removed, and r the sibling of w If either v of r was red, we color r black and we are done Else ( v and r were both black) we color r double black, which is a violation of the internal property requiring a reorganization of the tree Example where the deletion of 8 causes a double black: 6 3 8 4 v rw 6 3 4 r

47. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees47 Remedying a Double Black The algorithm for remedying a double black node w with sibling y considers three cases Case 1: y is black and has a red child We perform a restructuring, equivalent to a transfer, and we are done Case 2: y is black and its children are both black We perform a recoloring, equivalent to a fusion, which may propagate up the double black violation Case 3: y is red We perform an adjustment, equivalent to choosing a different representation of a 3-node, after which either Case 1 or Case 2 applies Deletion in a red-black tree takes O(log n) time

48. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees48 Red-Black Tree Reorganization Insertion remedy double red Red-black tree action(2,4) tree actionresult restructuring change of 4-node representation double red removed recoloringsplit double red removed or propagated up Deletion remedy double black Red-black tree action(2,4) tree actionresult restructuringtransferdouble black removed recoloringfusion double black removed or propagated up adjustment change of 3-node representation restructuring or recoloring follows

49. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees49 Splay Trees 6 3 8 4 v z

50. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees50 all the keys in the yellow region are  20 all the keys in the blue region are  20 Splay Trees are Binary Search Trees BST Rules: entries stored only at internal nodes keys stored at nodes in the left subtree of v are less than or equal to the key stored at v keys stored at nodes in the right subtree of v are greater than or equal to the key stored at v An inorder traversal will return the keys in order (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (14,J) (7,T) (35,R)(10,A) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (8,N) (7,P) (36,L) (10,U) (40,X) note that two keys of equal value may be well- separated (§ 9.3)

51. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees51 Searching in a Splay Tree: Starts the Same as in a BST Search proceeds down the tree to found item or an external node. Example: Search for time with key 11. (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (14,J) (7,T) (35,R)(10,A) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (8,N) (7,P) (36,L) (10,U) (40,X)

52. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees52 Example Searching in a BST, continued search for key 8, ends at an internal node. (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (14,J) (7,T) (35,R)(10,A) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (8,N) (7,P) (36,L) (10,U) (40,X)

53. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees53 Splay Trees do Rotations after Every Operation (Even Search) new operation: splay splaying moves a node to the root using rotations right rotation makes the left child x of a node y into y’s parent; y becomes the right child of x y x T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 y x T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 left rotation makes the right child y of a node x into x’s parent; x becomes the left child of y y x T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 y x T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 (structure of tree above y is not modified) (structure of tree above x is not modified) a right rotation about ya left rotation about x

54. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees54 Splaying: is x the root? stop is x a child of the root? right-rotate about the root left-rotate about the root is x the left child of the root? is x a left-left grandchild? is x a left-right grandchild? is x a right-right grandchild? is x a right-left grandchild? right-rotate about g, right-rotate about p left-rotate about g, left-rotate about p left-rotate about p, right-rotate about g right-rotate about p, left-rotate about g start with node x “ x is a left-left grandchild” means x is a left child of its parent, which is itself a left child of its parent p is x ’s parent; g is p ’s parent no yes no yes zig-zig zig-zag zig-zig zig

55. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees55 Visualizing the Splaying Cases zig-zag y x T2T2 T3T3 T4T4 z T1T1 y x T2T2 T3T3 T4T4 z T1T1 y x T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 z T4T4 zig-zig y z T4T4 T3T3 T2T2 x T1T1 zig x w T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 y T4T4 y x T2T2 T3T3 T4T4 w T1T1

56. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees56 Splaying Example let x = (8,N) x is the right child of its parent, which is the left child of the grandparent left-rotate around p, then right-rotate around g (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (14,J) (7,T) (35,R)(10,A) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (8,N) (7,P) (36,L) (10,U) (40,X) x g p (10,A) (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (35,R) (36,L) (40,X) (7,T) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (14,J) (8,N) (7,P) (10,U) x g p (10,A) (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (35,R) (36,L) (40,X) (7,T) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (14,J) (8,N) (7,P) (10,U) x g p 1. (before rotating) 2. (after first rotation) 3. (after second rotation) x is not yet the root, so we splay again

57. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees57 Splaying Example, Continued now x is the left child of the root right-rotate around root (10,A) (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (35,R) (36,L) (40,X) (7,T) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (14,J) (8,N) (7,P) (10,U) x (10,A) (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (35,R) (36,L) (40,X) (7,T) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (14,J) (8,N) (7,P) (10,U) x 1. (before applying rotation) 2. (after rotation) x is the root, so stop

58. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees58 Example Result of Splaying tree might not be more balanced e.g. splay (40,X) before, the depth of the shallowest leaf is 3 and the deepest is 7 after, the depth of shallowest leaf is 1 and deepest is 8 (20,Z) (37,P)(21,O) (14,J) (7,T) (35,R)(10,A) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (8,N) (7,P) (36,L) (10,U) (40,X) (20,Z) (37,P) (21,O) (14,J) (7,T) (35,R) (10,A) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (8,N) (7,P) (36,L) (10,U) (40,X) (20,Z) (37,P) (21,O) (14,J) (7,T) (35,R) (10,A) (1,C) (1,Q) (5,G) (2,R) (5,H) (6,Y) (5,I) (8,N) (7,P) (36,L) (10,U) (40,X) before after first splay after second splay

59. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees59 Splay Tree Definition a splay tree is a binary search tree where a node is splayed after it is accessed (for a search or update) deepest internal node accessed is splayed splaying costs O(h), where h is height of the tree – which is still O(n) worst-case  O(h) rotations, each of which is O(1)

60. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees60 Splay Trees & Ordered Dictionaries which nodes are splayed after each operation? use the parent of the internal node that was actually removed from the tree (the parent of the node that the removed item was swapped with) remove(k) use the new node containing the entry inserted insert(k,v) if key found, use that node if key not found, use parent of ending external node find(k) splay nodemethod

61. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees61 Amortized Analysis of Splay Trees Running time of each operation is proportional to time for splaying. Define rank(v) as the logarithm (base 2) of the number of nodes in subtree rooted at v. Costs: zig = $1, zig-zig = $2, zig-zag = $2. Thus, cost for playing a node at depth d = $d. Imagine that we store rank(v) cyber-dollars at each node v of the splay tree (just for the sake of analysis).

62. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees62 Cost per zig Doing a zig at x costs at most rank’(x) - rank(x): cost = rank’(x) + rank’(y) - rank(y) - rank(x) < rank’(x) - rank(x). zig x w T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 y T4T4 y x T2T2 T3T3 T4T4 w T1T1

63. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees63 Cost per zig-zig and zig-zag Doing a zig-zig or zig-zag at x costs at most 3(rank’(x) - rank(x)) - 2. Proof: See Proposition 9.2, Page 440. y x T1T1 T2T2 T3T3 z T4T4 zig-zig y z T4T4 T3T3 T2T2 x T1T1 zig-zag y x T2T2 T3T3 T4T4 z T1T1 y x T2T2 T3T3 T4T4 z T1T1

64. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees64 Cost of Splaying Cost of splaying a node x at depth d of a tree rooted at r: at most 3(rank(r) - rank(x)) - d + 2: Proof: Splaying x takes d/2 splaying substeps:

65. Goodrich, Tamassia Search Trees65 Performance of Splay Trees Recall: rank of a node is logarithm of its size. Thus, amortized cost of any splay operation is O(log n). In fact, the analysis goes through for any reasonable definition of rank(x). This implies that splay trees can actually adapt to perform searches on frequently- requested items much faster than O(log n) in some cases. (See Proposition 9.4 and 9.5.)