Scribd
Upload
98 views3 pages

CSCE 221 Cover Page Programming Assignment #3

This document describes Programming Assignment #3 for CSCE 221, which involves implementing three different priority queue data structures - an unsorted list implementation, a sorted list implementation, and a heap implementation. Students are asked to code the priority queue implementations, test their correctness, and experimentally analyze the running time of insertion and sorting operations of different sizes of randomly generated inputs. The analysis should include plotting insertion time vs number of items and sorting time vs number of items to compare performance of the three implementations. The report must include sections on theoretical analysis, experimental setup, results, and discussion.

Uploaded by

Nick Inker
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
98 views3 pages

CSCE 221 Cover Page Programming Assignment #3

This document describes Programming Assignment #3 for CSCE 221, which involves implementing three different priority queue data structures - an unsorted list implementation, a sorted list implementation, and a heap implementation. Students are asked to code the priority queue implementations, test their correctness, and experimentally analyze the running time of insertion and sorting operations of different sizes of randomly generated inputs. The analysis should include plotting insertion time vs number of items and sorting time vs number of items to compare performance of the three implementations. The report must include sections on theoretical analysis, experimental setup, results, and discussion.

Uploaded by

Nick Inker
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

CSCE 221 Cover Page

Programming Assignment #3

First Name: Last Name: UIN:

Any assignment turned in without a fully completed coverpage will receive ZERO POINTS.
Please list all below all sources (people, books, webpages, etc) consulted regarding this assignment:

CSCE 221 Students Other People Printed Material Web Material (URL) Other
1. 1. 1. 1. 1.
2. 2. 2. 2. 2.
3. 3. 3. 3. 3.
4. 4. 4. 4. 4.
5. 5. 5. 5. 5.

Recall that University Regulations, Section 42, define scholastic dishonesty to include acquiring answers
from any unauthorized source, working with another person when not specifically permitted, observing
the work of other students during any exam, providing answers when not specifically authorized to do so,
informing any person of the contents of an exam prior to the exam, and failing to credit sources used.
Disciplinary actions range from grade penalties to expulsion. Please consult the Aggie Honor System
Office for additional information regarding academic misconduct – it is your responsibility to understand
what constitutes academic misconduct and to ensure that you do not commit it.

I certify that I have listed above all the sources that I consulted regarding this assignment, and that I have
not received nor given any assistance that is contrary to the letter or the spirit of the collaboration
guidelines for this assignment.

Today’s Date:

Printed Name (in lieu of a signature):


Priority Queues and Heaps
Due: March 4, 2015 11:59pm

Description:
For this programming assignment, you will implement a Priority Queue. Your Priority Queue can grow
dynamically as in the Stack assignment (although you should use a method with amortized cost O(1) for
insertion) or you may make a Priority Queue large enough to fit all of your data ahead of time. You will
build three different implementations of the Priority Queue. Two of these implementations will be based
on a List. The first list implementation, UnsortedPQ, should use an unsorted list to store the data. The
second list implementation, SortedPQ, should use a sorted list. The third implementation, HeapPQ,
should be an array-based implementation of a Heap.

We will test your implementations using a set of numbers in a text file named “numbers.txt”. Each line of
the file will contain a number. The first number will be which Priority Queue to use (0=UnsortedPQ,
1=SortedPQ, 2=HeapPQ). The second number will be the number of remaining elements in the file, n.
The first two numbers of the file (queue type and n) will NOT be inserted into your Priority Queue.
However, the remaining n numbers will be inserted. You should then remove all n numbers and print
them to the screen. Here is an example numbers.txt file.

Using your three implementations, you will also time how long it takes to insert n random numbers and
the total time to insert n random numbers and remove n random numbers. You may use a random
number generating as opposed to the file input above. Time how long insertion takes using the
StopWatch class we provided. You should measure the total time at fixed intervals. You will then show
a graph of the total insertion time versus the number of items inserted for each implementation. You will
then time how long insertion and removal takes by inserting n numbers and removing n numbers for each
implementation. You will then graph the sorting time versus the number of elements. This process will
allow you to see how your choice of implementation can affect performance.

Coding Portion (50 Points):


 Start with the following template: PriorityQueue.h, and create three versions of the Priority
Queue (using templates for the type of object) filling in all of the member functions.
 Be sure to test the correctness of your algorithms and implementations (we will).
 Your code will be graded based on whether or not it compiles, runs, produces the expected
output, produces correct output, whether or not your experimental setup is correct, and your
coding style (does the code follow proper indentation/style and comments).

Report (50 Points):


You will write a brief report that includes theoretical analysis, a description of your experiments, and
discussion of your results. At a minimum, your report should include the following sections:
1. Introduction. In this section, you should describe the objective of this assignment.
2. Theoretical Analysis. In this section, you should provide an analysis of the complexity of an
insert operation and the complexity of the sort (inserting all of the items and then removing all of
the items). Describe the advantages and disadvantages of the three strategies. What is the
complexity of an insert (on average) for the different implementations? What is the complexity
of the sort (on average) for the different implementations?
3. Experimental Setup. In this section, you should provide a description of your experimental setup,
which includes but is not limited to
a. Machine specification
b. How did you generate the test inputs? What input sizes did you test? Why? What data
structures did you use for your List implementation of the Priority Queue?
c. How many times did you repeat each experiment?
4. Experimental Results. In this section, you should compare the performance (running time) of the
insert() operation and the sort in the three different implementations to one another and to their
theoretical complexity.
a. Make a plot showing the running time (y-axis) vs. the number of insert operations (x-
axis). You must use some electronic tool (matlab, gnuplot, excel, …) to create the plot –
hand-written plots will NOT be accepted.
b. Make a plot showing the running time (y-axis) vs. the number of items inserted and
removed (x-axis). You must use some electronic tool (matlab, gnuplot, excel, …) to
create the plot – hand-written plots will NOT be accepted.
c. Provide a discussion of your results, which includes but is not limited to:
i. Which of the three Priority Queue implementations performs the best? Does it
depend on the input?
ii. To what extent does the theoretical analysis agree with the experimental results?
Attempt to understand and explain any discrepancies you note.

You might also like