Scribd
Upload
26 views

CS 332: Algorithms: Hash Tables

This document provides an overview of hash tables and skip lists. It discusses implementing skip lists for homework 4 which involves building skip lists, evaluating their performance, and optionally comparing them to randomly built binary search trees. It then reviews hash tables and hash functions, covering direct addressing, collisions, open addressing, chaining, analysis of chaining, choices of hash functions like division and multiplication methods, and universal hashing to prevent worst case scenarios from adversaries.

Uploaded by

Anonymous niE5VQOH
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
26 views

CS 332: Algorithms: Hash Tables

This document provides an overview of hash tables and skip lists. It discusses implementing skip lists for homework 4 which involves building skip lists, evaluating their performance, and optionally comparing them to randomly built binary search trees. It then reviews hash tables and hash functions, covering direct addressing, collisions, open addressing, chaining, analysis of chaining, choices of hash functions like division and multiplication methods, and universal hashing to prevent worst case scenarios from adversaries.

Uploaded by

Anonymous niE5VQOH
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 26

CS 332: Algorithms

Hash Tables

Homework 4
Programming assignment:
Implement Skip Lists
Evaluate performance
Extra credit: compare performance to randomly

built BST
Due Mar 9 (Fri before Spring Break)
Will post later today

Review: Skip Lists


The basic idea:
level 3
level 2
level 1

12

18

29

35

37

Keep a doubly-linked list of elements


Min, max, successor, predecessor: O(1) time
Delete is O(1) time, Insert is O(1)+Search time

During insert, add each level-i element to level i+1

with probability p (e.g., p = 1/2 or p = 1/4)

Summary: Skip Lists


O(1) expected time for most operations
O(lg n) expected time for insert
O(n2) time worst case
But random, so no particular order of insertion

evokes worst-case behavior


O(n) expected storage requirements
Easy to code

Review: Hash Tables


Hash table:
Given a table T and a record x, with key (= symbol) and

satellite data, we need to support:


Insert (T, x)
Delete (T, x)
Search(T, x)

We want these to be fast, but dont care about sorting

the records
In this discussion we consider all keys to be (possibly
large) natural numbers

Review: Direct Addressing


Suppose:
The range of keys is 0..m-1
Keys are distinct

The idea:
Set up an array T[0..m-1] in which
T[i] = x
T[i] = NULL

if x T and key[x] = i
otherwise

This is called a direct-address table


Operations take O(1) time!

Review: The Problem With


Direct Addressing
Direct addressing works well when the range m of

keys is relatively small


But what if the keys are 32-bit integers?
Problem 1: direct-address table will have

232 entries, more than 4 billion


Problem 2: even if memory is not an issue, the time to
initialize the elements to NULL may be
Solution: map keys to smaller range 0..m-1
This mapping is called a hash function

Hash Functions
Next problem: collision
T
U
(universe of keys)

0
h(k1)

k1
k4
K
(actual
keys)
k2

h(k4)
k5

h(k2) = h(k5)
k3

h(k3)
m-1

Resolving Collisions
How can we solve the problem of collisions?
Solution 1: chaining
Solution 2: open addressing

Open Addressing
Basic idea (details in Section 12.4):
To insert: if slot is full, try another slot, , until an open slot

is found (probing)
To search, follow same sequence of probes as would be used
when inserting the element
If reach element with correct key, return it
If reach a NULL pointer, element is not in table

Good for fixed sets (adding but no deletion)


Example: spell checking

Table neednt be much bigger than n

Chaining
Chaining puts elements that hash to the same

slot in a linked list:


U
(universe of keys)

k6

k2

k5

k8

k1

k4

k5

k2

k1
k4
K
(actual
k7
keys)

k3

k3
k8

k6

k7

Chaining
How do we insert an element?
U
(universe of keys)

k6

k2

k5

k8

k1

k4

k5

k2

k1
k4
K
(actual
k7
keys)

k3

k3
k8

k6

k7

Chaining
How do we delete an element?
Do we need a doubly-linked list for efficient delete?
U
(universe of keys)

k6

k2

k5

k8

k1

k4

k5

k2

k1
k4
K
(actual
k7
keys)

k3

k3
k8

k6

k7

Chaining
How do we search for a element with a

given key?
U
(universe of keys)

k6

k2

k5

k8

k1

k4

k5

k2

k1
k4
K
(actual
k7
keys)

k3

k3
k8

k6

k7

Analysis of Chaining
Assume simple uniform hashing: each key in

table is equally likely to be hashed to any slot


Given n keys and m slots in the table: the
load factor = n/m = average # keys per slot
What will be the average cost of an
unsuccessful search for a key?

Analysis of Chaining
Assume simple uniform hashing: each key in

table is equally likely to be hashed to any slot


Given n keys and m slots in the table, the
load factor = n/m = average # keys per slot
What will be the average cost of an
unsuccessful search for a key? A: O(1+)

Analysis of Chaining
Assume simple uniform hashing: each key in

table is equally likely to be hashed to any slot


Given n keys and m slots in the table, the
load factor = n/m = average # keys per slot
What will be the average cost of an
unsuccessful search for a key? A: O(1+)
What will be the average cost of a successful
search?

Analysis of Chaining
Assume simple uniform hashing: each key in

table is equally likely to be hashed to any slot


Given n keys and m slots in the table, the
load factor = n/m = average # keys per slot
What will be the average cost of an
unsuccessful search for a key? A: O(1+)
What will be the average cost of a successful
search? A: O(1 + /2) = O(1 + )

Analysis of Chaining Continued


)
If the number of keys n is proportional to the
number of slots in the table, what is ?
A: = O(1)
So the cost of searching = O(1 +

In other words, we can make the expected cost of

searching constant if we make constant

Choosing A Hash Function


Clearly choosing the hash function well is

crucial
What will a worst-case hash function do?
What will be the time to search in this case?

What are desirable features of the hash

function?
Should distribute keys uniformly into slots
Should not depend on patterns in the data

Hash Functions:
The Division Method
h(k) = k mod m
In words: hash k into a table with m slots using the slot

given by the remainder of k divided by m


What happens to elements with adjacent

values of k?
What happens if m is a power of 2 (say 2 P)?
What if m is a power of 10?
Upshot: pick table size m = prime number not too
close to a power of 2 (or 10)

Hash Functions:
The Multiplication Method
For a constant A, 0 < A < 1:
h(k) = m (kA - kA )

What does this term represent?

Hash Functions:
The Multiplication Method
For a constant A, 0 < A < 1:
h(k) = m (kA - kA )

Fractional part of kA
Choose m = 2P
Choose A not too close to 0 or 1
Knuth: Good choice for A = (5 - 1)/2

Hash Functions:
Worst Case Scenario
Scenario:
You are given an assignment to implement hashing
You will self-grade in pairs, testing and grading your

partners implementation
In a blatant violation of the honor code, your partner:
Analyzes your hash function
Picks a sequence of worst-case keys, causing your

implementation to take O(n) time to search

Whats an honest CS student to do?

Hash Functions:
Universal Hashing
As before, when attempting to foil an

malicious adversary: randomize the algorithm


Universal hashing: pick a hash function
randomly in a way that is independent of the
keys that are actually going to be stored
Guarantees good performance on average, no

matter what keys adversary chooses

The End

You might also like