![]() So in other words, there are some cases where selection sort would be better than mergesort, but in those cases you're still probably better off using another sorting algorithm. (However, it would probably be a worse choice than, say, insertion sort). If you're sorting, say, arrays of 16 or so elements, then selection sort might be faster than mergesort. Selection sort may be faster than mergesort on small input arrays because it's a simpler algorithm with lower constant factors than the ones hidden by mergesort. (However, it would be a worse choice than, say, heapsort or quicksort!) In this study five new sorting algorithms (Bi-directional Selection Sort, Bi-directional bubble sort, MIDBiDirectional Selection Sort, MIDBidirectional bubble sort and linear insertion sort are presented. On each iteration, it maintains the order between two adjacent elements means a smaller value should come before a larger value. In this study a set of improved sorting algorithms are proposed which gives better performance and design idea. ![]() ![]() As a result, if memory is extremely scarce, selection sort would be a better choice than mergesort. Bubble Sort The idea behind the bubble sort is to compare two adjacent elements of an array and swap them if the predecessor is greater than the successor. Selection sort on an array can be implemented with O(1) auxiliary storage space, whereas (most) implementations of mergesort on arrays use Θ(n) auxiliary storage space. ![]() However, there are two areas in which selection sort might be better: Because the runtime of selection sort is Θ(n 2) and the runtime of mergesort is O(n log n), for sufficiently large inputs mergesort will outperform selection sort.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |