最近我参加了一个面试,面试官要求我“编写一个程序,从一个包含10亿个数字的数组中找出100个最大的数字”。
我只能给出一个蛮力解决方案,即以O(nlogn)时间复杂度对数组进行排序,并取最后100个数字。
Arrays.sort(array);
面试官正在寻找一个更好的时间复杂度,我尝试了几个其他的解决方案,但都没有回答他。有没有更好的时间复杂度解决方案?
最近我参加了一个面试,面试官要求我“编写一个程序,从一个包含10亿个数字的数组中找出100个最大的数字”。
我只能给出一个蛮力解决方案,即以O(nlogn)时间复杂度对数组进行排序,并取最后100个数字。
Arrays.sort(array);
面试官正在寻找一个更好的时间复杂度,我尝试了几个其他的解决方案,但都没有回答他。有没有更好的时间复杂度解决方案?
当前回答
可能的改进。
如果文件包含十亿的数字,读取它可能会很长…
为了提高工作效率,你可以:
将文件分成n个部分,创建n个线程,让n个线程在各自的部分中寻找最大的100个数字(使用优先级队列),最后得到所有线程输出的最大的100个数字。 使用像hadoop这样的解决方案,使用集群来完成这样的任务。在这里,您可以进一步分割文件,并更快地输出10亿(或10^12)个数字的文件。
其他回答
Recently I am adapting a theory that all the problems in the world could be solved with O(1). And even this one. It wasn't clear from the question what is the range of the numbers. If the numbers are it range from 1 to 10, then probably the the top 100 largest numbers will be a group of 10. The chance that the highest number will be picked out of the 1 billion numbers when the highest number is very small in compare to to 1 billion are very big. So I would give this as an answer in that interview.
你可以遍历这些数字,需要O(n)
只要发现一个大于当前最小值的值,就将新值添加到一个大小为100的循环队列中。
循环队列的最小值就是新的比较值。继续往队列中添加。如果已满,则从队列中提取最小值。
管理一个单独的列表是额外的工作,每次你找到另一个替代物时,你都必须在整个列表中移动东西。把它排序,选前100名。
取十亿个数字中的前一百个,然后排序。现在只需遍历十亿,如果源数大于100中最小的数,则按排序顺序插入。你得到的结果更接近于O(n)除以集合的大小。
The simplest solution is to scan the billion numbers large array and hold the 100 largest values found so far in a small array buffer without any sorting and remember the smallest value of this buffer. First I thought this method was proposed by fordprefect but in a comment he said that he assumed the 100 number data structure being implemented as a heap. Whenever a new number is found that is larger then the minimum in the buffer is overwritten by the new value found and the buffer is searched for the current minimum again. If the numbers in billion number array are randomly distributed most of the time the value from the large array is compared to the minimum of the small array and discarded. Only for a very very small fraction of number the value must be inserted into the small array. So the difference of manipulating the data structure holding the small numbers can be neglected. For a small number of elements it is hard to determine if the usage of a priority queue is actually faster than using my naive approach.
I want to estimate the number of inserts in the small 100 element array buffer when the 10^9 element array is scanned. The program scans the first 1000 elements of this large array and has to insert at most 1000 elements in the buffer. The buffer contains 100 element of the 1000 elements scanned, that is 0.1 of the element scanned. So we assume that the probability that a value from the large array is larger than the current minimum of the buffer is about 0.1 Such an element has to be inserted in the buffer . Now the program scans the next 10^4 elements from the large array. Because the minimum of the buffer will increase every time a new element is inserted. We estimated that the ratio of elements larger than our current minimum is about 0.1 and so there are 0.1*10^4=1000 elements to insert. Actually the expected number of elements that are inserted into the buffer will be smaller. After the scan of this 10^4 elements fraction of the numbers in the buffer will be about 0.01 of the elements scanned so far. So when scanning the next 10^5 numbers we assume that not more than 0.01*10^5=1000 will be inserted in the buffer. Continuing this argumentation we have inserted about 7000 values after scanning 1000+10^4+10^5+...+10^9 ~ 10^9 elements of the large array. So when scanning an array with 10^9 elements of random size we expect not more than 10^4 (=7000 rounded up) insertions in the buffer. After each insertion into the buffer the new minimum must be found. If the buffer is a simple array we need 100 comparison to find the new minimum. If the buffer is another data structure (like a heap) we need at least 1 comparison to find the minimum. To compare the elements of the large array we need 10^9 comparisons. So all in all we need about 10^9+100*10^4=1.001 * 10^9 comparisons when using an array as buffer and at least 1.000 * 10^9 comparisons when using another type of data structure (like a heap). So using a heap brings only a gain of 0.1% if performance is determined by the number of comparison. But what is the difference in execution time between inserting an element in a 100 element heap and replacing an element in an 100 element array and finding its new minimum?
在理论层面:在堆中插入需要多少比较。我知道它是O(log(n))但常数因子有多大呢?我 在机器级别:缓存和分支预测对堆插入和数组中线性搜索的执行时间有什么影响? 在实现级别:库或编译器提供的堆数据结构中隐藏了哪些额外成本?
我认为,在人们试图估计100个元素堆和100个元素数组的性能之间的真正区别之前,这些都是必须回答的一些问题。所以做一个实验并测量真实的表现是有意义的。