还有一种算法，比快速选择算法性能更好。它叫做弗洛伊德-铆钉(FR)算法。

原文:https://doi.org/10.1145/360680.360694

下载版本:http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.309.7108&rep=rep1&type=pdf

维基百科文章https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floyd%E2%80%93Rivest_algorithm

我尝试在c++中实现快速选择和FR算法。我还将它们与标准c++库实现std::nth_element(基本上是quickselect和heapselect的introselect混合)进行了比较。结果是快速选择和nth_element的平均运行，而FR算法的平均运行约。速度是它们的两倍。

我用于FR算法的示例代码:

template <typename T>
T FRselect(std::vector<T>& data, const size_t& n)
{
    if (n == 0)
        return *(std::min_element(data.begin(), data.end()));
    else if (n == data.size() - 1)
        return *(std::max_element(data.begin(), data.end()));
    else
        return _FRselect(data, 0, data.size() - 1, n);
}

template <typename T>
T _FRselect(std::vector<T>& data, const size_t& left, const size_t& right, const size_t& n)
{
    size_t leftIdx = left;
    size_t rightIdx = right;

    while (rightIdx > leftIdx)
    {
        if (rightIdx - leftIdx > 600)
        {
            size_t range = rightIdx - leftIdx + 1;
            long long i = n - (long long)leftIdx + 1;
            long long z = log(range);
            long long s = 0.5 * exp(2 * z / 3);
            long long sd = 0.5 * sqrt(z * s * (range - s) / range) * sgn(i - (long long)range / 2);

            size_t newLeft = fmax(leftIdx, n - i * s / range + sd);
            size_t newRight = fmin(rightIdx, n + (range - i) * s / range + sd);

            _FRselect(data, newLeft, newRight, n);
        }
        T t = data[n];
        size_t i = leftIdx;
        size_t j = rightIdx;
        // arrange pivot and right index
        std::swap(data[leftIdx], data[n]);
        if (data[rightIdx] > t)
            std::swap(data[rightIdx], data[leftIdx]);

        while (i < j)
        {
            std::swap(data[i], data[j]);
            ++i; --j;
            while (data[i] < t) ++i;
            while (data[j] > t) --j;
        }

        if (data[leftIdx] == t)
            std::swap(data[leftIdx], data[j]);
        else
        {
            ++j;
            std::swap(data[j], data[rightIdx]);
        }
        // adjust left and right towards the boundaries of the subset
        // containing the (k - left + 1)th smallest element
        if (j <= n)
            leftIdx = j + 1;
        if (n <= j)
            rightIdx = j - 1;
    }

    return data[leftIdx];
}

template <typename T>
int sgn(T val) {
    return (T(0) < val) - (val < T(0));
}

你确实喜欢快速排序。随机选择一个元素，然后将所有元素推高或推低。此时，您将知道您实际选择了哪个元素，如果它是第k个元素，您就完成了，否则您将重复bin(更高或更低)，第k个元素将落在其中。从统计学上讲，找到第k个元素所需的时间随着n, O(n)而增加。

这是一个Javascript实现。

如果您释放了不能修改数组的约束，则可以使用两个索引来标识“当前分区”(经典快速排序样式- http://www.nczonline.net/blog/2012/11/27/computer-science-in-javascript-quicksort/)来防止使用额外的内存。

function kthMax(a, k){
    var size = a.length;

    var pivot = a[ parseInt(Math.random()*size) ]; //Another choice could have been (size / 2) 

    //Create an array with all element lower than the pivot and an array with all element higher than the pivot
    var i, lowerArray = [], upperArray = [];
    for (i = 0; i  < size; i++){
        var current = a[i];

        if (current < pivot) {
            lowerArray.push(current);
        } else if (current > pivot) {
            upperArray.push(current);
        }
    }

    //Which one should I continue with?
    if(k <= upperArray.length) {
        //Upper
        return kthMax(upperArray, k);
    } else {
        var newK = k - (size - lowerArray.length);

        if (newK > 0) {
            ///Lower
            return kthMax(lowerArray, newK);
        } else {
            //None ... it's the current pivot!
            return pivot;
        }   
    }
}  

如果你想测试它的表现，你可以使用这个变量:

    function kthMax (a, k, logging) {
         var comparisonCount = 0; //Number of comparison that the algorithm uses
         var memoryCount = 0;     //Number of integers in memory that the algorithm uses
         var _log = logging;

         if(k < 0 || k >= a.length) {
            if (_log) console.log ("k is out of range"); 
            return false;
         }      

         function _kthmax(a, k){
             var size = a.length;
             var pivot = a[parseInt(Math.random()*size)];
             if(_log) console.log("Inputs:", a,  "size="+size, "k="+k, "pivot="+pivot);

             // This should never happen. Just a nice check in this exercise
             // if you are playing with the code to avoid never ending recursion            
             if(typeof pivot === "undefined") {
                 if (_log) console.log ("Ops..."); 
                 return false;
             }

             var i, lowerArray = [], upperArray = [];
             for (i = 0; i  < size; i++){
                 var current = a[i];
                 if (current < pivot) {
                     comparisonCount += 1;
                     memoryCount++;
                     lowerArray.push(current);
                 } else if (current > pivot) {
                     comparisonCount += 2;
                     memoryCount++;
                     upperArray.push(current);
                 }
             }
             if(_log) console.log("Pivoting:",lowerArray, "*"+pivot+"*", upperArray);

             if(k <= upperArray.length) {
                 comparisonCount += 1;
                 return _kthmax(upperArray, k);
             } else if (k > size - lowerArray.length) {
                 comparisonCount += 2;
                 return _kthmax(lowerArray, k - (size - lowerArray.length));
             } else {
                 comparisonCount += 2;
                 return pivot;
             }
     /* 
      * BTW, this is the logic for kthMin if we want to implement that... ;-)
      * 

             if(k <= lowerArray.length) {
                 return kthMin(lowerArray, k);
             } else if (k > size - upperArray.length) {
                 return kthMin(upperArray, k - (size - upperArray.length));
             } else 
                 return pivot;
     */            
         }

         var result = _kthmax(a, k);
         return {result: result, iterations: comparisonCount, memory: memoryCount};
     }

剩下的代码只是创建一些游乐场:

    function getRandomArray (n){
        var ar = [];
        for (var i = 0, l = n; i < l; i++) {
            ar.push(Math.round(Math.random() * l))
        }

        return ar;
    }

    //Create a random array of 50 numbers
    var ar = getRandomArray (50);   

现在给你做几次测试。 因为Math.random()每次都会产生不同的结果:

    kthMax(ar, 2, true);
    kthMax(ar, 2);
    kthMax(ar, 2);
    kthMax(ar, 2);
    kthMax(ar, 2);
    kthMax(ar, 2);
    kthMax(ar, 34, true);
    kthMax(ar, 34);
    kthMax(ar, 34);
    kthMax(ar, 34);
    kthMax(ar, 34);
    kthMax(ar, 34);

如果你测试它几次，你甚至可以看到经验的迭代次数，平均来说，O(n) ~=常数* n, k的值不会影响算法。

还有Wirth的选择算法，它的实现比QuickSelect简单。Wirth的选择算法比QuickSelect慢，但经过一些改进，它变得更快。

更详细地说。使用Vladimir Zabrodsky的MODIFIND优化和3中位数的枢轴选择，并注意算法划分部分的最后步骤，我提出了以下算法(想象一下，命名为“LefSelect”):

#define F_SWAP(a,b) { float temp=(a);(a)=(b);(b)=temp; }

# Note: The code needs more than 2 elements to work
float lefselect(float a[], const int n, const int k) {
    int l=0, m = n-1, i=l, j=m;
    float x;

    while (l<m) {
        if( a[k] < a[i] ) F_SWAP(a[i],a[k]);
        if( a[j] < a[i] ) F_SWAP(a[i],a[j]);
        if( a[j] < a[k] ) F_SWAP(a[k],a[j]);

        x=a[k];
        while (j>k & i<k) {
            do i++; while (a[i]<x);
            do j--; while (a[j]>x);

            F_SWAP(a[i],a[j]);
        }
        i++; j--;

        if (j<k) {
            while (a[i]<x) i++;
            l=i; j=m;
        }
        if (k<i) {
            while (x<a[j]) j--;
            m=j; i=l;
        }
    }
    return a[k];
}

在我这里做的基准测试中，LefSelect比QuickSelect快20-30%。

遍历列表。如果当前值大于存储的最大值，则将其存储为最大值，并将1-4向下碰撞，5从列表中删除。如果不是，将它与第2条进行比较，然后做同样的事情。重复，检查所有5个存储值。应该是O(n)

在那个('第k大元素数组')上快速谷歌返回这个:http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?interview.11.509587.17

"Make one pass through tracking the three largest values so far." 

(它是专门为3d最大)

这个答案是:

Build a heap/priority queue.  O(n)
Pop top element.  O(log n)
Pop top element.  O(log n)
Pop top element.  O(log n)

Total = O(n) + 3 O(log n) = O(n)