我相信有一种方法可以找到长度为n的O(n)无序数组中第k大的元素。也可能是期望O(n)之类的。我们该怎么做呢?


当前回答

下面是一个随机化快速选择的c++实现。这个想法是随机选择一个主元。为了实现随机分区,我们使用一个随机函数rand()来生成l和r之间的索引,将随机生成索引处的元素与最后一个元素交换,最后调用以最后一个元素为枢轴的标准分区过程。

#include<iostream>
#include<climits>
#include<cstdlib>
using namespace std;

int randomPartition(int arr[], int l, int r);

// This function returns k'th smallest element in arr[l..r] using
// QuickSort based method.  ASSUMPTION: ALL ELEMENTS IN ARR[] ARE DISTINCT
int kthSmallest(int arr[], int l, int r, int k)
{
    // If k is smaller than number of elements in array
    if (k > 0 && k <= r - l + 1)
    {
        // Partition the array around a random element and
        // get position of pivot element in sorted array
        int pos = randomPartition(arr, l, r);

        // If position is same as k
        if (pos-l == k-1)
            return arr[pos];
        if (pos-l > k-1)  // If position is more, recur for left subarray
            return kthSmallest(arr, l, pos-1, k);

        // Else recur for right subarray
        return kthSmallest(arr, pos+1, r, k-pos+l-1);
    }

    // If k is more than number of elements in array
    return INT_MAX;
}

void swap(int *a, int *b)
{
    int temp = *a;
    *a = *b;
    *b = temp;
}

// Standard partition process of QuickSort().  It considers the last
// element as pivot and moves all smaller element to left of it and
// greater elements to right. This function is used by randomPartition()
int partition(int arr[], int l, int r)
{
    int x = arr[r], i = l;
    for (int j = l; j <= r - 1; j++)
    {
        if (arr[j] <= x) //arr[i] is bigger than arr[j] so swap them
        {
            swap(&arr[i], &arr[j]);
            i++;
        }
    }
    swap(&arr[i], &arr[r]); // swap the pivot
    return i;
}

// Picks a random pivot element between l and r and partitions
// arr[l..r] around the randomly picked element using partition()
int randomPartition(int arr[], int l, int r)
{
    int n = r-l+1;
    int pivot = rand() % n;
    swap(&arr[l + pivot], &arr[r]);
    return partition(arr, l, r);
}

// Driver program to test above methods
int main()
{
    int arr[] = {12, 3, 5, 7, 4, 19, 26};
    int n = sizeof(arr)/sizeof(arr[0]), k = 3;
    cout << "K'th smallest element is " << kthSmallest(arr, 0, n-1, k);
    return 0;
}

上述解的最坏情况时间复杂度仍为O(n2)。在最坏的情况下,随机函数可能总是选择一个角元素。上述随机化QuickSelect的期望时间复杂度为Θ(n)

其他回答

这叫做求k阶统计量。有一个非常简单的随机算法(叫做quickselect),平均时间为O(n),最坏情况时间为O(n²),还有一个相当复杂的非随机算法(叫做introselect),最坏情况时间为O(n)。维基百科上有一些信息,但不是很好。

你需要的一切都在这些幻灯片里。只需提取O(n)最坏情况算法(introselect)的基本算法:

Select(A,n,i):
    Divide input into ⌈n/5⌉ groups of size 5.

    /* Partition on median-of-medians */
    medians = array of each group’s median.
    pivot = Select(medians, ⌈n/5⌉, ⌈n/10⌉)
    Left Array L and Right Array G = partition(A, pivot)

    /* Find ith element in L, pivot, or G */
    k = |L| + 1
    If i = k, return pivot
    If i < k, return Select(L, k-1, i)
    If i > k, return Select(G, n-k, i-k)

在Cormen等人的《算法介绍》一书中也有非常详细的描述。

Haskell的解决方案:

kthElem index list = sort list !! index

withShape ~[]     []     = []
withShape ~(x:xs) (y:ys) = x : withShape xs ys

sort []     = []
sort (x:xs) = (sort ls `withShape` ls) ++ [x] ++ (sort rs `withShape` rs)
  where
   ls = filter (<  x)
   rs = filter (>= x)

这通过使用withShape方法来实现中值解的中值,从而发现分区的大小,而无需实际计算分区大小。

根据本文,在n个项目的列表中寻找第k个最大的项目,下面的算法在最坏的情况下将花费O(n)时间。

将数组分成n/5个列表,每个列表有5个元素。 求每个5个元素的子数组的中值。 递归地找到所有中位数的中位数,记作M 将数组划分为两个子数组第一个子数组包含大于M的元素,设这个子数组为a1,而其他子数组包含小于M的元素,设这个子数组为a2。 如果k <= |a1|,返回选择(a1,k)。 k−1 = |a1|,返回M。 如果k> |a1| + 1,返回选择(a2,k−a1−1)。

分析:如原文所述:

我们使用中位数将列表分成两部分(前一半, 如果k <= n/2,反之则为后半部分)。这个算法需要 对于某个常数c,递归第一级的时间cn/2 at 下一层(因为我们在大小为n/2的列表中递归),cn/4在 第三层,以此类推。总时间为cn + cn/2 + cn/4 + .... = 2cn = o(n)。

为什么分区大小是5而不是3?

如原文所述:

将列表除以5可以保证最坏情况下70−30的分割。至少 至少一半的中位数大于中位数的中位数 n/5块中的一半至少有3个元素,这就给出了a 3n/10的分割,这意味着另一个分区在最坏情况下是7n/10。 得到T(n) = T(n/5)+T(7n/10)+O(n)由于n/5+7n/10 < 1 最差情况运行时间isO(n)。

现在我尝试将上述算法实现为:

public static int findKthLargestUsingMedian(Integer[] array, int k) {
        // Step 1: Divide the list into n/5 lists of 5 element each.
        int noOfRequiredLists = (int) Math.ceil(array.length / 5.0);
        // Step 2: Find pivotal element aka median of medians.
        int medianOfMedian =  findMedianOfMedians(array, noOfRequiredLists);
        //Now we need two lists split using medianOfMedian as pivot. All elements in list listOne will be grater than medianOfMedian and listTwo will have elements lesser than medianOfMedian.
        List<Integer> listWithGreaterNumbers = new ArrayList<>(); // elements greater than medianOfMedian
        List<Integer> listWithSmallerNumbers = new ArrayList<>(); // elements less than medianOfMedian
        for (Integer element : array) {
            if (element < medianOfMedian) {
                listWithSmallerNumbers.add(element);
            } else if (element > medianOfMedian) {
                listWithGreaterNumbers.add(element);
            }
        }
        // Next step.
        if (k <= listWithGreaterNumbers.size()) return findKthLargestUsingMedian((Integer[]) listWithGreaterNumbers.toArray(new Integer[listWithGreaterNumbers.size()]), k);
        else if ((k - 1) == listWithGreaterNumbers.size()) return medianOfMedian;
        else if (k > (listWithGreaterNumbers.size() + 1)) return findKthLargestUsingMedian((Integer[]) listWithSmallerNumbers.toArray(new Integer[listWithSmallerNumbers.size()]), k-listWithGreaterNumbers.size()-1);
        return -1;
    }

    public static int findMedianOfMedians(Integer[] mainList, int noOfRequiredLists) {
        int[] medians = new int[noOfRequiredLists];
        for (int count = 0; count < noOfRequiredLists; count++) {
            int startOfPartialArray = 5 * count;
            int endOfPartialArray = startOfPartialArray + 5;
            Integer[] partialArray = Arrays.copyOfRange((Integer[]) mainList, startOfPartialArray, endOfPartialArray);
            // Step 2: Find median of each of these sublists.
            int medianIndex = partialArray.length/2;
            medians[count] = partialArray[medianIndex];
        }
        // Step 3: Find median of the medians.
        return medians[medians.length / 2];
    }

为了完成,另一种算法利用优先队列,花费时间O(nlogn)。

public static int findKthLargestUsingPriorityQueue(Integer[] nums, int k) {
        int p = 0;
        int numElements = nums.length;
        // create priority queue where all the elements of nums will be stored
        PriorityQueue<Integer> pq = new PriorityQueue<Integer>();

        // place all the elements of the array to this priority queue
        for (int n : nums) {
            pq.add(n);
        }

        // extract the kth largest element
        while (numElements - k + 1 > 0) {
            p = pq.poll();
            k++;
        }

        return p;
    }

这两个算法都可以被测试为:

public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
        Integer[] numbers = new Integer[]{2, 3, 5, 4, 1, 12, 11, 13, 16, 7, 8, 6, 10, 9, 17, 15, 19, 20, 18, 23, 21, 22, 25, 24, 14};
        System.out.println(findKthLargestUsingMedian(numbers, 8));
        System.out.println(findKthLargestUsingPriorityQueue(numbers, 8));
    }

如预期输出为: 18 18

我提出了这个算法,似乎是O(n):

假设k=3我们想找出数组中第三大的元素。我将创建三个变量,并将数组中的每一项与这三个变量中的最小值进行比较。如果数组item大于最小值,则用item的值替换最小值变量。我们继续做同样的事情,直到数组结束。三个变量中的最小值是数组中第三大的项。

define variables a=0, b=0, c=0
iterate through the array items
    find minimum a,b,c
    if item > min then replace the min variable with item value
    continue until end of array
the minimum of a,b,c is our answer

为了找到第K大的项,我们需要K个变量。

例如:(k = 3)

[1,2,4,1,7,3,9,5,6,2,9,8]

Final variable values:

a=7 (answer)
b=8
c=9

有人可以审查这个,让我知道我错过了什么?

虽然不是很确定O(n)复杂度,但肯定在O(n)和nLog(n)之间。也肯定更接近于O(n)而不是nLog(n)函数是用Java编写的

public int quickSelect(ArrayList<Integer>list, int nthSmallest){
    //Choose random number in range of 0 to array length
    Random random =  new Random();
    //This will give random number which is not greater than length - 1
    int pivotIndex = random.nextInt(list.size() - 1); 

    int pivot = list.get(pivotIndex);

    ArrayList<Integer> smallerNumberList = new ArrayList<Integer>();
    ArrayList<Integer> greaterNumberList = new ArrayList<Integer>();

    //Split list into two. 
    //Value smaller than pivot should go to smallerNumberList
    //Value greater than pivot should go to greaterNumberList
    //Do nothing for value which is equal to pivot
    for(int i=0; i<list.size(); i++){
        if(list.get(i)<pivot){
            smallerNumberList.add(list.get(i));
        }
        else if(list.get(i)>pivot){
            greaterNumberList.add(list.get(i));
        }
        else{
            //Do nothing
        }
    }

    //If smallerNumberList size is greater than nthSmallest value, nthSmallest number must be in this list 
    if(nthSmallest < smallerNumberList.size()){
        return quickSelect(smallerNumberList, nthSmallest);
    }
    //If nthSmallest is greater than [ list.size() - greaterNumberList.size() ], nthSmallest number must be in this list
    //The step is bit tricky. If confusing, please see the above loop once again for clarification.
    else if(nthSmallest > (list.size() - greaterNumberList.size())){
        //nthSmallest will have to be changed here. [ list.size() - greaterNumberList.size() ] elements are already in 
        //smallerNumberList
        nthSmallest = nthSmallest - (list.size() - greaterNumberList.size());
        return quickSelect(greaterNumberList,nthSmallest);
    }
    else{
        return pivot;
    }
}