Results 1 
6 of
6
Analysis of Shellsort and related algorithms
 ESA ’96: Fourth Annual European Symposium on Algorithms
, 1996
"... This is an abstract of a survey talk on the theoretical and empirical studies that have been done over the past four decades on the Shellsort algorithm and its variants. The discussion includes: upper bounds, including linkages to numbertheoretic properties of the algorithm; lower bounds on Shellso ..."
Abstract

Cited by 26 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This is an abstract of a survey talk on the theoretical and empirical studies that have been done over the past four decades on the Shellsort algorithm and its variants. The discussion includes: upper bounds, including linkages to numbertheoretic properties of the algorithm; lower bounds on Shellsort and Shellsortbased networks; averagecase results; proposed probabilistic sorting networks based on the algorithm; and a list of open problems. 1 Shellsort The basic Shellsort algorithm is among the earliest sorting methods to be discovered (by D. L. Shell in 1959 [36]) and is among the easiest to implement, as exhibited by the following C code for sorting an array a[l],..., a[r]: shellsort(itemType a[], int l, int r) { int i, j, h; itemType v;
Lower Bounds for Shellsort
 In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
, 1997
"... We show lower bounds on the worstcase complexity of Shellsort. In particular, we give a fairly simple proof of an \Omega\Gamma n lg 2 n=(lg lg n) 2 ) lower bound for the size of Shellsort sorting networks, for arbitrary increment sequences. We also show an identical lower bound for the running ..."
Abstract

Cited by 13 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We show lower bounds on the worstcase complexity of Shellsort. In particular, we give a fairly simple proof of an \Omega\Gamma n lg 2 n=(lg lg n) 2 ) lower bound for the size of Shellsort sorting networks, for arbitrary increment sequences. We also show an identical lower bound for the running time of Shellsort algorithms, again for arbitrary increment sequences. Our lower bounds establish an almost tight tradeoff between the running time of a Shellsort algorithm and the length of the underlying increment sequence. Proposed running head: Lower Bounds for Shellsort. Contact author: Prof. Greg Plaxton, Department of Computer Science, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 787121188. 1 Introduction Shellsort is a classical sorting algorithm introduced by Shell in 1959 [15]. The algorithm is based on a sequence H = h 0 ; : : : ; hm\Gamma1 of positive integers called an increment sequence. An input file A = A[0]; : : : ; A[n \Gamma 1] of elements is sorted by performing an ...
Randomized Shellsort: A simple oblivious sorting algorithm
 In Proceedings 21st ACMSIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA
, 2010
"... In this paper, we describe a randomized Shellsort algorithm. This algorithm is a simple, randomized, dataoblivious version of the Shellsort algorithm that always runs in O(n log n) time and succeeds in sorting any given input permutation with very high probability. Taken together, these properties ..."
Abstract

Cited by 12 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper, we describe a randomized Shellsort algorithm. This algorithm is a simple, randomized, dataoblivious version of the Shellsort algorithm that always runs in O(n log n) time and succeeds in sorting any given input permutation with very high probability. Taken together, these properties imply applications in the design of new efficient privacypreserving computations based on the secure multiparty computation (SMC) paradigm. In addition, by a trivial conversion of this Monte Carlo algorithm to its Las Vegas equivalent, one gets the first version of Shellsort with a running time that is provably O(n log n) with very high probability. 1
The worst case in Shellsort and related algorithms
 Journal of Algorithms
, 1993
"... Abstract. We show that sorting a sufficiently long list of length N using Shellsort with m increments (not necessarily decreasing) requires at least N 1+c/ √ m comparisons in the worst case, for some constant c> 0. For m ≤ (log N / log log N) 2 we obtain an upper bound of the same form. We also prov ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We show that sorting a sufficiently long list of length N using Shellsort with m increments (not necessarily decreasing) requires at least N 1+c/ √ m comparisons in the worst case, for some constant c> 0. For m ≤ (log N / log log N) 2 we obtain an upper bound of the same form. We also prove that Ω(N(log N / log log N) 2) comparisons are needed regardless of the number of increments. Our approach is general enough to apply to other sorting algorithms, including Shakersort, for which an even stronger result is proved. 1.
Analysis of Sorting Algorithms by Kolmogorov Complexity  A Survey
, 2003
"... Recently, many results on the computational complexity of sorting algorithms were obtained using Kolmogorov complexity (the incompressibility method). Especially, the usually hard averagecase analysis is ammenable to this method. Here we survey such results about Bubblesort, Heapsort, Shellsort, ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Recently, many results on the computational complexity of sorting algorithms were obtained using Kolmogorov complexity (the incompressibility method). Especially, the usually hard averagecase analysis is ammenable to this method. Here we survey such results about Bubblesort, Heapsort, Shellsort, Dobosiewiczsort, Shakersort, and sorting with stacks and queues in sequential or parallel mode. Especially in the case of Shellsort the uses of Kolmogorov complexity surprisingly easily resolved problems that had stayed open for a long time despite strenuous attacks.