Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 1271070941 by CiaPan (talk) O(log n) decrease-key isn't misleading; otherwise, is O(1) decrease-key for Fibonacci heaps misleading too? See talk page reply :) |
→Heap operations: fix images per WP:VPT, remove incorrect indents |
||
Line 50:
As an example of binary heap insertion, say we have a max-heap
and we want to add the number 15 to the heap. We first place the 15 in the position marked by the X. However, the heap property is violated since {{nowrap|15 > 8}}, so we need to swap the 15 and the 8. So, we have the heap looking as follows after the first swap:
However the heap property is still violated since {{nowrap|15 > 11}}, so we need to swap again:
which is a valid max-heap. There is no need to check the left child after this final step: at the start, the max-heap was valid, meaning the root was already greater than its left child, so replacing the root with an even greater value will maintain the property that each node is greater than its children ({{nowrap|11 > 5}}; if {{nowrap|15 > 11}}, and {{nowrap|11 > 5}}, then {{nowrap|15 > 5}}, because of the [[transitive relation]]).
Line 72:
So, if we have the same max-heap as before
We remove the 11 and replace it with the 4.
Now the heap property is violated since 8 is greater than 4. In this case, swapping the two elements, 4 and 8, is enough to restore the heap property and we need not swap elements further:
The downward-moving node is swapped with the ''larger'' of its children in a max-heap (in a min-heap it would be swapped with its smaller child), until it satisfies the heap property in its new position. This functionality is achieved by the '''Max-Heapify''' function as defined below in [[pseudocode]] for an [[Array data structure|array]]-backed heap ''A'' of length ''length''(''A''). ''A'' is indexed starting at 1.
| |||