
A union-find data structure maintains a collection of disjoint sets under the operations makeset, union, and find. Kaplan, Shafrir, and Tarjan [SODA 2002] designed data structures for an extension of the union-find problem in which items of the sets maintained may be deleted. The cost of a delete operation in their implementations is essentially the same as the cost of a find operation; namely, O (log n ) worst-case and O (α ⌈ M / N ⌉ ( n )) amortized, where n is the number of items in the set returned by the find operation, N is the total number of makeset operations performed, M is the total number of find operations performed, and α ⌈ M / N ⌉ ( n ) is a functional inverse of Ackermann’s function. They left open the question whether delete operations can be implemented more efficiently than find operations, for example, in o (log n ) worst-case time. We resolve this open problem by presenting a relatively simple modification of the classical union-find data structure that supports delete, as well as makeset and union operations, in constant worst-case time, while still supporting find operations in O (log n ) worst-case time and O (α ⌈ M/N⌉ ( n )) amortized time. Our analysis supplies, in particular, a very concise potential-based amortized analysis of the standard union-find data structure that yields an O (α ⌈ M / N ⌉ ( n )) amortized bound on the cost of find operations. All previous potential-based analyses yielded the weaker amortized bound of O (α ⌈ M / N ⌉ ( N )). Furthermore, our tighter analysis extends to one-path variants of the path compression technique such as path splitting .
disjoint sets, Union-find
disjoint sets, Union-find
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 15 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
