I know similar problem like "sort 5 numbers in 7 comparisons". I know no general algorithms exist. Do I just enlist all possible game trees?
2026-03-25 17:39:18.1774460358
Find 3rd largest number out of 7 under at most 11 comparisons
401 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in ALGORITHMS
- Least Absolute Deviation (LAD) Line Fitting / Regression
- Do these special substring sets form a matroid?
- Modified conjugate gradient method to minimise quadratic functional restricted to positive solutions
- Correct way to prove Big O statement
- Product of sums of all subsets mod $k$?
- (logn)^(logn) = n^(log10+logn). WHY?
- Clarificaiton on barycentric coordinates
- Minimum number of moves to make all elements of the sequence zero.
- Translation of the work of Gauss where the fast Fourier transform algorithm first appeared
- sources about SVD complexity
Related Questions in SORTING
- Writing an algorithm which takes $O(\log n)$ to run
- Question regarding the $\mathcal{O}$ notation used on constant functions
- Sorting a graph's adjacency matrix by the *objectively* best edges for the TSP
- Inversions of a Deck of Cards
- For which values of n does insertion sort beat merge sort?
- Finding an order-2 permutation that sorts colored balls
- Insertion Sort Using Logical Operators
- Lower bound for asymptotic time of sorting algorithms
- recurrance with merge-sort
- How many ways can blocks be arranged in a grid
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
Let $V_t(n)$ be the minimum number (in the worst case) of comparisons needed to find the $t$th largest of $n$ distinct values (selection algorithms).
Knuth (AOCP 5.3.3) describes a good method to find the required entry, the constructive basis for an upper bound (11), Hadian and Sobel's theorem:
$$ V_t(n) \leq n - t + (t-1) \lceil \lg(n+2-t) \rceil $$
In the immediate case this gives $V_3(7) \leq 4+2\lceil \lg 6 \rceil = 10 $, which is within the limit prescribed in this Question's title.
The general method is to set up a binary tree "knockout tournament" on $n-t+2$ of the entries, keeping $t-2$ of them in reserve. This requires $n-t+1$ comparisons, and produces a "winner" which exceeds (at least) $n-t+1$ of all the other entries. Since the $t$th largest entry exceeds only $n-t$ entries, it cannot be that winner. Replace the winner at the base (not the top) of the binary tree/tournament with one of the reserve entries, and recompare. Since this affects only one path (from base to top) in the tournament, this requires at most $\lceil \lg(n+2-t) \rceil$ added comparisons. Repeating this for each reserve entry, $t-2$ times in all, we are down to a set of $n-t+2$ entries whose current winner is also not the entry we want. Finally, replace that last winner with an entry that a priori loses every comparison, and again recompare (affecting only one path in the tree), which takes at most $\lceil \lg(n+2-t) \rceil - 1$ comparisions (taking advantage of the sure loser not to actually do a comparison). The $t$th largest entry comes out on top, in total using at most the number of comparisons given in the right hand side of the above inequality.
For the specific case $n=7$ and $t=3$, our initial knockout tournament would involve six of the entries, holding just one entry
Rin reserve. This uses five comparisons*to determine an initial winnerX, which could have come from anywhere in the tree's base:The depth of the binary tree is three, so recomparing after replacing the initial winner
Xwith the reserve entryRresults in at most three new comparisons#to find our second winnerY:Finally, after putting a sure loser in place of second winner
Y, recomparing produces the 3rd largest entryZ. This takes at most two new comparisons because the first comparison thatYtook to the top of the tree is "skipped" by the sure loser. In total:$$ V_3(7) \leq 5 + 3 + 2 = 10 $$
This turns out to be the sharp minimum number of comparisons possible in the worst case, as $V_3(7) = V_4(7) = V_5(7) = 10$ (see Knuth's AOCP, Vol. 3 Sorting and Searching, in Table I of Sec. 5.3.3, or the expanded table here by Ken Okansen).