For example, given the following binary tree:
[2,3,5,4,8,6,-2,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,2] and sum = 7
2
/ \
3 5
/ \ / \
4 8 6 -2
\
2
Print : [3,4] , [2,5] , [2,5,-2,2]
I could come up with a n^2 solution, but is there a better solution to it? Maybe with a some extra memory, like using a stack or hashtable.
I've spent 4 hours trying to come up with some solution, but all the solution becomes too ugly or chaotic.
My n^2 solution is relatively simple:
1) Have one method i.e. helper which recursively calls itself till all the leafs. When it finds a path with the sum, add it to the result. (This is will take O(n))
2)Call this method for every node in the tree ( O(n) * O(n) = O(n^2))
My simple solution
//TreeNode structure
public class TreeNode {
int val;
public TreeNode left;
public TreeNode right;
TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }
}
//Solution class
public class Solution {
public List<List<Integer>> pathSum(TreeNode root, int sum) {
List<Integer> temp = new ArrayList<Integer>();
List<List<Integer>> result = new ArrayList<>();
if (root == null) return result;
Queue<TreeNode> q = new LinkedList<>();
q.offer(root);
while ( !q.isEmpty())
{
TreeNode top = q.poll();
helper(top,sum,temp,result);
if (top.left != null) q.offer(top.left);
if (top.right != null) q.offer(top.right);
}
return result;
}
public void helper(TreeNode root, int sum, List<Integer> temp, List<List<Integer>> result)
{
if (root == null) return;
temp.add(root.val) ;
if (root.val == sum)
{
result.add(new ArrayList<>(temp));
}
helper(root.left,sum-root.val, temp, result );
helper(root.right, sum-root.val, temp, result);
temp.remove(temp.size() - 1);
}
}
//Execution class
public class treeApp {
public static void main(String args[])
{ TreeNode root = new TreeNode(2);
root.left = new TreeNode(3);
root.right = new TreeNode(5);
root.left.left = new TreeNode(4);
root.left.right = new TreeNode(8);
root.right.left = new TreeNode(6);
root.right.right = new TreeNode(-2);
root.right.right.right = new TreeNode(2);
Solution sol = new Solution();
List<List<Integer>> result ;
result = sol.pathSum(root, 7);
for (List l : result)
{
System.out.println(l.toString());
}
}
//Prints:
[2, 5]
[2, 5, -2, 2]
[3, 4]
Traverse the tree in any convenient fashion (breadth-first or depth-first), but include the path to this node.
At each node, check all of the path sums that end at this node; if any equal the target value, add those paths to the solution (passed back as the functional result).
Then recur: add the current node to the path and call on each child.
Is this clear enough? I think this solves the problem in less time. The traversal is O(N) to reach all the nodes. At each node, you walk through the path, which is of length . If you have a balanced binary tree, the depth is O(log2[N]).
Related
I'm looking at this question on leetcode. Given two arrays, inorder and preorder, you need to construct a binary tree. I get the general solution of the question.
Preorder traversal visits root, left, and right, so the left child would be current preorder node index + 1. From that value, you can then know how many nodes are on the left of the tree using the inorder array. In the answers, the formula used to get the right child is "preStart + inIndex - inStart + 1".
I don't want to memorize the formula so I'm wondering if there is a proof for this? I went through the discussion board there, but I'm still missing a link.
For Python Only
In Python we can also use pop(0) for solving this problem, even though that's inefficient (it would pass though).
For inefficiency we can likely use deque() with popleft(), however not on LeetCode, because we don't have control over the tree.
class Solution:
def buildTree(self, preorder, inorder):
if inorder:
index = inorder.index(preorder.pop(0))
root = TreeNode(inorder[index])
root.left = self.buildTree(preorder, inorder[:index])
root.right = self.buildTree(preorder, inorder[index + 1:])
return root
For Java and C++, that'd be a bit different just like you said (don't have the proof) but maybe this post would be just a bit helpful:
public class Solution {
public static final TreeNode buildTree(
final int[] preorder,
final int[] inorder
) {
return traverse(0, 0, inorder.length - 1, preorder, inorder);
}
private static final TreeNode traverse(
final int preStart,
final int inStart,
final int atEnd,
final int[] preorder,
final int[] inorder
) {
if (preStart > preorder.length - 1 || inStart > atEnd) {
return null;
}
TreeNode root = new TreeNode(preorder[preStart]);
int inorderIndex = 0;
for (int i = inStart; i <= atEnd; i++)
if (inorder[i] == root.val) {
inorderIndex = i;
}
root.left = traverse(preStart + 1, inStart, inorderIndex - 1, preorder, inorder);
root.right = traverse(preStart + inorderIndex - inStart + 1, inorderIndex + 1, atEnd, preorder, inorder);
return root;
}
}
C++
// The following block might slightly improve the execution time;
// Can be removed;
static const auto __optimize__ = []() {
std::ios::sync_with_stdio(false);
std::cin.tie(nullptr);
std::cout.tie(nullptr);
return 0;
}();
// Most of headers are already included;
// Can be removed;
#include <cstdint>
#include <vector>
#include <unordered_map>
using ValueType = int;
static const struct Solution {
TreeNode* buildTree(
std::vector<ValueType>& preorder,
std::vector<ValueType>& inorder
) {
std::unordered_map<ValueType, ValueType> inorder_indices;
for (ValueType index = 0; index < std::size(inorder); ++index) {
inorder_indices[inorder[index]] = index;
}
return build(preorder, inorder, inorder_indices, 0, 0, std::size(inorder) - 1);
}
private:
TreeNode* build(
std::vector<ValueType>& preorder,
std::vector<ValueType>& inorder,
std::unordered_map<ValueType, ValueType>& inorder_indices,
ValueType pre_start,
ValueType in_start,
ValueType in_end
) {
if (pre_start >= std::size(preorder) || in_start > in_end) {
return nullptr;
}
TreeNode* root = new TreeNode(preorder[pre_start]);
ValueType pre_index = inorder_indices[preorder[pre_start]];
root->left = build(preorder, inorder, inorder_indices, pre_start + 1, in_start, pre_index - 1);
root->right = build(preorder, inorder, inorder_indices, pre_start + 1 + pre_index - in_start, pre_index + 1, in_end);
return root;
}
};
I'm not sure whether this question should be posted in math of overflow, but here we go.
I have an arbitrary amount of ordered lists (say 3 for example) with numerical values. These lists can be long enough that trying all combinations of values becomes too computationally heavy.
What I need is to get an ordered list of possible sums when picking one value from each of the lists. Since the lists can be large, I only want the N smallest sums.
What I've considered is to step down one of the lists for each iteration. This however misses many cases that would have been possible if another list would have been chosen for that step.
An alternative would be a recursive solution, but that would generate many duplicate cases instead.
Is there any known methods that could solve such a problem?
Let we have K lists.
Make min-heap.
a) Push a structure contaning sum of elements from every list (the first ones at this elements) and list of indexes key = Sum(L[i][0]), [ix0=0, ix1=0, ix2=0]
b) Pop the smallest element from the heap, output key (sum) value
c) Construct K new elements from popped one - for every increment corresponding index and update sum
key - L[0][ix0] + L[0][ix0 + 1], [ix0 + 1, ix1, ix2]
key - L[1][ix1] + L[1][ix1 + 1], [ix0, ix1 + 1, ix2]
same for ix2
d) Push them into the heap
e) Repeat from b) until N smallest sums are extracted
A Java implementation of the min heap algorithm with a simple test case:
The algorithm itself is just as described by #MBo.
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Comparator;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.PriorityQueue;
class MinHeapElement {
int sum;
List<Integer> idx;
}
public class SumFromKLists {
public static List<Integer> sumFromKLists(List<List<Integer>> lists, int N) {
List<Integer> ans = new ArrayList<>();
if(N == 0) {
return ans;
}
PriorityQueue<MinHeapElement> minPq = new PriorityQueue<>(new Comparator<MinHeapElement>() {
#Override
public int compare(MinHeapElement e1, MinHeapElement e2) {
return e1.sum - e2.sum;
}
});
MinHeapElement smallest = new MinHeapElement();
smallest.idx = new ArrayList<>();
for(int i = 0; i < lists.size(); i++) {
smallest.sum += lists.get(i).get(0);
smallest.idx.add(0);
}
minPq.add(smallest);
ans.add(smallest.sum);
while(ans.size() < N) {
MinHeapElement curr = minPq.poll();
if(ans.get(ans.size() - 1) != curr.sum) {
ans.add(curr.sum);
}
List<MinHeapElement> candidates = nextPossibleCandidates(lists, curr);
if(candidates.size() == 0) {
break;
}
minPq.addAll(candidates);
}
return ans;
}
private static List<MinHeapElement> nextPossibleCandidates(List<List<Integer>> lists, MinHeapElement minHeapElement) {
List<MinHeapElement> candidates = new ArrayList<>();
for(int i = 0; i < lists.size(); i++) {
List<Integer> currList = lists.get(i);
int newIdx = minHeapElement.idx.get(i) + 1;
while(newIdx < currList.size() && currList.get(newIdx) == currList.get(newIdx - 1)) {
newIdx++;
}
if(newIdx < currList.size()) {
MinHeapElement nextElement = new MinHeapElement();
nextElement.sum = minHeapElement.sum + currList.get(newIdx) - currList.get(minHeapElement.idx.get(i));
nextElement.idx = new ArrayList<>(minHeapElement.idx);
nextElement.idx.set(i, newIdx);
candidates.add(nextElement);
}
}
return candidates;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
List<Integer> list1 = new ArrayList<>();
list1.add(2); list1.add(4); list1.add(7); list1.add(8);
List<Integer> list2 = new ArrayList<>();
list2.add(1); list2.add(3); list2.add(5); list2.add(8);
List<List<Integer>> lists = new ArrayList<>();
lists.add(list1); lists.add(list2);
sumFromKLists(lists, 11);
}
}
First i insert the tree into an array according to Level order (aka Breadth first) traversal.
and now i check the array
For i=1 to Len(Array) do:
IF 2*i smaller than Len(Array) then:
IF Array[i] smaller than Array[2i] OR Array[i] larger than Array[2i+1] then:
Return false
Else if 2*I larger than Len(Array) then
Return True
But my problem is the algorithm work only if the tree is a complete binary tree
As a hint, a binary tree is a binary search tree if and only if an inorder traversal of the tree lists the keys in sorted order. Try switching from a level-by-level traversal to an inorder traversal and making appropriate modifications.
Hope this helps!
Clear, concise and efficient code: Recursion is cool if you actually understand the phenomenon. The idea is to validate each node of the tree as such that it is always between the min and max value. Start with Integer.MIN_VALUE and Integer.MAX_VALUE as the initial input for min and max.
public boolean isBinarySearch(Node root, int min, int max) {
if (root == null)
return true;
return ((min <= root.val && root.val <= max) && (isBinarySearch(
root.left, min, root.val) && isBinarySearch(root.right,
root.val, max)));
}
You can try this out also.
class Node {
public Node left;
public Node right;
public int val;
public Node(int val) {
this.val = val;
}
}
Now do this.
Node root2 = new Node(12);
root2.left = new Node(7);
root2.left.left = new Node(4);
root2.left.right = new Node(11);
root2.right = new Node(16);
root2.right.left = new Node(14);
root2.right.right = new Node(18);
root2.right.right.left = new Node(17);
System.out
.println("IsBinary="
+ wc.isBinarySearch(root2, Integer.MIN_VALUE,
Integer.MAX_VALUE));
}
How do you merge 2 Binary Search Trees in such a way that the resultant tree contains all the elements of both the trees and also maintains the BST property.
I saw the solution provided in
How to merge two BST's efficiently?
However that solution involves converting into a Double Linked List. I was wondering if there is a more elegant way of doing this which could be done in place without the conversion. I came up with the following pseudocode. Does it work for all cases? Also I am having trouble with the 3rd case.
node* merge(node* head1, node* head2) {
if (!head1)
return head2;
if (!head2)
return head1;
// Case 1.
if (head1->info > head2->info) {
node* temp = head2->right;
head2->right = NULL;
head1->left = merge(head1->left, head2);
head1 = merge(head1, temp);
return head1;
} else if (head1->info < head2->info) { // Case 2
// Similar to case 1.
} else { // Case 3
// ...
}
}
The two binary search trees (BST) cannot be merged directly during a recursive traversal.
Suppose we should merge Tree 1 and Tree 2 shown in the figure.
The recursion should reduce the merging to a simpler situation. We cannot reduce
the merging only to the respective left subtrees L1 and L2, because L2 can contain
numbers larger than 10, so we would need to include the right
subtree R1 into the process. But then we include numbers greater
than 10 and possibly greater than 20, so we would need to include
the right subtree R2 as well. A similar reasoning shows that
we cannot simplify the merging by including subtrees from Tree 1 and from Tree 2
at the same time.
The only possibility for reduction is to simplify only inside the respective trees.
So, we can transform
the trees to their right spines with sorted nodes:
Now, we can merge the two spines easily into one spine. This
spine is in fact a BST, so we could stop here. However, this BST
is completely unbalanced, so we transform it to a balanced BST.
The complexity is:
Spine 1: time = O(n1), space = O(1)
Spine 2: time = O(n2), space = O(1)
Merge: time = O(n1+n2), space = O(1)
Balance: time = O(n1+n2), space = O(1)
Total: time = O(n1+n2), space = O(1)
The complete running code is on http://ideone.com/RGBFQ. Here are the essential parts. The top level code is a follows:
Node* merge(Node* n1, Node* n2) {
Node *prev, *head1, *head2;
prev = head1 = 0; spine(n1, prev, head1);
prev = head2 = 0; spine(n2, prev, head2);
return balance(mergeSpines(head1, head2));
}
The auxiliary functions are for the tranformation to spines:
void spine(Node *p, Node *& prev, Node *& head) {
if (!p) return;
spine(p->left, prev, head);
if (prev) prev->right = p;
else head = p;
prev = p;
p->left = 0;
spine(p->right, prev, head);
}
Merging of the spines:
void advance(Node*& last, Node*& n) {
last->right = n;
last = n;
n = n->right;
}
Node* mergeSpines(Node* n1, Node* n2) {
Node head;
Node* last = &head;
while (n1 || n2) {
if (!n1) advance(last, n2);
else if (!n2) advance(last, n1);
else if (n1->info < n2->info) advance(last, n1);
else if (n1->info > n2->info) advance(last, n2);
else {
advance(last, n1);
printf("Duplicate key skipped %d \n", n2->info);
n2 = n2->right;
}
}
return head.right;
}
Balancing:
Node* balance(Node *& list, int start, int end) {
if (start > end) return NULL;
int mid = start + (end - start) / 2;
Node *leftChild = balance(list, start, mid-1);
Node *parent = list;
parent->left = leftChild;
list = list->right;
parent->right = balance(list, mid+1, end);
return parent;
}
Node* balance(Node *head) {
int size = 0;
for (Node* n = head; n; n = n->right) ++size;
return balance(head, 0, size-1);
}
Assuming we have two trees A and B we insert root of tree A into tree B and using rotations move inserted root to become new root of tree B. Next we recursively merge left and right sub-trees of trees A and B. This algorithm takes into account both trees structure but insertion still depends on how balanced target tree is. You can use this idea to merge the two trees in O(n+m) time and O(1) space.
The following implementation is due to Dzmitry Huba:
// Converts tree to sorted singly linked list and appends it
// to the head of the existing list and returns new head.
// Left pointers are used as next pointer to form singly
// linked list thus basically forming degenerate tree of
// single left oriented branch. Head of the list points
// to the node with greatest element.
static TreeNode<T> ToSortedList<T>(TreeNode<T> tree, TreeNode<T> head)
{
if (tree == null)
// Nothing to convert and append
return head;
// Do conversion using in order traversal
// Convert first left sub-tree and append it to
// existing list
head = ToSortedList(tree.Left, head);
// Append root to the list and use it as new head
tree.Left = head;
// Convert right sub-tree and append it to list
// already containing left sub-tree and root
return ToSortedList(tree.Right, tree);
}
// Merges two sorted singly linked lists into one and
// calculates the size of merged list. Merged list uses
// right pointers to form singly linked list thus forming
// degenerate tree of single right oriented branch.
// Head points to the node with smallest element.
static TreeNode<T> MergeAsSortedLists<T>(TreeNode<T> left, TreeNode<T> right, IComparer<T> comparer, out int size)
{
TreeNode<T> head = null;
size = 0;
// See merge phase of merge sort for linked lists
// with the only difference in that this implementations
// reverts the list during merge
while (left != null || right != null)
{
TreeNode<T> next;
if (left == null)
next = DetachAndAdvance(ref right);
else if (right == null)
next = DetachAndAdvance(ref left);
else
next = comparer.Compare(left.Value, right.Value) > 0
? DetachAndAdvance(ref left)
: DetachAndAdvance(ref right);
next.Right = head;
head = next;
size++;
}
return head;
}
static TreeNode<T> DetachAndAdvance<T>(ref TreeNode<T> node)
{
var tmp = node;
node = node.Left;
tmp.Left = null;
return tmp;
}
// Converts singly linked list into binary search tree
// advancing list head to next unused list node and
// returning created tree root
static TreeNode<T> ToBinarySearchTree<T>(ref TreeNode<T> head, int size)
{
if (size == 0)
// Zero sized list converts to null
return null;
TreeNode<T> root;
if (size == 1)
{
// Unit sized list converts to a node with
// left and right pointers set to null
root = head;
// Advance head to next node in list
head = head.Right;
// Left pointers were so only right needs to
// be nullified
root.Right = null;
return root;
}
var leftSize = size / 2;
var rightSize = size - leftSize - 1;
// Create left substree out of half of list nodes
var leftRoot = ToBinarySearchTree(ref head, leftSize);
// List head now points to the root of the subtree
// being created
root = head;
// Advance list head and the rest of the list will
// be used to create right subtree
head = head.Right;
// Link left subtree to the root
root.Left = leftRoot;
// Create right subtree and link it to the root
root.Right = ToBinarySearchTree(ref head, rightSize);
return root;
}
public static TreeNode<T> Merge<T>(TreeNode<T> left, TreeNode<T> right, IComparer<T> comparer)
{
Contract.Requires(comparer != null);
if (left == null || right == null)
return left ?? right;
// Convert both trees to sorted lists using original tree nodes
var leftList = ToSortedList(left, null);
var rightList = ToSortedList(right, null);
int size;
// Merge sorted lists and calculate merged list size
var list = MergeAsSortedLists(leftList, rightList, comparer, out size);
// Convert sorted list into optimal binary search tree
return ToBinarySearchTree(ref list, size);
}
The best way we could merge the trees in place is something like:
For each node n in first BST {
Go down the 2nd tree and find the appropriate place to insert n
Insert n there
}
Each iteration in the for loop is O(log n) since we are dealing with trees, and the for loop will be iterated n times, so in total we have O(n log n).
A BST is a ordered or sorted binary tree. My algorithm would be to simple :
traverse through both trees
compare the values
insert the smaller of the two into a new BST.
The python code for traversing is as follows:
def traverse_binary_tree(node, callback):
if node is None:
return
traverse_binary_tree(node.leftChild, callback)
callback(node.value)
traverse_binary_tree(node.rightChild, callback)
The cost for traversing through the BST and building a new merged BST would remain O(n)
This blog post provides a solution to the problem with O(logn) space complexity. (Pay attention that the given approach does not modify input trees.)
This can be done in 3 steps:
covert the BSTs to sorted linked list (this can be done in place with O(m+n) time)
Merge this two sorted linked lists to a single list (this can be done in place with O(m+n) time)
Convert sorted linked list to balanced BST (this can be done in place with O(m+n) time)
Here is what I would do.
This solution is O(n1+n2) time complexity.
STEPS:
Perform the inorder traversal of both the trees to get sorted arrays --> linear time
Merge the two arrays --> again linear time
Convert the merged array into a Balanced binary search tree --> again linear time
This would require O(n1+n2) time and space.
Links you may find useful while implementing:
How to merge 2 sorted arrays
Inorder traversal
Sorted array to a balanced BST
The following algorithm is from Algorithms in C++.
The idea is almost the same as in the algorithm posted by PengOne. This algorithm does in place merging, time complexity is O(n+m).
link join(link a, link b) {
if (b == 0) return a;
if (a == 0) return b;
insert(b, a->item);
b->left = join(a->left, b->left);
b->right = join(a->right, b->right);
delete a;
return b;
}
insert just inserts an item in the right place in the tree.
void insert(link &h, Item x) {
if (h == 0) {
h = new node(x);
return;
}
if (x.key() < h->item.key()) {
insert(h->left, x);
rotateRight(h);
}
else {
insert(h->right, x);
rotateLeft(h);
}
}
rotateRight and rotateLeft keep tree in the right order.
void rotateRight(link &h) {
link x = h->left;
h->left = x->right;
x->right = h;
h = x;
}
void rotateLeft(link &h) {
link x = h->right;
h->right = x->left;
x->left = h;
h = x;
}
Here link is node *.
Assuming the question is just to print sorted from both BSTs. Then the easier way is,
Store inorder traversal of 2 BSTs in 2 seperate arrays.
Now the problem reduces to merging\printing elements from 2 sorted arrays, which we got from step one. This merging can be done in o(m) when m>n or o(n) when m
Complexity: o(m+n)
Aux space: o(m+n) for the 2 arrays
MergeTwoBST_to_BalancedBST.java
public class MergeTwoBST_to_BalancedBST {
// arr1 and arr2 are the input arrays to be converted into a binary search
// structure and then merged and then balanced.
int[] arr1 = new int[] { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 };
int[] arr2 = new int[] { 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 };
BSTNode root1;
BSTNode root2;
// vector object to hold the nodes from the merged unbalanced binary search
// tree.
Vector<BSTNode> vNodes = new Vector<BSTNode>();
/**
* Constructor to initialize the Binary Search Tree root nodes to start
* processing. This constructor creates two trees from two given sorted
* array inputs. root1 tree from arr1 and root2 tree from arr2.
*
* Once we are done with creating the tree, we are traversing the tree in
* inorder format, to verify whether nodes are inserted properly or not. An
* inorder traversal should give us the nodes in a sorted order.
*/
public MergeTwoBST_to_BalancedBST() {
// passing 0 as the startIndex and arr1.length-1 as the endIndex.
root1 = getBSTFromSortedArray(arr1, 0, arr1.length - 1);
System.out.println("\nPrinting the first binary search tree");
inorder(root1); // traverse the tree in inorder format to verify whether
// nodes are inserted correctly or not.
// passing 0 as the startIndex and arr2.length-1 as the endIndex.
root2 = getBSTFromSortedArray(arr2, 0, arr2.length - 1);
System.out.println("\nPrinting the second binary search tree");
inorder(root2); // same here - checking whether the nodes are inserted
// properly or not.
}
/**
* Method to traverse the tree in inorder format. Where it traverses the
* left child first, then root and then right child.
*
* #param node
*/
public void inorder(BSTNode node) {
if (null != node) {
inorder(node.getLeft());
System.out.print(node.getData() + " ");
inorder(node.getRight());
}
}
/**
* Method to traverse the tree in preorder format. Where it traverses the
* root node first, then left child and then right child.
*
* #param node
*/
public void preorder(BSTNode node) {
if (null != node) {
System.out.print(node.getData() + " ");
preorder(node.getLeft());
preorder(node.getRight());
}
}
/**
* Creating a new Binary Search Tree object from a sorted array and
* returning the root of the newly created node for further processing.
*
* #param arr
* #param startIndex
* #param endIndex
* #return
*/
public BSTNode getBSTFromSortedArray(int[] arr, int startIndex, int endIndex) {
if (startIndex > endIndex) {
return null;
}
int middleIndex = startIndex + (endIndex - startIndex) / 2;
BSTNode node = new BSTNode(arr[middleIndex]);
node.setLeft(getBSTFromSortedArray(arr, startIndex, middleIndex - 1));
node.setRight(getBSTFromSortedArray(arr, middleIndex + 1, endIndex));
return node;
}
/**
* This method involves two operation. First - it adds the nodes from root1
* tree to root2 tree, and hence we get a merged root2 tree.Second - it
* balances the merged root2 tree with the help of a vector object which can
* contain objects only of BSTNode type.
*/
public void mergeTwoBinarySearchTree() {
// First operation - merging the trees. root1 with root2 merging should
// give us a new root2 tree.
addUtil(root1);
System.out.println("\nAfter the root1 tree nodes are added to root2");
System.out.println("Inorder Traversal of root2 nodes");
inorder(root2); // inorder traversal of the root2 tree should display
// the nodes in a sorted order.
System.out.println("\nPreorder traversal of root2 nodes");
preorder(root2);
// Second operation - this will take care of balancing the merged binary
// search trees.
balancedTheMergedBST();
}
/**
* Here we are doing two operations. First operation involves, adding nodes
* from root2 tree to the vector object. Second operation involves, creating
* the Balanced binary search tree from the vector objects.
*/
public void balancedTheMergedBST() {
// First operation : adding nodes to the vector object
addNodesToVector(root2, vNodes);
int vSize = vNodes.size();
// Second operation : getting a balanced binary search tree
BSTNode node = getBalancedBSTFromVector(vNodes, 0, vSize - 1);
System.out
.println("\n********************************************************");
System.out.println("After balancing the merged trees");
System.out.println("\nInorder Traversal of nodes");
inorder(node); // traversing the tree in inoder process should give us
// the output in sorted order ascending
System.out.println("\nPreorder traversal of root2 nodes");
preorder(node);
}
/**
* This method will provide us a Balanced Binary Search Tree. Elements of
* the root2 tree has been added to the vector object. It is parsed
* recursively to create a balanced tree.
*
* #param vNodes
* #param startIndex
* #param endIndex
* #return
*/
public BSTNode getBalancedBSTFromVector(Vector<BSTNode> vNodes,
int startIndex, int endIndex) {
if (startIndex > endIndex) {
return null;
}
int middleIndex = startIndex + (endIndex - startIndex) / 2;
BSTNode node = vNodes.get(middleIndex);
node.setLeft(getBalancedBSTFromVector(vNodes, startIndex,
middleIndex - 1));
node.setRight(getBalancedBSTFromVector(vNodes, middleIndex + 1,
endIndex));
return node;
}
/**
* This method traverse the tree in inorder process and adds each node from
* root2 to the vector object vNodes object only accepts objects of BSTNode
* type.
*
* #param node
* #param vNodes
*/
public void addNodesToVector(BSTNode node, Vector<BSTNode> vNodes) {
if (null != node) {
addNodesToVector(node.getLeft(), vNodes);
// here we are adding the node in the vector object.
vNodes.add(node);
addNodesToVector(node.getRight(), vNodes);
}
}
/**
* This method traverse the root1 tree in inorder process and add the nodes
* in the root2 tree based on their value
*
* #param node
*/
public void addUtil(BSTNode node) {
if (null != node) {
addUtil(node.getLeft());
mergeToSecondTree(root2, node.getData());
addUtil(node.getRight());
}
}
/**
* This method adds the nodes found from root1 tree as part it's inorder
* traversal and add it to the second tree.
*
* This method follows simple Binary Search Tree inserstion logic to insert
* a node considering the tree already exists.
*
* #param node
* #param data
* #return
*/
public BSTNode mergeToSecondTree(BSTNode node, int data) {
if (null == node) {
node = new BSTNode(data);
} else {
if (data < node.getData()) {
node.setLeft(mergeToSecondTree(node.getLeft(), data));
} else if (data > node.getData()) {
node.setRight(mergeToSecondTree(node.getRight(), data));
}
}
return node;
}
/**
*
* #param args
*/
public static void main(String[] args) {
MergeTwoBST_to_BalancedBST mergeTwoBST = new MergeTwoBST_to_BalancedBST();
mergeTwoBST.mergeTwoBinarySearchTree();
}
}
BSTNode.java:
public class BSTNode {
BSTNode left, right;
int data;
/* Default constructor */
public BSTNode() {
left = null;
right = null;
data = 0;
}
/* Constructor */
public BSTNode(int data) {
left = null;
right = null;
this.data = data;
}
public BSTNode getLeft() {
return left;
}
public void setLeft(BSTNode left) {
this.left = left;
}
public BSTNode getRight() {
return right;
}
public void setRight(BSTNode right) {
this.right = right;
}
public int getData() {
return data;
}
public void setData(int data) {
this.data = data;
}
}
This is an interview question
I think of a solution.
It uses queue.
public Void BFS()
{
Queue q = new Queue();
q.Enqueue(root);
Console.WriteLine(root.Value);
while (q.count > 0)
{
Node n = q.DeQueue();
if (n.left !=null)
{
Console.Writeln(n.left);
q.EnQueue(n.left);
}
if (n.right !=null)
{
Console.Writeln(n.right);
q.EnQueue(n.right);
}
}
}
Can anything think of better solution than this, which doesn't use Queue?
Level by level traversal is known as Breadth-first traversal. Using a Queue is the proper way to do this. If you wanted to do a depth first traversal you would use a stack.
The way you have it is not quite standard though.
Here's how it should be.
public Void BFS()
{
Queue q = new Queue();
q.Enqueue(root);//You don't need to write the root here, it will be written in the loop
while (q.count > 0)
{
Node n = q.DeQueue();
Console.Writeln(n.Value); //Only write the value when you dequeue it
if (n.left !=null)
{
q.EnQueue(n.left);//enqueue the left child
}
if (n.right !=null)
{
q.EnQueue(n.right);//enque the right child
}
}
}
Edit
Here's the algorithm at work.
Say you had a tree like so:
1
/ \
2 3
/ / \
4 5 6
First, the root (1) would be enqueued. The loop is then entered.
first item in queue (1) is dequeued and printed.
1's children are enqueued from left to right, the queue now contains {2, 3}
back to start of loop
first item in queue (2) is dequeued and printed
2's children are enqueued form left to right, the queue now contains {3, 4}
back to start of loop
...
The queue will contain these values over each loop
1: {1}
2: {2, 3}
3: {3, 4}
4: {4, 5, 6}
5: {5, 6}
6: {6}
7: {}//empty, loop terminates
Output:
1
2
3
4
5
6
Since the question requires printing the tree level by level, there should be a way to determine when to print the new line character on the console. Here's my code which tries to do the same by appending NewLine node to the queue,
void PrintByLevel(Node *root)
{
Queue q;
Node *newline = new Node("\n");
Node *v;
q->enque(root);
q->enque(newline);
while(!q->empty()) {
v = q->deque();
if(v == newline) {
printf("\n");
if(!q->empty())
q->enque(newline);
}
else {
printf("%s", v->val);
if(v->Left)
q-enque(v->left);
if(v->right)
q->enque(v->right);
}
}
delete newline;
}
Let's see some Scala solutions. First, I'll define a very basic binary tree:
case class Tree[+T](value: T, left: Option[Tree[T]], right: Option[Tree[T]])
We'll use the following tree:
1
/ \
2 3
/ / \
4 5 6
You define the tree like this:
val myTree = Tree(1,
Some(Tree(2,
Some(Tree(4, None, None)),
None
)
),
Some(Tree(3,
Some(Tree(5, None, None)),
Some(Tree(6, None, None))
)
)
)
We'll define a breadthFirst function which will traverse the tree applying the desired function to each element. With this, we'll define a print function and use it like this:
def printTree(tree: Tree[Any]) =
breadthFirst(tree, (t: Tree[Any]) => println(t.value))
printTree(myTree)
Now, Scala solution, recursive, lists but no queues:
def breadthFirst[T](t: Tree[T], f: Tree[T] => Unit): Unit = {
def traverse(trees: List[Tree[T]]): Unit = trees match {
case Nil => // do nothing
case _ =>
val children = for{tree <- trees
Some(child) <- List(tree.left, tree.right)}
yield child
trees map f
traverse(children)
}
traverse(List(t))
}
Next, Scala solution, queue, no recursion:
def breadthFirst[T](t: Tree[T], f: Tree[T] => Unit): Unit = {
import scala.collection.mutable.Queue
val queue = new Queue[Option[Tree[T]]]
import queue._
enqueue(Some(t))
while(!isEmpty)
dequeue match {
case Some(tree) =>
f(tree)
enqueue(tree.left)
enqueue(tree.right)
case None =>
}
}
That recursive solution is fully functional, though I have an uneasy feeling that it can be further simplified.
The queue version is not functional, but it is highly effective. The bit about importing an object is unusual in Scala, but put to good use here.
C++:
struct node{
string key;
struct node *left, *right;
};
void printBFS(struct node *root){
std::queue<struct node *> q;
q.push(root);
while(q.size() > 0){
int levelNodes = q.size();
while(levelNodes > 0){
struct node *p = q.front();
q.pop();
cout << " " << p->key ;
if(p->left != NULL) q.push(p->left);
if(p->right != NULL) q.push(p->right);
levelNodes--;
}
cout << endl;
}
}
Input :
Balanced tree created from:
string a[] = {"a","b","c","d","e","f","g","h","i","j","k","l","m","n"};
Output:
g
c k
a e i m
b d f h j l n
Algorithm:
Create an ArrayList of Linked List Nodes.
Do the level order traversal using queue(Breadth First Search).
For getting all the nodes at each level, before you take out a node from queue, store the size of the queue in a variable, say you call it as levelNodes.
Now while levelNodes > 0, take out the nodes and print it and add their children into the queue.
After this while loop put a line break.
P.S: I know the OP said, no queue. My answer is just to show if someone is looking for a C++ solution using queue.
public class LevelOrderTraversalQueue {
Queue<Nodes> qe = new LinkedList<Nodes>();
public void printLevelOrder(Nodes root)
{
if(root == null) return;
qe.add(root);
int count = qe.size();
while(count!=0)
{
System.out.print(qe.peek().getValue());
System.out.print(" ");
if(qe.peek().getLeft()!=null) qe.add(qe.peek().getLeft());
if(qe.peek().getRight()!=null) qe.add(qe.peek().getRight());
qe.remove(); count = count -1;
if(count == 0 )
{
System.out.println(" ");
count = qe.size();
}
}
}
}
In order to print out by level, you can store the level information with the node as a tuple to add to the queue. Then you can print a new line whenever the level is changed. Here is a Python code to do so.
from collections import deque
class BTreeNode:
def __init__(self, data, left=None, right=None):
self.data = data
self.left = left
self.right = right
def printLevel(self):
""" Breadth-first traversal, print out the data by level """
level = 0
lastPrintedLevel = 0
visit = deque([])
visit.append((self, level))
while len(visit) != 0:
item = visit.popleft()
if item[1] != lastPrintedLevel: #New line for a new level
lastPrintedLevel +=1
print
print item[0].data,
if item[0].left != None:
visit.append((item[0].left, item[1] + 1))
if item[0].right != None:
visit.append((item[0].right, item[1] + 1))
Try this one (Complete code) :
class HisTree
{
public static class HisNode
{
private int data;
private HisNode left;
private HisNode right;
public HisNode() {}
public HisNode(int _data , HisNode _left , HisNode _right)
{
data = _data;
right = _right;
left = _left;
}
public HisNode(int _data)
{
data = _data;
}
}
public static int height(HisNode root)
{
if (root == null)
{
return 0;
}
else
{
return 1 + Math.max(height(root.left), height(root.right));
}
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
// 1
// / \
// / \
// 2 3
// / \ / \
// 4 5 6 7
// /
// 21
HisNode root1 = new HisNode(3 , new HisNode(6) , new HisNode(7));
HisNode root3 = new HisNode(4 , new HisNode(21) , null);
HisNode root2 = new HisNode(2 , root3 , new HisNode(5));
HisNode root = new HisNode(1 , root2 , root1);
printByLevels(root);
}
private static void printByLevels(HisNode root) {
List<HisNode> nodes = Arrays.asList(root);
printByLevels(nodes);
}
private static void printByLevels(List<HisNode> nodes)
{
if (nodes == null || (nodes != null && nodes.size() <= 0))
{
return;
}
List <HisNode> nodeList = new LinkedList<HisNode>();
for (HisNode node : nodes)
{
if (node != null)
{
System.out.print(node.data);
System.out.print(" , ");
nodeList.add(node.left);
nodeList.add(node.right);
}
}
System.out.println();
if (nodeList != null && !CheckIfNull(nodeList))
{
printByLevels(nodeList);
}
else
{
return;
}
}
private static boolean CheckIfNull(List<HisNode> list)
{
for(HisNode elem : list)
{
if (elem != null)
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
}
I think what you expecting is to print the nodes at each level either separated by a space or a comma and the levels be separated by a new line. This is how I would code up the algorithm. We know that when we do a breadth-first search on a graph or tree and insert the nodes in a queue, all nodes in the queue coming out will be either at the same level as the one previous or a new level which is parent level + 1 and nothing else.
So when you are at a level keep printing out the node values and as soon as you find that the level of the node increases by 1, then you insert a new line before starting to print all the nodes at that level.
This is my code which does not use much memory and only the queue is needed for everything.
Assuming the tree starts from the root.
queue = [(root, 0)] # Store the node along with its level.
prev = 0
while queue:
node, level = queue.pop(0)
if level == prev:
print(node.val, end = "")
else:
print()
print(node.val, end = "")
if node.left:
queue.append((node.left, level + 1))
if node.right:
queue.append((node.right, level + 1))
prev = level
At the end all you need is the queue for all the processing.
I tweaked the answer so that it shows the null nodes and prints it by height.
Was actually fairly decent for testing the balance of a red black tree. can
also add the color into the print line to check black height.
Queue<node> q = new Queue<node>();
int[] arr = new int[]{1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256};
int i =0;
int b = 0;
int keeper = 0;
public void BFS()
{
q.Enqueue(root);
while (q.Count > 0)
{
node n = q.Dequeue();
if (i == arr[b])
{
System.Diagnostics.Debug.Write("\r\n"+"("+n.id+")");
b++;
i =0 ;
}
else {
System.Diagnostics.Debug.Write("(" + n.id + ")");
}
i++;
if (n.id != -1)
{
if (n.left != null)
{
q.Enqueue(n.left);
}
else
{
node c = new node();
c.id = -1;
c.color = 'b';
q.Enqueue(c);
}
if (n.right != null)
{
q.Enqueue(n.right);
}
else
{
node c = new node();
c.id = -1;
c.color = 'b';
q.Enqueue(c);
}
}
}
i = 0;
b = 0;
System.Diagnostics.Debug.Write("\r\n");
}
Of course you don't need to use queue. This is in python.
# Function to print level order traversal of tree
def printLevelOrder(root):
h = height(root)
for i in range(1, h+1):
printGivenLevel(root, i)
# Print nodes at a given level
def printGivenLevel(root , level):
if root is None:
return
if level == 1:
print "%d" %(root.data),
elif level > 1 :
printGivenLevel(root.left , level-1)
printGivenLevel(root.right , level-1)
""" Compute the height of a tree--the number of nodes
along the longest path from the root node down to
the farthest leaf node
"""
def height(node):
if node is None:
return 0
else :
# Compute the height of each subtree
lheight = height(node.left)
rheight = height(node.right)
return max(lheight, reight)
Try with below code.
public void printLevelOrder(TreeNode root) {
if (root == null) {
return;
}
Queue<TreeNode> nodesToVisit = new LinkedList<>();
nodesToVisit.add(root);
int count = nodesToVisit.size();
while (count != 0) {
TreeNode node = nodesToVisit.remove();
System.out.print(" " + node.data);
if (node.left != null) {
nodesToVisit.add(node.left);
}
if (node.right != null) {
nodesToVisit.add(node.right);
}
count--;
if (count == 0) {
System.out.println("");
count = nodesToVisit.size();
}
}
}
here is my answer.
//for level order traversal
func forEachLevelOrder(_ visit : (TreeNode) -> Void) {
visit(self)
var queue = Queue<TreeNode>()
children.forEach {
queue.Enqueue($0)
}
while let node = queue.Dequeue() {
visit(node)
node.children.forEach { queue.Enqueue($0)}
}
}
children is an array here that stores the children of a node.