AVL-Tree | This project is an implementation of AVL-Tree data structure | Dataset library

by SamanKhamesian Java Version: Current License: Apache-2.0

X-Ray Key Features Code Snippets Community Discussions(6)Vulnerabilities Install Support

kandi X-RAY | AVL-Tree Summary

AVL-Tree is a Java library typically used in Artificial Intelligence, Dataset applications. AVL-Tree has no bugs, it has no vulnerabilities, it has a Permissive License and it has low support. However AVL-Tree build file is not available. You can download it from GitHub.

This project is an implementation of AVL-Tree data structure

Support

Quality

Security

License

Reuse

Support

AVL-Tree has a low active ecosystem.

It has 7 star(s) with 0 fork(s). There are 1 watchers for this library.

It had no major release in the last 6 months.

AVL-Tree has no issues reported. There are no pull requests.

It has a neutral sentiment in the developer community.

The latest version of AVL-Tree is current.

Quality

AVL-Tree has 0 bugs and 0 code smells.

Security

AVL-Tree has no vulnerabilities reported, and its dependent libraries have no vulnerabilities reported.

AVL-Tree code analysis shows 0 unresolved vulnerabilities.

There are 0 security hotspots that need review.

License

AVL-Tree is licensed under the Apache-2.0 License. This license is Permissive.

Permissive licenses have the least restrictions, and you can use them in most projects.

Reuse

AVL-Tree releases are not available. You will need to build from source code and install.

AVL-Tree has no build file. You will be need to create the build yourself to build the component from source.

It has 229 lines of code, 18 functions and 3 files.

It has medium code complexity. Code complexity directly impacts maintainability of the code.

Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA

kandi has reviewed AVL-Tree and discovered the below as its top functions. This is intended to give you an instant insight into AVL-Tree implemented functionality, and help decide if they suit your requirements.

Demonstrates how to show a query
Removes a key from the AVL tree
Show a pre - order of the AVL tree
Show the in - order of AVL tree
Resolves a tree node if necessary
Rotate the left node to the left of the tree
Rotate the AVL tree
Inserts a new node into the AVL tree
Adds a new node
Delete a key from AVL
Updates the height of a node
Finds the smallest key in a tree
Returns the balance of a node
Get the height of a node
Returns the depth of a key
Searches for a binary search

Get all kandi verified functions for this library.

AVL-Tree Key Features

No Key Features are available at this moment for AVL-Tree.

AVL-Tree Examples and Code Snippets

No Code Snippets are available at this moment for AVL-Tree.

Community Discussions

Trending Discussions on AVL-Tree

Finding Height of a node in an AVL Tree for Balance Factor calculation

AVL Tree implementation: Insert function - Reference get twisted

I'm getting a error on an AVL tree search problem

casting Integer -> Object and later Object -> Integer

Efficient comparison based set-like data structure for insertion and lookup but no deletion

Is the LL Rotation a single left Rotation or a single right Rotation?

QUESTION

Finding Height of a node in an AVL Tree for Balance Factor calculation

Asked 2022-Jan-14 at 10:58

AVL tree is a binary search tree that is balanced i.e height = O(log(n)). This is achieved by making sure every node follows the AVL tree property:

Height of the left subtree(LST) - Height of the right subtree(RST) is in the range [-1, 0, 1]

where Height(LST) - Height(RST) is called Balance factor(BF) for a given node.

The height of the node is usually defined as, "length of the path(#edges) from that node to the deepest node" eg:

By this definition, height of leaf is 0. But almost everytime while discussing AVL trees, people consider height of the leaf to be 1.

My question is, can we take the height of leaf to be 0? This will make following BSTs also AVL trees, right?

Height concept confuses me because of these articles:

Firstly, they start the height with 0. Then they say, minimum number of nodes required for avl tree of height 2 to be 4 BUT if height is starting with zero, I can have the following AVL trees too, right?

...

ANSWER

Answered 2022-Jan-14 at 10:58

By this definition, height of leaf is 0.

This is correct.

BUT if height is starting with zero, I can have the following AVL trees too, right?

No, the parent of the leaf has height 1, as the path from that node to the leaf has 1 edge.

So it should be:

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/70705044

QUESTION

AVL Tree implementation: Insert function - Reference get twisted

Asked 2021-Oct-01 at 18:07

I got the bug when adding 13 to the tree, the left and right pointer of node 10 have reference back to the root, and create cycle reference.

I think it's because I understand Javascript syntax wrong.

code (open the console)

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-Oct-01 at 18:07

The problem is that you don't use the returned node reference from the recursive call of insert. insert may return a different node than the one it got as argument. By not assigning it back to node.left or node.right, the latter will keep a reference to the non-cloned node, giving you an inconsistent tree.

So change this:

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/69403153

QUESTION

I'm getting a error on an AVL tree search problem

Asked 2021-Apr-13 at 20:54

I'm trying to do a search function for an AVL-tree, when i try to search for a number that is in the tree the code works fine, but i'm getting the error

AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'search'

when a try to search for a number that isn't in the tree

This is the search function

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-Apr-13 at 20:54

    def search(self, data):
   
      if self is None:
        return "the key doesn't exist"  
      elif data < self.data:
        return self.left.busca(data)
      elif data > self.data:
        return self.right.busca(data)
      else:
        return "the key exist"

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67081800

QUESTION

casting Integer -> Object and later Object -> Integer

Asked 2021-Mar-06 at 04:55

Below is a code snippet out of an AVL-tree implementation. It worked fine back in the days, but now it doesn't work any longer. The cause seems to be casting Object to Integer.

So the Avl structure handles Object as data, and the user (in this case main() ) does the casting. What I wanted to achieve was a generic AVL-tree with comparable objects. Actually I insert Objects alongside with a key to be able to distinguish what to sort for. They are internally put in a local class called KeyData.

Here is the code:

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-Mar-06 at 04:55

...so what's the story?

The short version is that your find method doesn't return an Integer value. So you can't cast it to an Integer.

It worked fine back in the days, but now it doesn't work any longer.

Well, you must have changed something significant in your code between then and now. (Hint: the Java language or its implementations have not changed in ways that would cause this!)

So lets take a look at your find method.

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66492645

QUESTION

Efficient comparison based set-like data structure for insertion and lookup but no deletion

Asked 2020-Sep-15 at 14:49

Structures like AVL-Tree and RB-Tree should be fast enough for most uses. But is there any room for optimization if there is no need for deletion?

To be specific, I wonder if there is a container type optimized for the scenario described below:

It's set-like, i.e. it stores unique values.
It's based on comparison, e.g. < operator, rather than hash.
It support insertion and lookup, i.e. checking whether it contains a value or not.
There is no need for deletion, i.e. values will never be remove from it.

...

ANSWER

Answered 2020-Sep-15 at 14:49

In theory, no, since the Ω(log n) bound on comparisons still applies to comparison-based sets without deletion.

In practice, I'm not aware of any comparison-based structures that yield an empirical improvement, other than that deletion is often more complicated than insertion, and you don't have to code it. (Bloom filters are an example of a hash-based data structure where not having deletion yields a performance improvement.)

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63903921

QUESTION

Is the LL Rotation a single left Rotation or a single right Rotation?

Asked 2020-Aug-21 at 14:27

As this for example,

In this post, it says the LL Rotation is a single left Rotation. https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/avl-tree-insertion-rotation-and-balance-factor/

However, from the wiki of tree rotation, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_rotation, I think that is a single right Rotation?

What is more, I also see, https://www.codingeek.com/data-structure/avl-tree-introduction-to-rotations-and-its-implementation/. This says it is a RR Rotation and it is a single right Rotation?

I am confused for the different opinions. Can anyone tell me the truth for the above picture?

Is it a LL Rotation?
Is it a single left rotation or a single right rotation?

...

ANSWER

Answered 2020-Aug-21 at 14:27

First of all, all the referenced websites agree that the depicted example represents a single right rotation.

You write:

As this for example, LL tree rotation

In this post, it says the LL Rotation is a single left Rotation https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/avl-tree-insertion-rotation-and-balance-factor/

Indeed, although there is no ambiguity for what the terms "left rotation" and "right rotation" mean, there seem to be two contradictory interpretations floating around for what "LL rotation" and "RR rotation" stand for.

However, from the wiki of tree rotation, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_rotation, I think that is a single right Rotation?

Well the Wikipedia article does not use the term "LL rotation". But it does also agree that the depicted example represents a right rotation. There is so far no ambiguity for the terms "left rotation" and "right rotation".

Can anyone tell me the truth for the above picture?

Like all those sites explain: it is a single right rotation.

LL, RR

The ambiguity arises in the use of the terms "LL rotation" and "RR rotation":

The acronyms "LL" and "RR" make more sense in describing the imbalance before any rotation is performed. The Wikipedia article categorises imbalanced trees in 4 categories (4 columns):

In each column you see the original state at the top, and then below it the result of the rotation(s) that should be performed to bring the tree in balance.

So for a tree in the Left Left case, we need a right rotation. And for a tree in the Right Right case we need a left rotation.

The following notes of an ICS course at University of California, Irvine, explain where the letters LL, RR, LR, RL come from:

The rotation is chosen considering the two links along the path below the node where the imbalance is, heading back down toward where you inserted a node. (If you were wondering where the names LL, RR, LR, and RL come from, this is the answer to that mystery.)

If the two links are both to the left, perform an LL rotation rooted where the imbalance is.

If the two links are both to the right, perform an RR rotation rooted where the imbalance is.

If the first link is to the left and the second is to the right, perform an LR rotation rooted where the imbalance is.

If the first link is to the right and the second is to the left, perform an RL rotation rooted where the imbalance is.

But I feel speaking of LL rotation can trigger confusion, as here we see that the double LL describes the imbalance of the original state, and does not describe the action. It would have been cleaner to speak of an LL state (or imbalance) and then name the resolving action a "right rotation". With that in mind, I think the Wikipedia article takes a good position, as it avoids the term "LL rotation".

This misunderstanding does not arise with LR and RL rotations. You can say that the initial state is LR (the imbalance was caused by giving a left leaf a right child), and you can also say that first a left rotation is needed, and then a right rotation. In both cases the abbreviation LR makes sense. So no ambiguity there.

Conclusion

The terms left rotation and right rotation are clear.

There are different traditions for which of these rotations to call an LL or RR rotation. In my opinion we should avoid talking about "LL rotation" or "RR rotation", as these letters do not describe the act of the rotation, but the initial state. It is better to speak of the "LL case" or "LL imbalance".

With those terms we can say:

A tree with an LL imbalance needs a right rotation
A tree with a RR imbalance needs a left rotation

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63452633

Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network

Vulnerabilities

No vulnerabilities reported

Install AVL-Tree

You can download it from GitHub.
You can use AVL-Tree like any standard Java library. Please include the the jar files in your classpath. You can also use any IDE and you can run and debug the AVL-Tree component as you would do with any other Java program. Best practice is to use a build tool that supports dependency management such as Maven or Gradle. For Maven installation, please refer maven.apache.org. For Gradle installation, please refer gradle.org .

Support

For any new features, suggestions and bugs create an issue on GitHub. If you have any questions check and ask questions on community page Stack Overflow .

Find more information at: