I have the following algorithm and the runtime complexity is O(N^2) but I want to have a deeper understanding of it rather than just memorizing common runtimes.
What would be the right approach to break it down and analyze it with i+1
in the inner for loop taken into account?
void printunorderedPairs(int[] array) {
for(int i=0; i<array.length; i++) {
for(int j=i+1; j<array.length; j++) {
System.out.println(array[i] + "," + array[j]);
}
}
}
EDIT
Asking for how to analyze a specific question
What would be the right approach to break it down and analyze it
Take pencil and paper and put down some loops unwraped:
i inner loops per i
-------------------------------
1 length - 1
2 length - 2
.. ..
k length - k
.. ..
length - 1 1
length 0
Now, in order to obtain the total time required, let's sum up the inner loops:
(length - 1) + (length - 2) + ... + (length - k) ... + 1 + 0
It's an arithmetic progression, and its sum is
((length - 1) + 0) / 2 * length == length**2 / 2 - length / 2 = O(length**2)
Let T
= the number of times the inner loop runs.
About half the time, when i<array.length/2
, it runs at least array.length/2
times. So, for about array.length/2 outer iterations, the inner loop runs at least array.length/2 times, therefore:
T >= (N/2)*(N/2)
i.e.,
T >= N²/4
This is in O(N²). Also, though, for all array.length outer iterations, the inner loop runs at most array.length times, so:
T <= N*N, i.e.,
T <= N²
This is also in O(N²). Since we have upper and lower bounds on the time that are both in O(N²), we know that T is in O(N²).
NOTE: Technically we only need to upper bound to show that T is in O(N²), but we're usually looking for bounds as tight as we can get. T is actually in Ө(N²).
NOTE ALSO: there's nothing special about using halves above -- any constant proportion will do. These are the general rules in play:
Lower bound: If you do at least Ω(N) work at least Ω(N) times, you are doing Ω(N²) work. Ω(N)*Ω(N) = Ω(N²)
Upper bound: If you do at most O(N) work at most O(N) times, you are doing O(N²) work. O(N)*O(N) = O(N²)
And since we have both, we can use: Ω(N²) ∩ O(N²) = Ө(N²)