Is it possible to compare two binary trees in less than O(n log n) time?












6














I wrote a java routine to compare 2 binary trees. I am looking for better algorithms that run in less time. 



 public class TreeNode {

  int val;

  TreeNode left;

  TreeNode right;

  TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }

 }



 class Solution {

  public boolean isSameTree(TreeNode p, TreeNode q) {



    if  ( p == null && q==null)

        return true;



    if (p == null || q == null) 

        return false;



    if ( (p.val == q.val) && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && 

      isSameTree(p.right, q.right))

        return true;

    else 

        return false;  

   }   

  }


My code takes O(n log n) time.



How to approach reducing the time required?






java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree







share|improve this question
























  • If you happen to have a size variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
    – Boann
    1 hour ago
















6














I wrote a java routine to compare 2 binary trees. I am looking for better algorithms that run in less time. 



 public class TreeNode {

  int val;

  TreeNode left;

  TreeNode right;

  TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }

 }



 class Solution {

  public boolean isSameTree(TreeNode p, TreeNode q) {



    if  ( p == null && q==null)

        return true;



    if (p == null || q == null) 

        return false;



    if ( (p.val == q.val) && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && 

      isSameTree(p.right, q.right))

        return true;

    else 

        return false;  

   }   

  }


My code takes O(n log n) time.



How to approach reducing the time required?






java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree







share|improve this question
























  • If you happen to have a size variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
    – Boann
    1 hour ago














6












6








6


1





I wrote a java routine to compare 2 binary trees. I am looking for better algorithms that run in less time. 



 public class TreeNode {

  int val;

  TreeNode left;

  TreeNode right;

  TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }

 }



 class Solution {

  public boolean isSameTree(TreeNode p, TreeNode q) {



    if  ( p == null && q==null)

        return true;



    if (p == null || q == null) 

        return false;



    if ( (p.val == q.val) && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && 

      isSameTree(p.right, q.right))

        return true;

    else 

        return false;  

   }   

  }


My code takes O(n log n) time.



How to approach reducing the time required?






java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree







share|improve this question















I wrote a java routine to compare 2 binary trees. I am looking for better algorithms that run in less time. 



 public class TreeNode {

  int val;

  TreeNode left;

  TreeNode right;

  TreeNode(int x) { val = x; }

 }



 class Solution {

  public boolean isSameTree(TreeNode p, TreeNode q) {



    if  ( p == null && q==null)

        return true;



    if (p == null || q == null) 

        return false;



    if ( (p.val == q.val) && isSameTree(p.left, q.left) && 

      isSameTree(p.right, q.right))

        return true;

    else 

        return false;  

   }   

  }


My code takes O(n log n) time.



How to approach reducing the time required?






java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree




java algorithm time-complexity binary-tree






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 3 hours ago









nullpointer

43.8k1093179




43.8k1093179










asked 4 hours ago









Louise

311




311












  • If you happen to have a size variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
    – Boann
    1 hour ago


















  • If you happen to have a size variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
    – Boann
    1 hour ago
















If you happen to have a size variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
– Boann
1 hour ago




If you happen to have a size variable at the base of the structure, compare that first.
– Boann
1 hour ago












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















7














The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n), where n should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.



Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n).



Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2




    In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
    – Stephen C
    3 hours ago











Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54067216%2fis-it-possible-to-compare-two-binary-trees-in-less-than-on-log-n-time%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









7














The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n), where n should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.



Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n).



Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2




    In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
    – Stephen C
    3 hours ago
















7














The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n), where n should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.



Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n).



Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2




    In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
    – Stephen C
    3 hours ago














7












7








7






The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n), where n should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.



Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n).



Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.






share|improve this answer














The current runtime of your approach is actually O(n), where n should be the number of nodes of the tree with lesser(or if they're equal) nodes.



Also, note to compare all the values of a data structure you would have to visit all of them and that is the runtime you could achieve and not reduce further. In the current case, at the worst, you would have to visit all the nodes of the smaller tree and hence O(n).



Hence any other approach though might help you with conditional optimization, your current solution has an optimal runtime which cannot be reduced further.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 hours ago









ruakh

124k13197251




124k13197251










answered 3 hours ago









nullpointer

43.8k1093179




43.8k1093179








  • 2




    In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
    – Stephen C
    3 hours ago














  • 2




    In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
    – Stephen C
    3 hours ago








2




2




In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
3 hours ago




In fact ... it is O(n) worst case. The best case is O(1).
– Stephen C
3 hours ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f54067216%2fis-it-possible-to-compare-two-binary-trees-in-less-than-on-log-n-time%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Accessing regular linux commands in Huawei's Dopra Linux

Image
4 Backstory: I have a Huawei HG8245 router in my house and I want to change the default username/password. I've tried following this guide but the config file always gets reset. My ISP isn't helping either so I'm looking for other ways to accomplish this. The router has telnet access so this seems like a way to change the credentials. The first shell I gain access to looks like this: WAP> Pressing "?" gives me a list of available commands which I've pasted here, the two interesting ones are "su" and "shell". I can't seem to get su access, even after logging in as root (challenge password prompt, and then nothing happens), but shell gives me a proper linux shell. WAP>shell BusyBox v1.18.4 (2017-12-26 17:06:34 CST) built-in shell (ash) Enter 'hel
Read more

Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down

Image
up vote 3 down vote favorite I have bluez 5.4.3 and I am attempting to communicate with a ble device through minicom. These two deceives (my computer and a bluno nano) are alreadt paired and this has been my method so far. #bluetoothctl # pair xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx # exit Everything is working well so far then... #sudo rfcomm connect /dev/rfcomm0 xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx 1 & [1] 3665 Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down Does anyone know how to resolve this issue? Any help would be very much appreciated. bluetooth bluez share | improve this question asked Feb 9 '17 at 18:46 Brandon Knape 46 2
Read more

Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal Exception in Interrupt

Image
0 Every day this error occured on my pc, kernel panic error on interrupt, what will be the problem? linux-mint share asked 6 mins ago Vinod Selvin Vinod Selvin 1 1 New contributor Vinod Selvin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct. add a comment
Read more