| 1 | \section{\module{heapq} ---
|
|---|
| 2 | Heap queue algorithm}
|
|---|
| 3 |
|
|---|
| 4 | \declaremodule{standard}{heapq}
|
|---|
| 5 | \modulesynopsis{Heap queue algorithm (a.k.a. priority queue).}
|
|---|
| 6 | \moduleauthor{Kevin O'Connor}{}
|
|---|
| 7 | \sectionauthor{Guido van Rossum}{[email protected]}
|
|---|
| 8 | % Theoretical explanation:
|
|---|
| 9 | \sectionauthor{Fran\c cois Pinard}{}
|
|---|
| 10 | \versionadded{2.3}
|
|---|
| 11 |
|
|---|
| 12 |
|
|---|
| 13 | This module provides an implementation of the heap queue algorithm,
|
|---|
| 14 | also known as the priority queue algorithm.
|
|---|
| 15 |
|
|---|
| 16 | Heaps are arrays for which
|
|---|
| 17 | \code{\var{heap}[\var{k}] <= \var{heap}[2*\var{k}+1]} and
|
|---|
| 18 | \code{\var{heap}[\var{k}] <= \var{heap}[2*\var{k}+2]}
|
|---|
| 19 | for all \var{k}, counting elements from zero. For the sake of
|
|---|
| 20 | comparison, non-existing elements are considered to be infinite. The
|
|---|
| 21 | interesting property of a heap is that \code{\var{heap}[0]} is always
|
|---|
| 22 | its smallest element.
|
|---|
| 23 |
|
|---|
| 24 | The API below differs from textbook heap algorithms in two aspects:
|
|---|
| 25 | (a) We use zero-based indexing. This makes the relationship between the
|
|---|
| 26 | index for a node and the indexes for its children slightly less
|
|---|
| 27 | obvious, but is more suitable since Python uses zero-based indexing.
|
|---|
| 28 | (b) Our pop method returns the smallest item, not the largest (called a
|
|---|
| 29 | "min heap" in textbooks; a "max heap" is more common in texts because
|
|---|
| 30 | of its suitability for in-place sorting).
|
|---|
| 31 |
|
|---|
| 32 | These two make it possible to view the heap as a regular Python list
|
|---|
| 33 | without surprises: \code{\var{heap}[0]} is the smallest item, and
|
|---|
| 34 | \code{\var{heap}.sort()} maintains the heap invariant!
|
|---|
| 35 |
|
|---|
| 36 | To create a heap, use a list initialized to \code{[]}, or you can
|
|---|
| 37 | transform a populated list into a heap via function \function{heapify()}.
|
|---|
| 38 |
|
|---|
| 39 | The following functions are provided:
|
|---|
| 40 |
|
|---|
| 41 | \begin{funcdesc}{heappush}{heap, item}
|
|---|
| 42 | Push the value \var{item} onto the \var{heap}, maintaining the
|
|---|
| 43 | heap invariant.
|
|---|
| 44 | \end{funcdesc}
|
|---|
| 45 |
|
|---|
| 46 | \begin{funcdesc}{heappop}{heap}
|
|---|
| 47 | Pop and return the smallest item from the \var{heap}, maintaining the
|
|---|
| 48 | heap invariant. If the heap is empty, \exception{IndexError} is raised.
|
|---|
| 49 | \end{funcdesc}
|
|---|
| 50 |
|
|---|
| 51 | \begin{funcdesc}{heapify}{x}
|
|---|
| 52 | Transform list \var{x} into a heap, in-place, in linear time.
|
|---|
| 53 | \end{funcdesc}
|
|---|
| 54 |
|
|---|
| 55 | \begin{funcdesc}{heapreplace}{heap, item}
|
|---|
| 56 | Pop and return the smallest item from the \var{heap}, and also push
|
|---|
| 57 | the new \var{item}. The heap size doesn't change.
|
|---|
| 58 | If the heap is empty, \exception{IndexError} is raised.
|
|---|
| 59 | This is more efficient than \function{heappop()} followed
|
|---|
| 60 | by \function{heappush()}, and can be more appropriate when using
|
|---|
| 61 | a fixed-size heap. Note that the value returned may be larger
|
|---|
| 62 | than \var{item}! That constrains reasonable uses of this routine
|
|---|
| 63 | unless written as part of a conditional replacement:
|
|---|
| 64 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 65 | if item > heap[0]:
|
|---|
| 66 | item = heapreplace(heap, item)
|
|---|
| 67 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 68 | \end{funcdesc}
|
|---|
| 69 |
|
|---|
| 70 | Example of use:
|
|---|
| 71 |
|
|---|
| 72 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 73 | >>> from heapq import heappush, heappop
|
|---|
| 74 | >>> heap = []
|
|---|
| 75 | >>> data = [1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 2, 4, 6, 8, 0]
|
|---|
| 76 | >>> for item in data:
|
|---|
| 77 | ... heappush(heap, item)
|
|---|
| 78 | ...
|
|---|
| 79 | >>> sorted = []
|
|---|
| 80 | >>> while heap:
|
|---|
| 81 | ... sorted.append(heappop(heap))
|
|---|
| 82 | ...
|
|---|
| 83 | >>> print sorted
|
|---|
| 84 | [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
|
|---|
| 85 | >>> data.sort()
|
|---|
| 86 | >>> print data == sorted
|
|---|
| 87 | True
|
|---|
| 88 | >>>
|
|---|
| 89 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 90 |
|
|---|
| 91 | The module also offers two general purpose functions based on heaps.
|
|---|
| 92 |
|
|---|
| 93 | \begin{funcdesc}{nlargest}{n, iterable\optional{, key}}
|
|---|
| 94 | Return a list with the \var{n} largest elements from the dataset defined
|
|---|
| 95 | by \var{iterable}. \var{key}, if provided, specifies a function of one
|
|---|
| 96 | argument that is used to extract a comparison key from each element
|
|---|
| 97 | in the iterable: \samp{\var{key}=\function{str.lower}}
|
|---|
| 98 | Equivalent to: \samp{sorted(iterable, key=key, reverse=True)[:n]}
|
|---|
| 99 | \versionadded{2.4}
|
|---|
| 100 | \versionchanged[Added the optional \var{key} argument]{2.5}
|
|---|
| 101 | \end{funcdesc}
|
|---|
| 102 |
|
|---|
| 103 | \begin{funcdesc}{nsmallest}{n, iterable\optional{, key}}
|
|---|
| 104 | Return a list with the \var{n} smallest elements from the dataset defined
|
|---|
| 105 | by \var{iterable}. \var{key}, if provided, specifies a function of one
|
|---|
| 106 | argument that is used to extract a comparison key from each element
|
|---|
| 107 | in the iterable: \samp{\var{key}=\function{str.lower}}
|
|---|
| 108 | Equivalent to: \samp{sorted(iterable, key=key)[:n]}
|
|---|
| 109 | \versionadded{2.4}
|
|---|
| 110 | \versionchanged[Added the optional \var{key} argument]{2.5}
|
|---|
| 111 | \end{funcdesc}
|
|---|
| 112 |
|
|---|
| 113 | Both functions perform best for smaller values of \var{n}. For larger
|
|---|
| 114 | values, it is more efficient to use the \function{sorted()} function. Also,
|
|---|
| 115 | when \code{n==1}, it is more efficient to use the builtin \function{min()}
|
|---|
| 116 | and \function{max()} functions.
|
|---|
| 117 |
|
|---|
| 118 |
|
|---|
| 119 | \subsection{Theory}
|
|---|
| 120 |
|
|---|
| 121 | (This explanation is due to François Pinard. The Python
|
|---|
| 122 | code for this module was contributed by Kevin O'Connor.)
|
|---|
| 123 |
|
|---|
| 124 | Heaps are arrays for which \code{a[\var{k}] <= a[2*\var{k}+1]} and
|
|---|
| 125 | \code{a[\var{k}] <= a[2*\var{k}+2]}
|
|---|
| 126 | for all \var{k}, counting elements from 0. For the sake of comparison,
|
|---|
| 127 | non-existing elements are considered to be infinite. The interesting
|
|---|
| 128 | property of a heap is that \code{a[0]} is always its smallest element.
|
|---|
| 129 |
|
|---|
| 130 | The strange invariant above is meant to be an efficient memory
|
|---|
| 131 | representation for a tournament. The numbers below are \var{k}, not
|
|---|
| 132 | \code{a[\var{k}]}:
|
|---|
| 133 |
|
|---|
| 134 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 135 | 0
|
|---|
| 136 |
|
|---|
| 137 | 1 2
|
|---|
| 138 |
|
|---|
| 139 | 3 4 5 6
|
|---|
| 140 |
|
|---|
| 141 | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
|
|---|
| 142 |
|
|---|
| 143 | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
|
|---|
| 144 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 145 |
|
|---|
| 146 | In the tree above, each cell \var{k} is topping \code{2*\var{k}+1} and
|
|---|
| 147 | \code{2*\var{k}+2}.
|
|---|
| 148 | In an usual binary tournament we see in sports, each cell is the winner
|
|---|
| 149 | over the two cells it tops, and we can trace the winner down the tree
|
|---|
| 150 | to see all opponents s/he had. However, in many computer applications
|
|---|
| 151 | of such tournaments, we do not need to trace the history of a winner.
|
|---|
| 152 | To be more memory efficient, when a winner is promoted, we try to
|
|---|
| 153 | replace it by something else at a lower level, and the rule becomes
|
|---|
| 154 | that a cell and the two cells it tops contain three different items,
|
|---|
| 155 | but the top cell "wins" over the two topped cells.
|
|---|
| 156 |
|
|---|
| 157 | If this heap invariant is protected at all time, index 0 is clearly
|
|---|
| 158 | the overall winner. The simplest algorithmic way to remove it and
|
|---|
| 159 | find the "next" winner is to move some loser (let's say cell 30 in the
|
|---|
| 160 | diagram above) into the 0 position, and then percolate this new 0 down
|
|---|
| 161 | the tree, exchanging values, until the invariant is re-established.
|
|---|
| 162 | This is clearly logarithmic on the total number of items in the tree.
|
|---|
| 163 | By iterating over all items, you get an O(n log n) sort.
|
|---|
| 164 |
|
|---|
| 165 | A nice feature of this sort is that you can efficiently insert new
|
|---|
| 166 | items while the sort is going on, provided that the inserted items are
|
|---|
| 167 | not "better" than the last 0'th element you extracted. This is
|
|---|
| 168 | especially useful in simulation contexts, where the tree holds all
|
|---|
| 169 | incoming events, and the "win" condition means the smallest scheduled
|
|---|
| 170 | time. When an event schedule other events for execution, they are
|
|---|
| 171 | scheduled into the future, so they can easily go into the heap. So, a
|
|---|
| 172 | heap is a good structure for implementing schedulers (this is what I
|
|---|
| 173 | used for my MIDI sequencer :-).
|
|---|
| 174 |
|
|---|
| 175 | Various structures for implementing schedulers have been extensively
|
|---|
| 176 | studied, and heaps are good for this, as they are reasonably speedy,
|
|---|
| 177 | the speed is almost constant, and the worst case is not much different
|
|---|
| 178 | than the average case. However, there are other representations which
|
|---|
| 179 | are more efficient overall, yet the worst cases might be terrible.
|
|---|
| 180 |
|
|---|
| 181 | Heaps are also very useful in big disk sorts. You most probably all
|
|---|
| 182 | know that a big sort implies producing "runs" (which are pre-sorted
|
|---|
| 183 | sequences, which size is usually related to the amount of CPU memory),
|
|---|
| 184 | followed by a merging passes for these runs, which merging is often
|
|---|
| 185 | very cleverly organised\footnote{The disk balancing algorithms which
|
|---|
| 186 | are current, nowadays, are
|
|---|
| 187 | more annoying than clever, and this is a consequence of the seeking
|
|---|
| 188 | capabilities of the disks. On devices which cannot seek, like big
|
|---|
| 189 | tape drives, the story was quite different, and one had to be very
|
|---|
| 190 | clever to ensure (far in advance) that each tape movement will be the
|
|---|
| 191 | most effective possible (that is, will best participate at
|
|---|
| 192 | "progressing" the merge). Some tapes were even able to read
|
|---|
| 193 | backwards, and this was also used to avoid the rewinding time.
|
|---|
| 194 | Believe me, real good tape sorts were quite spectacular to watch!
|
|---|
| 195 | From all times, sorting has always been a Great Art! :-)}.
|
|---|
| 196 | It is very important that the initial
|
|---|
| 197 | sort produces the longest runs possible. Tournaments are a good way
|
|---|
| 198 | to that. If, using all the memory available to hold a tournament, you
|
|---|
| 199 | replace and percolate items that happen to fit the current run, you'll
|
|---|
| 200 | produce runs which are twice the size of the memory for random input,
|
|---|
| 201 | and much better for input fuzzily ordered.
|
|---|
| 202 |
|
|---|
| 203 | Moreover, if you output the 0'th item on disk and get an input which
|
|---|
| 204 | may not fit in the current tournament (because the value "wins" over
|
|---|
| 205 | the last output value), it cannot fit in the heap, so the size of the
|
|---|
| 206 | heap decreases. The freed memory could be cleverly reused immediately
|
|---|
| 207 | for progressively building a second heap, which grows at exactly the
|
|---|
| 208 | same rate the first heap is melting. When the first heap completely
|
|---|
| 209 | vanishes, you switch heaps and start a new run. Clever and quite
|
|---|
| 210 | effective!
|
|---|
| 211 |
|
|---|
| 212 | In a word, heaps are useful memory structures to know. I use them in
|
|---|
| 213 | a few applications, and I think it is good to keep a `heap' module
|
|---|
| 214 | around. :-)
|
|---|