What is Big O notation? Do you use it? [duplicate]

Answer 1

Every programmer should be aware of what Big O notation is, how it applies for actions with common data structures and algorithms (and thus pick the correct DS and algorithm for the problem they are solving), and how to calculate it for their own algorithms.

1) It's an order of measurement of the efficiency of an algorithm when working on a data structure.

2) Actions like 'add' / 'sort' / 'remove' can take different amounts of time with different data structures (and algorithms), for example 'add' and 'find' are O(1) for a hashmap, but O(log n) for a binary tree. Sort is O(nlog n) for QuickSort, but O(n^2) for BubbleSort, when dealing with a plain array.

3) Calculations can be done by looking at the loop depth of your algorithm generally. No loops, O(1), loops iterating over all the set (even if they break out at some point) O(n). If the loop halves the search space on each iteration? O(log n). Take the highest O() for a sequence of loops, and multiply the O() when you nest loops.

Yeah, it's more complex than that. If you're really interested get a textbook.

Answer 2

Big O notation denotes the limiting factor of an algorithm. Its a simplified expression of how run time of an algorithm scales with relation to the input.

For example (in Java):

/** Takes an array of strings and concatenates them
  * This is a silly way of doing things but it gets the 
  * point across hopefully
  * @param strings the array of strings to concatenate
  * @returns a string that is a result of the concatenation of all the strings
  *          in the array
  */
public static String badConcat(String[] Strings){
    String totalString = "";
    for(String s : strings) {
        for(int i = 0; i < s.length(); i++){
            totalString += s.charAt(i);
        }
    }
    return totalString;
}

Now think about what this is actually doing. It is going through every character of input and adding them together. This seems straightforward. The problem is that String is immutable. So every time you add a letter onto the string you have to create a new String. To do this you have to copy the values from the old string into the new string and add the new character.

This means you will be copying the first letter n times where n is the number of characters in the input. You will be copying the character n-1 times, so in total there will be (n-1)(n/2) copies.

This is (n^2-n)/2 and for Big O notation we use only the highest magnitude factor (usually) and drop any constants that are multiplied by it and we end up with O(n^2).

Using something like a StringBuilder will be along the lines of O(nLog(n)). If you calculate the number of characters at the beginning and set the capacity of the StringBuilder you can get it to be O(n).

So if we had 1000 characters of input, the first example would perform roughly a million operations, StringBuilder would perform 10,000, and the StringBuilder with setCapacity would perform 1000 operations to do the same thing. This is rough estimate, but O(n) notation is about orders of magnitudes, not exact runtime.

It's not something I use per say on a regular basis. It is, however, constantly in the back of my mind when trying to figure out the best algorithm for doing something.

Answer 3

What is Big O notation?

Big O notation is a method of expressing the relationship between many steps an algorithm will require related to the size of the input data. This is referred to as the algorithmic complexity. For example sorting a list of size N using Bubble Sort takes O(N^2) steps.

Do I use Big O notation?

I do use Big O notation on occasion to convey algorithmic complexity to fellow programmers. I use the underlying theory (e.g. Big O analysis techniques) all of the time when I think about what algorithms to use.

Concrete Examples?

I have used the theory of complexity analysis to create algorithms for efficient stack data structures which require no memory reallocation, and which support average time of O(N) for indexing. I have used Big O notation to explain the algorithm to other people. I have also used complexity analysis to understand when linear time sorting O(N) is possible.

Answer 4

One important thing most people forget when talking about Big-O, thus I feel the need to mention that:

You cannot use Big-O to compare the speed of two algorithms. Big-O only says how much slower an algorithm will get (approximately) if you double the number of items processed, or how much faster it will get if you cut the number in half.

However, if you have two entirely different algorithms and one (A) is O(n^2) and the other one (B) is O(log n), it is not said that A is slower than B. Actually, with 100 items, A might be ten times faster than B. It only says that with 200 items, A will grow slower by the factor n^2 and B will grow slower by the factor log n. So, if you benchmark both and you know how much time A takes to process 100 items, and how much time B needs for the same 100 items, and A is faster than B, you can calculate at what amount of items B will overtake A in speed (as the speed of B decreases much slower than the one of A, it will overtake A sooner or later—this is for sure).

Answer 5

It may also be worth considering that the complexity of many algorithms is based on more than one variable, particularly in multi-dimensional problems. For example, I recently had to write an algorithm for the following. Given a set of n points, and m polygons, extract all the points that lie in any of the polygons. The complexity is based around two known variables, n and m, and the unknown of how many points are in each polygon. The big O notation here is quite a bit more involved than O(f(n)) or even O(f(n) + g(m)). Big O is good when you are dealing with large numbers of homogenous items, but don't expect this to always be the case.

It is also worth noting that the actual number of iterations over the data is often dependent on the data. Quicksort is usually quick, but give it presorted data and it slows down. My points and polygons alogorithm ended up quite fast, close to O(n + (m log(m)), based on prior knowledge of how the data was likely to be organised and the relative sizes of n and m. It would fall down badly on randomly organised data of different relative sizes.

A final thing to consider is that there is often a direct trade off between the speed of an algorithm and the amount of space it uses. Pigeon hole sorting is a pretty good example of this. Going back to my points and polygons, lets say that all my polygons were simple and quick to draw, and I could draw them filled on screen, say in blue, in a fixed amount of time each. So if I draw my m polygons on a black screen it would take O(m) time. To check if any of my n points was in a polygon, I simply check whether the pixel at that point is green or black. So the check is O(n), and the total analysis is O(m + n). Downside of course is that I need near infinite storage if I'm dealing with real world coordinates to millimeter accuracy.... ...ho hum.

Answer 6

A very similar question has already been asked at Big-O for Eight Year Olds?. Hopefully the answers there will answer your question although the question asker there did have a bit of mathematical knowledge about it all which you may not have so clarify if you need a fuller explanation.