From Wikipedia: O(|E| + |V| log|V|)
From Big O Cheat List: O((|V| + |E|) log |V|)
I consider there is a difference between E + V log V
and (E+V) log V
, isn't there?
Because, if Wikipedia's one is correct, shouldn't it be shown as O(|V| log |V|)
only then (Removing |E|
) for a reason I do not understand?)?
What is the Big O of Dijkstra with Fibonacci-Heap?
The complexity of Dijkstra's shortest path algorithm is:
O(|E| |decrease-key(Q)| + |V| |extract-min(Q)|)
where Q
is the min-priority queue ordering vertices by their current distance estimate.
For both a Fibonacci heap and a binary heap, the complexity of the extract-min operation on this queue is O(log |V|)
. This explains the common |V| log |V|
part in the sum. For a queue implemented with an unsorted array, the extract-min operation would have a complexity of O(|V|)
(the whole queue has to be traversed) and this part of the sum would be O(|V|^2)
.
In the remaining part of the sum (the one with the edge factor |E|), the O(1)
v.s. O(log |V|)
difference comes precisely from using respectively a Fibonacci heap as opposed to a binary heap. The decrease key operation which may happen for every edge has exactly this complexity. So the remaining part of the sum eventually has complexity O(|E|)
for a Fibonacci heap and O(|E| log |V|)
for a binary heap.
For a queue implemented with an unsorted array, the decrease-key operation would have a constant-time complexity (the queue directly stores the keys indexed by the vertices) and this part of the sum would thus be O(|E|)
, which is also O(|V|^2)
.
To summarize:
O(|E| + |V| log |V|)
O((|E| + |V|) log |V|)
O(|V|^2)
Since, in the general case |E| = O(|V|^2)
, these can't be simplified further without making further assumptions on the kind of graphs dealt with.