In computer science, an AVL tree is a selfbalancing binary search tree, and it was the first such data structure to be invented.^{[1]} In an AVL tree, the heights of the two child subtrees of any node differ by at most one. Lookup, insertion, and deletion all take O(log n) time in both the average and worst cases, where n is the number of nodes in the tree prior to the operation. Insertions and deletions may require the tree to be rebalanced by one or more tree rotations.
The AVL tree is named after its two soviet inventors, G.M. AdelsonVelskii and E.M. Landis, who published it in their 1962 paper "An algorithm for the organization of information."^{[2]}
The balance factor of a node is the height of its left subtree minus the height of its right subtree (sometimes opposite) and a node with balance factor 1, 0, or −1 is considered balanced. A node with any other balance factor is considered unbalanced and requires rebalancing the tree. The balance factor is either stored directly at each node or computed from the heights of the subtrees.
AVL trees are often compared with redblack trees because they support the same set of operations and because redblack trees also take O(log n) time for the basic operations. AVL trees perform better than redblack trees for lookupintensive applications.^{[3]} The AVL tree balancing algorithm appears in many computer science curricula.
Contents
Operations
The basic operations of an AVL tree involve carrying out the same actions as would be carried out on an unbalanced binary search tree, but modifications are preceded or followed by one or more operations called tree rotations, which help to restore the height balance of the subtrees.
Lookup
Lookup in an AVL tree is performed exactly as in an unbalanced binary search tree. Because of the heightbalancing of the tree, a lookup takes O(log n) time. No special actions need to be taken, and the tree's structure is not modified by lookups. (This is in contrast to splay tree lookups, which do modify their tree's structure.)
If each node additionally records the size of its subtree (including itself and its descendants), then the nodes can be retrieved by index in O(log n) time as well.
Once a node has been found in a balanced tree, the next or previous nodes can be explored in amortized constant time. A few cases require traversing up to 2×log(n) links. However exploring all n nodes in the tree in this manner would use each link exactly twice, and there are n−1 links, so the amortized cost is 2×(n−1)/n, approximately 2.
Full article ▸
