A Comparison of Meansort and Quicksort

PDF Version Also Available for Download.

Description

The main purpose of this project is to compare a new sorting method- Meansort with its preceding sorting method- Quicksort. Meansort uses the mean value for each key to determine the partition of the file, but Quicksort selects at random. Experiments proved that in some ways Meansort is superior to Quicksort but is still not perfect since it always needs a mean value for each key. This project implements these two methods and determines the situations under which each of these methods outperforms the other.

Physical Description

92 leaves

Creation Information

Tsang, Pey Betty November 1985.

Context

This thesis is part of the collection entitled: UNT Graduate Student Works and was provided by the UNT Libraries to the UNT Digital Library, a digital repository hosted by the UNT Libraries. It has been viewed 160 times. More information about this thesis can be viewed below.

Who

People and organizations associated with either the creation of this thesis or its content.

Chair

Publisher

Rights Holder

For guidance see Citations, Rights, Re-Use.

  • Tsang, Pey Betty

Provided By

UNT Libraries

The UNT Libraries serve the university and community by providing access to physical and online collections, fostering information literacy, supporting academic research, and much, much more.

Contact Us

What

Descriptive information to help identify this thesis. Follow the links below to find similar items on the Digital Library.

Degree Information

Description

The main purpose of this project is to compare a new sorting method- Meansort with its preceding sorting method- Quicksort. Meansort uses the mean value for each key to determine the partition of the file, but Quicksort selects at random. Experiments proved that in some ways Meansort is superior to Quicksort but is still not perfect since it always needs a mean value for each key. This project implements these two methods and determines the situations under which each of these methods outperforms the other.

Physical Description

92 leaves

Language

Identifier

Unique identifying numbers for this thesis in the Digital Library or other systems.

Collections

This thesis is part of the following collection of related materials.

UNT Graduate Student Works

This collection houses graduate student works other than theses and dissertations. All materials have been previously accepted by a professional organization or approved by a faculty mentor. The collection includes, but is not limited to projects or problems in lieu of thesis, supplemental files associated with theses and dissertations, posters, recitals, presentations, articles, reviews, book chapters, exhibitions, and artwork. Some items in this collection are restricted to use by the UNT community.

What responsibilities do I have when using this thesis?

When

Dates and time periods associated with this thesis.

Creation Date

  • November 1985

Added to The UNT Digital Library

  • Dec. 19, 2018, 9:11 a.m.

Description Last Updated

  • March 10, 2020, 3:40 p.m.

Usage Statistics

When was this thesis last used?

Yesterday: 0
Past 30 days: 0
Total Uses: 160

Interact With This Thesis

Here are some suggestions for what to do next.

Top Search Results

We found one place within this thesis that matches your search. View Now

Start Reading

PDF Version Also Available for Download.

International Image Interoperability Framework

IIF Logo

We support the IIIF Presentation API

Tsang, Pey Betty. A Comparison of Meansort and Quicksort, thesis, November 1985; Unknown. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1393721/: accessed June 11, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; .

Back to Top of Screen