Open Addressing

One of the advantages of chained hash table over the open addressing scheme is ______

Question

Open Addressing

One of the advantages of chained hash table over the open addressing scheme is ______

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Chained hash tables store all keys that hash to the same bucket in a secondary container (commonly a linked list), while open addressing places all keys directly in the table and resolves collisions by probing. This structural difference creates different trade-offs, especially for deletion.

1) Relevant knowledge points and concepts
- Chaining: each bucket points to a list (or another container). Insertion appends to the list; search walks the list; deletion removes the node from the list.
- Open addressing: keys occupy table slots. Deletion cannot simply clear a slot without breaking probe sequences; it typically requires tombstone markers or cluster reorganization (or reinsertion of later probes).
- Complexity: worst-case search in both schemes can degrade to O(n) if hashing is poor; average performance depends on load factor.

2) Step-by-step reasoning
- In chaining, deleting a key found in bucket b means unlinking the node from the list at b and freeing (or ignoring) it. This operation is straightforward and does not affect other keys or future searches for other keys in different buckets.
- In open addressing, imagine keys A, B, C that probe into slots i, i+1, i+2. If you remove B by clearing its slot, a subsequent search for C starting from its hash may stop at the empty slot and conclude C is absent even though C is later in the probe sequence. To avoid that, one must:
  a) mark the slot as “deleted” (tombstone), requiring later insertions to treat it differently, or
  b) reinsert subsequent keys in the cluster to restore correct probe sequences.
Both approaches complicate deletion logic and can degrade performance.

3) Why the correct answer is correct
Because chaining isolates collisions in separate lists, deletion simply removes a node with O(1) pointer updates (assuming you have a pointer to the node or after search). No special markers or cluster repairs are needed. That simplicity is the key advantage: “Deletion is easier to implement.”

4) Why other options are incorrect
- “Worst case complexity of search operations is less”: Incorrect — both chaining and open addressing can have O(n) worst-case search times with poor hashing or high load.
- “Space used is less”: Incorrect — open addressing usually uses less overhead per element (no pointers), so chaining does not use less space.
- “None is a correct answer.”: Incorrect — option about deletion is correct.

Conclusion: Deletion is easier to implement in chained hash tables, which matches the provided answer.

Open Addressing One of the advantages of chained hash table over the open addressing scheme is ______单项选择题

类似问题

Open Addressing One of the advantages of chained hash table over the open addressing scheme is ______

What is the worst-case complexity of get in separate chaining? (Make no assumption about the load factor or how good the hash function is.)

What is the worst-case complexity of insert in separate chaining? (Make no assumption about the load factor or how good the hash function is.)

In a separate chaining hashtable, what is the impact of increasing the load factor above 1?

Consider the hash table of size 11 that uses linear probing shown below, where the hash function is h(k) = (k mod 11). Thus h(14)=3, h(25)=3. What indices are examined if we now perform get(4)?

Consider an implementation of a hash table with linear probing where the hash function runs in constant time and the cost of comparison is also constant. What is the best-case time complexity of the getitem method? Consider n is the number of items in the hash table.

Which is TRUE?

What is the best case time complexity of deleting a key from a linear probe table?

更多留学生实用工具

智能学习助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单