Benchmark: Tree Traversals (update 1)

Script Preparation code:

root = {val: 1001}
let i = 0, node = root
while (++i < 1000) {
  while (node) {
    if (i < node.val) {
      if (!node.left) {
        node.left = { val: i }
        break
      }
      node = node.left
    } else {
      if (!node.right) {
        node.right = { val: i }
        break
      }
      node = node.right
    }
  }
}

Tests:

DFS
function dfs(node) { if (!node) return dfs(node.left) dfs(node.right) } dfs(root)
BFS (shift)
let q = [root] while (q.length) { const node = q.shift() if (node.left) q.push(node.left) if (node.right) q.push(node.right) }
BFS (pop)
let q = [root] while (q.length) { const node = q.pop() if (node.right) q.push(node.right) if (node.left) q.push(node.left) }
BFS (reassign queue)
let q = [root] while (q.length) { const level = [] const node = q.shift() if (node.left) level.push(node.left) if (node.right) level.push(node.right) q = level }
BFS (reassign node, shift)
let q = [], node = root while (node) { if (node.left) q.push(node.left) if (node.right) q.push(node.right) node = q.shift() }
BFS (reassign node, pop)
let q = [], node = root while (node) { if (node.right) q.push(node.right) if (node.left) q.push(node.left) node = q.pop() }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
DFS
BFS (shift)
BFS (pop)
BFS (reassign queue)
BFS (reassign node, shift)
BFS (reassign node, pop)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/15.6 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 15 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
DFS	126442.2 Ops/sec
BFS (shift)	52516.6 Ops/sec
BFS (pop)	230754.9 Ops/sec
BFS (reassign queue)	33766.8 Ops/sec
BFS (reassign node, shift)	52993.2 Ops/sec
BFS (reassign node, pop)	232194.8 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance of different tree traversal algorithms (Depth-First Search (DFS) and Breadth-First Search (BFS)) on a binary tree. The binary tree is created with a fixed structure: a root node with 1000 child nodes, where each child node has a unique value.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates the binary tree by recursively assigning left and right child nodes to the current node. The script uses a while loop to iterate over the 1000 child nodes and assign them to the corresponding child nodes of the root node.

**Benchmark Test Cases**

There are four test cases:

1. **DFS (Depth-First Search)**: This test case measures the performance of a recursive DFS algorithm.
2. **BFS (shift)**: This test case measures the performance of an iterative BFS algorithm using a shift-based approach (i.e., removing nodes from the front of the queue).
3. **BFS (pop)**: This test case measures the performance of an iterative BFS algorithm using a pop-based approach (i.e., removing nodes from the end of the queue).
4. **BFS (reassign queue)**: This test case measures the performance of an iterative BFS algorithm where the queue is reassigned after each level.
5. **BFS (reassign node, shift)**: This test case measures the performance of an iterative BFS algorithm where nodes are reassigned and then removed from the front of the queue.
6. **BFS (reassign node, pop)**: This test case measures the performance of an iterative BFS algorithm where nodes are reassigned and then removed from the end of the queue.

**Comparison of Algorithms**

Here's a brief comparison of each algorithm:

* **DFS**: Recursive approach, good for traversing trees with complex structures. However, it can lead to stack overflow issues if the tree is too deep.
* **BFS (shift)**: Iterative approach, efficient for traversing trees with a large number of nodes at each level. It uses a queue-based data structure to keep track of nodes to visit.
* **BFS (pop)**: Similar to BFS (shift), but uses a stack-based data structure instead of a queue.
* **BFS (reassign queue)**: Reassigns the queue after each level, which can be beneficial for trees with a large number of levels. However, it may lead to slower performance due to the overhead of reassigning the queue.
* **BFS (reassign node, shift)** and **BFS (reassign node, pop)**: These algorithms are similar to BFS (shift) and BFS (pop), respectively, but with an additional step of reassigned nodes.

**Performance Comparison**

The performance comparison shows that:

* DFS has the slowest execution time due to its recursive nature and potential stack overflow issues.
* BFS (shift) and BFS (pop) have similar execution times, with BFS (shift) being slightly faster on average.
* BFS (reassign queue), BFS (reassign node, shift), and BFS (reassign node, pop) have slower execution times due to the overhead of reassigning the queue or nodes.

**Conclusion**

The benchmark measures the performance of different tree traversal algorithms. The results show that DFS has the slowest execution time, while BFS (shift) and BFS (pop) are more efficient. The other algorithms, including BFS (reassign queue), BFS (reassign node, shift), and BFS (reassign node, pop), have slower execution times due to additional overhead.

In general, iterative approaches like BFS (shift) and BFS (pop) tend to be faster than recursive approaches like DFS. However, the choice of algorithm ultimately depends on the specific use case and requirements of the application.

Related benchmarks:

Tree Traversals (update 1) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: DFS vs BFS (shift) vs BFS (pop) vs BFS (reassign queue) vs BFS (reassign node, shift) vs BFS (reassign node, pop)

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

DFS

BFS (shift)

BFS (pop)

BFS (reassign queue)

BFS (reassign node, shift)

BFS (reassign node, pop)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):