Compare commits

..

5 Commits

5 changed files with 101 additions and 2 deletions

View File

@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
import traceback
class Node:
def __init__(self, value, left=None, right=None, parent=None, is_red=False):
self.value = value
@@ -451,8 +453,10 @@ def run_tests():
print(" Your rebalance likely created a cycle or otherwise broke the")
print(" tree structure (a child pointing back up at an ancestor).\n")
continue
except Exception as e:
print(f" RESULT: ERROR - {type(e).__name__}: {e}\n")
except Exception:
print(f" RESULT: ERROR - see stack trace below\n")
print(traceback.format_exc())
print("")
continue
# Guard the author (you) against a typo when adding a new case: the

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
## Breadth-first search (BFS)
In the notes on [depth-first search](./depth-first-search.md), we mention that the difference between DFS and BFS is the order in which nodes are traversed.
Using the same example, what would a breadth-first traversal look like if we start at vertex 0 in this graph?
```
0 --- 1
| |
3 --- 2
```
Can we also formalize an algorithm for breadth-first search?

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
## Traversal introduction
Many algorithms that involve graphs must involve some way to traverse the elements of a graph. The two simplest ways of traversal are depth-first search (DFS) and [breadth-first search (BFS)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breadth-first_search). The major difference here is the *order* in which nodes are traversed.
If we start from vertex 0 in the tree, in what order would you expect depth-first search to traverse the nodes? (There are multiple correct answers!)
```
0
/ \
1 2
/ \
3 4
```
Note that a single traversal step checks for already-visited nodes. So, if the path is `0 -> 1 -> 3`, the path cannot become `0 -> 1 -> 3 -> 1`.
What about starting from vertex 0 in this graph?
```
0 --- 1
| |
3 --- 2
```
What about this one?
```
0
/ \
1 5
/ \ \
2 3 6
\ / /
4 7
\ /
8
```
## Formalizing the algorithm
Based on these examples, can we create a formal algorithm that takes a starting node, producing a valid traversal path for all three graphs?
Some starter questions:
- Could recursion help us here?
- What are some ways we can track already-visited nodes? What's the most *time-efficient* way to do so?

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
# Adjacency list
first_graph = {
1: [3, 20],
2: [20],
3: [1, 20],
20: [2, 3]
}
# First exercise: go from 1, to 20, to 2
first_graph[first_graph[1][1]][0]
# pass visited by reference
def depth_first_search(graph: dict, start, visited=set()):
print(start)
if len(visited)==len(graph):
return visited
for x in graph[start]:
if x not in visited:
visited.add(x)
return depth_first_search(graph, x, visited)
pass
depth_first_search(first_graph, 1)

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
## Outline
To make our knowledge of graphs useful, we'll go over our first traversal method today: [depth-first search](./depth-first-search.md). We will also go over [breadth-first search](./breadth-first-search.md), and how both algorithms can be useful.
Assignment: write functions for depth-first search and breadth-first search. Because there is no starter file, the constraints are listed below:
- You may use either an adjacency list or adjacency matrix to represent your graph
- You should demonstrate that your algorithm works by running it through some test cases
- For each test case, specify the graph, starting point, and expected output(s)
Bonus: can you output *all* the valid paths for both DFS and BFS in a particular case?