finding element in an unsorted array and with no relationship b/w the elements would have lower bound - omega(n) ..boczz you need to traverse whole array atleast once to find that element. so obv it cant be done in log(n) time..think abt it.
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 11:23 PM, Gene <[email protected]> wrote: > Finding a given element in an unsorted list in less than O(n) time > (with a normal RAM model of computation) is easy to prove impossible. > > On Jun 3, 11:01 am, abhinav gupta <[email protected]> wrote: > > We have given a list 14 6 7 15 8 9 ............we have to find 15 in > (log > > n ) times. > > -- > > > > *Thanks and Regards,* > > > > Abhinav Kumar Gupta > > **[email protected] > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Algorithm Geeks" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Algorithm Geeks" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
