2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.ipl.2016.06.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A tight upper bound on the number of cyclically adjacent transpositions to sort a permutation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the case of sorting the permutation π(x) = x + ⌊N/2⌋, at least N 2 /4 swaps are required due to the distance of each number from its destination. This has recently been proved to be the worst case [vZBSY14]. By the above discussion, writhe considerations easily yield a very close bound of (N − 1) 2 /4 transpositions, for π(x) = N − x.…”
Section: Extreme Valuesmentioning
confidence: 62%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the case of sorting the permutation π(x) = x + ⌊N/2⌋, at least N 2 /4 swaps are required due to the distance of each number from its destination. This has recently been proved to be the worst case [vZBSY14]. By the above discussion, writhe considerations easily yield a very close bound of (N − 1) 2 /4 transpositions, for π(x) = N − x.…”
Section: Extreme Valuesmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…A related notion of weighted inversion numbers was considered by Kadell [20]. In Section 3 we discuss the relation of the writhe to other combinatorial notions, such as the alternating inversion number [6], and circular bubble sort [19,30]. We also fit the writhe into the context of nonparametric statistics for circular rank correlation [14,15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In[15], the corresponding claim is stated for a set of n positive integers instead of a permutation of[n]. Hence, the proof in[15] extends some notions on a permutation of [n] to a set of positive integers. On the other hand, our description here is straightforward and attains a short proof.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%