The polyphase variant of this algorithm improves its efficiency by reusing emptied files, while the bitonic variant requires the same number of steps regardless of input sequence but is not stable.
The polyphase variant of this algorithm improves its efficiency by reusing emptied files, while the bitonic variant requires the same number of steps regardless of input sequence but is not stable. Particularly suited for inputs that are accessed sequentially, it typically performs worse than another similar algorithm despite the fact that its theoretical average and worst-case runtimes are the same. Since the function at the center of this algorithm requires at most 2n operations, where n is the sequence length, its time complexity is "big-O of n log of n." For ten points, identify this divide-and-conquer sort, which breaks the input sequence into subsequences that are recursively sorted and then recombined.
The polyphase variant of this algorithm improves its efficiency by reusing emptied files, while the bitonic variant requires the same number of steps regardless of input sequence but is not stable.
{merge} sort