Please tell the complexity of http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/maximum-bipartite-matching/ ?
And if we use directly Ford-Fulkerson Algorithm, will it be better?
→ Обратите внимание
→ Трансляции
→ Лидеры (рейтинг)
| № | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ecnerwala | 3649 |
| 2 | Benq | 3581 |
| 3 | jiangly | 3578 |
| 4 | orzdevinwang | 3570 |
| 5 | Geothermal | 3569 |
| 5 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
| 7 | tourist | 3565 |
| 8 | maroonrk | 3531 |
| 9 | Radewoosh | 3521 |
| 10 | Um_nik | 3482 |
| Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
→ Лидеры (вклад)
| № | Пользователь | Вклад |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | maomao90 | 174 |
| 2 | awoo | 164 |
| 3 | adamant | 161 |
| 4 | TheScrasse | 159 |
| 5 | nor | 158 |
| 6 | maroonrk | 156 |
| 7 | -is-this-fft- | 152 |
| 8 | SecondThread | 147 |
| 9 | orz | 146 |
| 10 | pajenegod | 145 |
→ Найти пользователя
→ Прямой эфир
Codeforces (c) Copyright 2010-2024 Михаил Мирзаянов
Соревнования по программированию 2.0
Время на сервере: 28.04.2024 01:23:13 (i2).
Десктопная версия, переключиться на мобильную.
При поддержке
Maximum Bipartite Matching with Ford-Fulkerson takes O(VE) time. Using Dinic instead of Ford-Fulkerson (or Edmonds Karp for that matter; note that Edmonds Karp always find the shortest augmenting path instead of finding a random path), you can achieve a complexity of
.
Can you plz explain the complexity of the link I provided?
Secondly when and how Ford-Fulkerson Algorithm becomes better?
In the link, the bipartite matching is done using Ford-Fulkerson, so the complexity is O(VE).
I don't understand your second question.
A very good source to learn Max-Flow is CLRS. There's an entire chapter dedicated to network flows. You should read it.