diff --git a/pretext/Sort/SelfCheck.ptx b/pretext/Sort/SelfCheck.ptx index c0b9807a..e275241a 100644 --- a/pretext/Sort/SelfCheck.ptx +++ b/pretext/Sort/SelfCheck.ptx @@ -4,21 +4,21 @@

Which of the following sort algorithms are guaranteed to be O(n \log n) even in the worst case?

 - + Shell Sort - Shell sort is between O(n) and O(n^2) + Incorrect! Shell sort is between O(n) and O(n^2) - + Quick Sort - Quick sort can be O(n \log n), but if the pivot points are not well chosen and the list is just so, it can be O(n^2). + Incorrect! Quick sort can be O(n \log n), but if the pivot points are not well chosen and the list is just so, it can be O(n^2). - + Merge Sort Correct! Merge Sort is the only guaranteed O(n \log n) even in the worst case. The cost is that merge sort uses more memory. - + Insertion Sort - Insertion sort is O(n^2) + Incorrect! Insertion sort is O(n^2) @@ -37,21 +37,21 @@

Which sort should you use for best efficiency If you need to sort through 100,000 random items in a list?

 - + Merge Correct! - + Selection - Selection sort is inefficient in large lists. + Incorrect! Selection sort is inefficient in large lists. - + Bubble - Bubble sort works best with mostly sorted lists. + Incorrect! Bubble sort works best with mostly sorted lists. - + Insertion - Insertion sort works best with either small or mostly sorted lists. + Incorrect! Insertion sort works best with either small or mostly sorted lists.