2020
DOI: 10.26555/jifo.v14i1.a17038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Knuth Morris Pratt and Boyer Moore algorithms for a web-based dictionary of computer terms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Then, researchers who compared the Knuth Morris Pratt method with Bayer Moore using the Exponential Comparison Method (MPE) by [18] found that the Knuth Morris-Pratt algorithm is faster than the Boyer-Moore algorithm for the word search process [18]. Research comparing the two methods was also conducted by [19] which obtained different results, where from the total ECM score that the BM algorithm is 0.55% superior to KMP as evidenced by the BM search time is 37.9%, and the KMP algorithm is 62.1%, then the search memory usage for the KMP algorithm is 50.6%, and the BM algorithm is 49.4% [19]. Furthermore, still related to the comparison of the two models by implementing into Java and Java Microbenchmark Harness to evaluate the execution time of the method using a number of experimental test scenarios and the results obtained that the BM algorithm outperforms the KMP algorithm in all test scenarios [20].…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Then, researchers who compared the Knuth Morris Pratt method with Bayer Moore using the Exponential Comparison Method (MPE) by [18] found that the Knuth Morris-Pratt algorithm is faster than the Boyer-Moore algorithm for the word search process [18]. Research comparing the two methods was also conducted by [19] which obtained different results, where from the total ECM score that the BM algorithm is 0.55% superior to KMP as evidenced by the BM search time is 37.9%, and the KMP algorithm is 62.1%, then the search memory usage for the KMP algorithm is 50.6%, and the BM algorithm is 49.4% [19]. Furthermore, still related to the comparison of the two models by implementing into Java and Java Microbenchmark Harness to evaluate the execution time of the method using a number of experimental test scenarios and the results obtained that the BM algorithm outperforms the KMP algorithm in all test scenarios [20].…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Multi-pattern matching algorithms include AC (Aho-Corasick automaton) algorithm [11][12], and improved AC-BM (Aho-Corasick Boyer-Moore) algorithm based on AC algorithm [13][14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the dictionary tree construction of the AC algorithm wastes a lot of memory and requires multiple backtracking to transfer to the effective successor state when there is a mismatch, which affects the performance of the algorithm. Literature [13] and [14] is based on the AC algorithm, combined with the idea of BM algorithm, and adopts bad characters and good suffix rules to realize the jump matching of the pattern tree. The major disadvantage of this algorithm is that the good prefix rule preprocessing is complex and difficult to achieve.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%