Binomial heap
A binomial heap is a data structure that implements a priority queue as a collection of binomial trees, each of distinct order, satisfying the min-heap property where the key of a node is no greater than the keys of its children.[1] Introduced by Jean Vuillemin in 1978, it enables efficient merging of heaps and supports key operations including insertion, finding the minimum, extracting the minimum, union (merge), and decrease-key, all in O(log n) worst-case time per operation, where n is the number of elements.[1][2]
The structure of a binomial heap relies on binomial trees, defined recursively: a binomial tree of order 0, B0, is a single node, and a binomial tree of order k ≥ 1, Bk, consists of two binomial trees Bk−1 linked together such that the root of one becomes the leftmost child of the root of the other, resulting in a tree with exactly 2k nodes, height k, and root degree k.[2] A binomial heap with n elements forms a forest containing at most one binomial tree of each order from 0 to ⌊log2 n⌋, corresponding to the binary representation of n, and the roots are typically linked in a list sorted by order.[2] This design ensures the heap property across the forest and allows for at most ⌊log2 n⌋ + 1 trees in the collection.[2]
Key operations leverage the tree structure for efficiency: insertion adds a new B0 tree and merges it via a process akin to binary addition to resolve duplicate orders; finding or extracting the minimum scans the root list to identify and remove the smallest root, followed by merging its children; union merges two heaps by combining roots of equal order through linking; and decrease-key bubbles up a modified node to restore the heap property.[1][2] Each operation performs at most O(log n) link or unlink steps, yielding the logarithmic bounds without relying on amortization.[1]
Binomial heaps find applications in graph algorithms requiring mergeable priority queues, such as computing minimum spanning trees via Prim's algorithm and shortest paths via Dijkstra's algorithm, where the efficient union supports dynamic updates in disjoint sets.[1][3] Compared to binary heaps, binomial heaps excel in merge operations (O(log n) versus O(n) for binary heaps) but are more complex to implement due to the multi-tree structure.[2] They paved the way for advanced structures like Fibonacci heaps, which achieve better amortized performance for certain sequences of operations.[2]
Introduction
Definition and motivation
A binomial heap is a data structure serving as a priority queue, composed of a forest of binomial trees that adhere to the min-heap order property, wherein the key of each parent node is no greater than the keys of its children. These trees are recursively defined such that a binomial tree of order k consists of a root with k children that are binomial trees of orders k-1 down to 0, resulting in exactly $2^k nodes per tree of order k. The heap ensures at most one tree of each order, enabling a unique binary representation of the total number of nodes n, where the presence of a tree of order k corresponds to the k-th bit in the binary expansion of n. This organization facilitates efficient structural manipulations, particularly merging, by linking roots of identical-order trees while preserving heap order.[1]
The primary motivation for binomial heaps stems from the need for a priority queue that efficiently supports not only standard operations like insertion and minimum extraction but also key updates and, crucially, the union of two disjoint heaps—operations essential in dynamic scenarios such as graph algorithms (e.g., Dijkstra's shortest-path or Prim's minimum spanning tree) where priorities frequently change and multiple queues may need merging without rebuilding from scratch. Traditional binary heaps, while supporting decrease-key in O(\log n) time, require O(n) time for merging by successive insertions, rendering them inefficient for union-heavy applications; binomial heaps address this by leveraging their tree structure for O(\log n) merges, balancing efficiency across a broader set of operations vital for combinatorial optimization problems.[1]
Key properties of binomial heaps include worst-case O(\log n) time for union (merge), extract-min, and decrease-key, with the forest's distinct orders ensuring no redundant trees and supporting fast structural integrity checks. For illustration, a binomial tree of order 0 (B_0) is simply a single node, while a tree of order 1 (B_1) comprises a root node connected to one child node of order 0, both satisfying the heap property.[1][2]
History
The binomial heap was introduced by Jean Vuillemin in 1978 for efficiently manipulating priority queues, particularly emphasizing fast union operations through a novel merge algorithm based on binomial trees.[1] This invention addressed limitations in earlier priority queue implementations by enabling the efficient combination of disjoint sets, drawing inspiration from the binary heap concept originated by J. W. J. Williams in 1964 for heapsort.[4]
Shortly after its introduction, the structure received detailed analysis and implementation studies, notably by Mark R. Brown, who explored alternative representations and provided both theoretical worst-case bounds and empirical performance data, highlighting its potential for practical use in mergeable heaps.[5] Binomial heaps gained significant prominence in the mid-1980s as a foundational structure for advanced priority queues, serving as a direct predecessor to Fibonacci heaps developed by Michael L. Fredman and Robert E. Tarjan in 1984.[6] These extensions built upon binomial heaps by incorporating lazy melding techniques, which deferred merging costs to achieve amortized O(1) time for decrease-key operations and influenced optimizations in graph algorithms during the decade.[6]
Subsequent refinements, such as lazy binomial heaps, further adapted the original design for real-world efficiency by performing unions lazily—simply linking trees without immediate consolidation—reducing overhead in scenarios with frequent insertions and merges while maintaining amortized logarithmic bounds for other operations.[6] This evolution solidified binomial heaps' role in algorithm design, enabling scalable solutions for problems requiring dynamic priority management.
Structure
Binomial trees
A binomial tree of order k, denoted B_k, is a rooted tree consisting of exactly $2^k nodes that satisfies the minimum heap-order property, meaning the key of any node is less than or equal to the keys of all its descendants. The root of B_k has exactly k children, which are the roots of binomial trees B_{k-1}, B_{k-2}, \dots, B_0 arranged in decreasing order of their indices from left to right.[5]
The structure of a binomial tree is defined recursively. The base case B_0 consists of a single node with no children. For k \geq 1, B_k is constructed by creating a new root node and attaching the roots of B_{k-1}, B_{k-2}, \dots, B_0 as its children, with B_{k-1} as the leftmost child.[5] This recursive linking ensures that the subtrees are themselves binomial trees of successively lower orders, preserving the overall structure. The height of B_k is exactly k, and the number of nodes at depth d (for $0 \leq d \leq k) is given by the binomial coefficient \binom{k}{d}.[5]
In implementation, binomial trees are typically represented using the left-child right-sibling convention to efficiently simulate the multi-ary structure with binary pointers: each node stores a pointer to its leftmost child (the root of the next lower-order subtree) and a pointer to its right sibling (the next child of its parent).[7] This representation limits each node to at most two pointers—left child and right sibling—while maintaining the logical multi-child structure and facilitating operations like linking trees. The minimum heap-order property is enforced throughout, with parent keys strictly less than or equal to child keys.[5]
To illustrate, consider small binomial trees:
-
B_0: A single node, with 1 node total ($2^0 = 1).
-
B_1: A root node with B_0 as its single (leftmost) child, totaling 2 nodes ($2^1 = 2).
-
B_2: A root node with B_1 as its left child and B_0 as its right child (sibling to B_1), totaling 4 nodes ($2^2 = 4).
In each case, the keys increase from root to leaves to satisfy the min-heap order.[5]
Heap organization
A binomial heap with n nodes is represented as a forest consisting of at most \lfloor \log_2 n \rfloor + 1 binomial trees, where the orders (degrees) of these trees correspond exactly to the positions of the 1-bits in the binary representation of n, ensuring that no two trees share the same order.[8][2] For instance, a heap with 13 nodes ($13 = 1101_2) contains binomial trees of orders 0, 2, and 3. This structure leverages the recursive nature of binomial trees, where each tree B_k has $2^k nodes and is formed by linking two B_{k-1} trees.[8]
The trees in the forest are interconnected through their roots, which are maintained in a linked list ordered by increasing degree, allowing efficient traversal and merging.[2] Each node in a binomial tree includes pointers to its leftmost child and right sibling, facilitating the sibling-chain representation of children, while roots may point to a next sibling in the forest's root list.[8] Implementations often employ an auxiliary array indexed by degree to store pointers to the roots of each order, enabling constant-time access to specific trees during maintenance, though the core structure relies on the linked list for the collection of roots.[2]
The heap satisfies the min-heap property across the entire forest: within each binomial tree, the key of a parent node is no greater than the keys of its children, and consequently, the global minimum key resides at one of the roots.[8][2] This invariant ensures that finding the minimum requires only scanning the root list, which has length at most \log n + 1. The uniqueness of tree orders prevents redundancy and supports the binary-counting analogy central to the heap's design.[8]
Operations
Union and insert
The union operation, also known as merge, combines two binomial heaps H_1 and H_2 into a single heap H, destroying the inputs and running in O(\log n) time where n is the total number of nodes.[2] This process occurs in two phases: first, the root lists of H_1 and H_2—which are sorted by increasing degree—are merged into a single list sorted by degree using a procedure analogous to merging two sorted linked lists.[2] Second, trees of equal degree in the merged list are iteratively linked, propagating a "carry" to higher degrees much like binary addition, ensuring the resulting heap contains at most one tree per degree.[8][2]
To link two binomial trees of the same degree k, rooted at nodes x and y with keys \text{key} and \text{key}, the tree with the smaller root key is made a child of the tree with the larger root key, preserving the min-heap property since children have keys no smaller than their parents.[2] The degree of the new parent root increases to k+1, and this linked tree may then be merged with any existing tree of degree k+1 in the list, continuing the carry process until no duplicates remain.[8] The linking step itself takes constant time.[2]
The following pseudocode illustrates the union procedure, including the merge and linking phases:[2]
BINOMIAL-HEAP-UNION(H₁, H₂)
1 H ← MAKE-BINOMIAL-HEAP()
2 head[H] ← BINOMIAL-HEAP-MERGE(H₁, H₂)
3 free H₁ and H₂ objects but not their lists
4 if head[H] = NIL then return H
5 prev-x ← NIL
6 x ← head[H]
7 next-x ← sibling[x]
8 while next-x ≠ NIL
9 do if degree[x] ≠ degree[next-x] or (sibling[next-x] ≠ NIL and degree[sibling[next-x]] = degree[x])
10 then prev-x ← x
11 x ← next-x
12 else if key[x] ≤ key[next-x]
13 then sibling[x] ← sibling[next-x]
14 BINOMIAL-LINK(next-x, x)
15 else if prev-x = NIL
16 then head[H] ← next-x
17 else sibling[prev-x] ← next-x
18 BINOMIAL-LINK(x, next-x)
19 x ← next-x
20 next-x ← sibling[x]
21 return H
BINOMIAL-HEAP-UNION(H₁, H₂)
1 H ← MAKE-BINOMIAL-HEAP()
2 head[H] ← BINOMIAL-HEAP-MERGE(H₁, H₂)
3 free H₁ and H₂ objects but not their lists
4 if head[H] = NIL then return H
5 prev-x ← NIL
6 x ← head[H]
7 next-x ← sibling[x]
8 while next-x ≠ NIL
9 do if degree[x] ≠ degree[next-x] or (sibling[next-x] ≠ NIL and degree[sibling[next-x]] = degree[x])
10 then prev-x ← x
11 x ← next-x
12 else if key[x] ≤ key[next-x]
13 then sibling[x] ← sibling[next-x]
14 BINOMIAL-LINK(next-x, x)
15 else if prev-x = NIL
16 then head[H] ← next-x
17 else sibling[prev-x] ← next-x
18 BINOMIAL-LINK(x, next-x)
19 x ← next-x
20 next-x ← sibling[x]
21 return H
The BINOMIAL-LINK(y, z) subroutine, called during union, attaches tree y as the first child of root z:[2]
BINOMIAL-LINK(y, z)
1 parent[y] ← z
2 sibling[y] ← [child](/page/Child)[z]
3 [child](/page/Child)[z] ← y
4 [degree](/page/Degree)[z] ← [degree](/page/Degree)[z] + 1
BINOMIAL-LINK(y, z)
1 parent[y] ← z
2 sibling[y] ← [child](/page/Child)[z]
3 [child](/page/Child)[z] ← y
4 [degree](/page/Degree)[z] ← [degree](/page/Degree)[z] + 1
The insert operation adds a new node x to an existing heap H by creating a singleton binomial heap H' consisting of a single B_0 tree rooted at x (with degree 0, no children, and parent nil), then performing a union of H and H'.[8][2] This leverages the efficiency of union, requiring O(\log n) time.[2] The pseudocode is as follows:[2]
BINOMIAL-HEAP-INSERT(H, x)
1 H' ← MAKE-BINOMIAL-HEAP()
2 [parent](/page/Parent)[x] ← NIL
3 [child](/page/Child)[x] ← NIL
4 [sibling](/page/Sibling)[x] ← NIL
5 [degree](/page/Degree)[x] ← 0
6 head[H'] ← x
7 H ← BINOMIAL-HEAP-UNION(H, H')
BINOMIAL-HEAP-INSERT(H, x)
1 H' ← MAKE-BINOMIAL-HEAP()
2 [parent](/page/Parent)[x] ← NIL
3 [child](/page/Child)[x] ← NIL
4 [sibling](/page/Sibling)[x] ← NIL
5 [degree](/page/Degree)[x] ← 0
6 head[H'] ← x
7 H ← BINOMIAL-HEAP-UNION(H, H')
The extract minimum operation in a binomial heap first identifies the root node with the minimum key by scanning the root list of the forest, then removes that node and reconstructs the heap by merging its child subtrees into the remaining forest.[1] This process ensures the resulting structure remains a valid binomial heap with at most one tree of each order.[9]
To locate the minimum, the algorithm iterates through all roots in the heap's root list, comparing their keys and tracking the smallest. Since a binomial heap with n elements has at most \lfloor \log_2 n \rfloor + 1 roots, this scan requires O(\log n) comparisons in the worst case.[1][9]
After identifying and removing the minimum root—suppose it heads a binomial tree of order k—the node's children, which are roots of binomial trees of orders 0 through k-1, are detached to form a new binomial heap. These k child subtrees constitute a complete forest without duplicates in orders. The reconstruction then unions this new heap with the original heap minus the extracted root, using the standard link operation to merge any trees of equal order by recursively combining them into higher-order trees until uniqueness is restored.[1][9]
The following pseudocode combines the find and extract steps, assuming the children of the minimum node are linked in sibling order and the union procedure handles merging as described:
BINOMIAL-HEAP-EXTRACT-MIN(H)
1 find the root x with the minimum [key](/page/Key) in the root list of H, and remove x from the root list of H
2 H' ← MAKE-BINOMIAL-HEAP()
3 reverse the order of the [linked list](/page/Linked_list) of x's children, and set head[H'] to point to the head of the resulting list
4 H ← BINOMIAL-HEAP-UNION(H, H')
5 return x
BINOMIAL-HEAP-EXTRACT-MIN(H)
1 find the root x with the minimum [key](/page/Key) in the root list of H, and remove x from the root list of H
2 H' ← MAKE-BINOMIAL-HEAP()
3 reverse the order of the [linked list](/page/Linked_list) of x's children, and set head[H'] to point to the head of the resulting list
4 H ← BINOMIAL-HEAP-UNION(H, H')
5 return x
This implementation runs in O(\log n) time overall, as both the scan and union involve O(\log n) operations.[9]
Decrease key and delete
In binomial heaps, the decrease-key operation allows the priority of an existing element to be reduced, provided a handle (pointer) to the node is available, which is typically returned by the insert operation for future access.[9] This handle enables direct access to the node without searching the entire structure. To perform decrease-key on a node x with new key k (where k is no greater than the current key), the key of x is updated to k, and then x is bubbled up the binomial tree by repeatedly swapping it with its parent if the min-heap order is violated, until the order is restored or the root is reached.[3] The path length for this bubbling is at most \log n, where n is the number of elements in the heap.[9]
The following pseudocode illustrates the decrease-key procedure:
BINOMIAL-HEAP-DECREASE-KEY(H, x, k)
1 if k > [key](/page/Key)[x]
2 then error "new key is greater than current key"
3 [key](/page/Key)[x] ← k
4 y ← x
5 z ← p[y]
6 while z ≠ NIL and [key](/page/Key)[y] < [key](/page/Key)[z]
7 do exchange [key](/page/Key)[y] ↔ [key](/page/Key)[z]
8 (exchange satellite fields if present)
9 y ← z
10 z ← p[y]
BINOMIAL-HEAP-DECREASE-KEY(H, x, k)
1 if k > [key](/page/Key)[x]
2 then error "new key is greater than current key"
3 [key](/page/Key)[x] ← k
4 y ← x
5 z ← p[y]
6 while z ≠ NIL and [key](/page/Key)[y] < [key](/page/Key)[z]
7 do exchange [key](/page/Key)[y] ↔ [key](/page/Key)[z]
8 (exchange satellite fields if present)
9 y ← z
10 z ← p[y]
Here, H is the binomial heap, x is the node handle, k is the new key, \mathrm{key}[ \cdot ] denotes the key value, and p[ \cdot ] is the parent pointer; the exchanges propagate the smaller key upward.[9]
The delete operation removes an arbitrary node x from the heap, again requiring a handle to x. One standard implementation decreases the key of x to -\infty (using the decrease-key procedure), which makes x the new minimum, followed immediately by an extract-min operation to remove it.[3] [9] An alternative approach directly removes x from its binomial tree, promotes its subtrees to the root list, and unions them back into the heap structure to maintain the binomial heap properties.[8] The pseudocode for delete via the decrease-to--\infty method is:
BINOMIAL-HEAP-DELETE(H, x)
1 BINOMIAL-HEAP-DECREASE-KEY(H, x, -∞)
2 BINOMIAL-HEAP-EXTRACT-MIN(H)
BINOMIAL-HEAP-DELETE(H, x)
1 BINOMIAL-HEAP-DECREASE-KEY(H, x, -∞)
2 BINOMIAL-HEAP-EXTRACT-MIN(H)
This leverages the existing decrease-key and extract-min mechanisms for efficiency.[9]
Analysis
Time complexities
Binomial heaps support a range of priority queue operations with efficient time complexities, primarily bounded by the height of the underlying binomial trees, which is O(log n) for a heap of n elements. The find-min operation requires scanning up to O(log n) roots to identify the minimum, resulting in O(log n) worst-case time. All other major operations—insert, union, extract-min, decrease-key, and delete—achieve O(log n) in both worst-case and amortized analyses, as they involve merging or restructuring a bounded number of trees.[9]
| Operation | Worst-case | Amortized | Notes |
|---|
| Insert | O(log n) | O(1) | Implemented via union with a singleton heap; costs depend on merging roots. |
| Union | O(log n) | O(log n) | Drives linking of equal-degree trees; up to O(log n) merges. |
| Find-min | O(log n) | - | Scans root list; no amortization typically applied. |
| Extract-min | O(log n) | O(log n) | Removes min tree, unions its children, and merges with forest. |
| Decrease-key | O(log n) | O(log n) | Bubbles up along path to root, potentially relinking. |
| Delete | O(log n) | O(log n) | Reduces key to negative infinity, then extracts min. |
Amortized bounds
Amortized analysis provides a framework for bounding the average time per operation over a sequence of operations on a binomial heap, using either the accounting method or the potential method to demonstrate that the total cost is O(m log n) for m operations, yielding an average of O(log n) per operation. The potential method defines a potential function Φ(H) that measures the "stored work" in the heap's configuration, ensuring Φ(H) ≥ 0 for all heaps H and Φ(empty) = 0. Specifically, Φ(H) equals the number of binomial trees in H, as this captures the opportunities for future merging savings during operations like union.[11][12] The amortized cost of the i-th operation is then given by \hat{c_i} = c_i + \Phi(H_i) - \Phi(H_{i-1}), where c_i is the actual cost; over a sequence, the sum of amortized costs upper-bounds the total actual cost plus the final potential, which remains bounded by O(log n).[12]
In the union operation, which merges two heaps by aligning trees of equal order and linking them as needed, the actual cost is O(log n + l), where l is the number of links performed—equivalent to the carry length from consecutive equal-order trees encountered during the scan from lowest to highest order. Each link reduces the total number of trees by 1, causing a potential drop of ΔΦ = -l. This drop offsets the extra work of the links, so with an appropriate constant factor in the potential (e.g., Φ(H) = c \cdot t(H) for c ≥ 2), the amortized cost simplifies to O(log n), as the scanning cost is always O(log n) and the links are "prepaid" by prior potential increases.[11][12]
The insert operation, implemented as a union with a single-node heap (order-0 tree), follows similarly: the actual cost is O(1 + l), adding one tree initially (ΔΦ starts at +1) but dropping by l for each link. The net amortized cost is thus O(1), since the potential drop covers the linking beyond the initial addition. For decrease-key, which decreases a node's key and bubbles it up the path to its root by swapping with parents if the heap order is violated, the actual cost is proportional to the path length, O(log n) in the worst case. This cost can be charged directly to the edges traversed on the path, with each edge paying a constant amount for the update or swap, yielding an amortized cost of O(log n) without relying on potential changes, as the operation does not alter the number of trees.[13][12]
Extract-min removes the minimum root and unions its child subtrees into the main forest, with actual cost O(log n) for finding the minimum plus O(d + log n) for the union, where d is the degree of the extracted root (up to O(log n)). Here, ΔΦ = +d (exposing d new root trees) minus the net trees added after their union (O(log n) at worst, but typically fewer due to links). The potential increase from the exposed trees is offset by prior operations that built the structure, resulting in an amortized cost of O(log n); this holds even though the worst-case cost stems directly from unioning the children, unlike other operations where linking is less frequent.[11][12] Overall, while most operations like union and decrease-key achieve O(log n) in both worst and amortized cases, the potential method highlights how extract-min's child unions are balanced across sequences, preventing spikes from dominating the average.
Applications
Priority queue uses
Binomial heaps function as versatile priority queue implementations, supporting essential operations including insertion, extract-minimum, decrease-key, and union with efficient time bounds. Specifically, insertion operates in amortized O(1) time, while extract-minimum, decrease-key, and union each run in O(log n) worst-case time, providing advantages over binary heaps in scenarios with frequent decrease-key or merging requirements.[14][15] This structure maintains a forest of binomial trees, ensuring heap order and enabling handles for direct access to elements, which facilitates decrease-key without full restructuring.[2]
In discrete event simulations, binomial heaps efficiently manage event queues by prioritizing events based on simulation timestamps, allowing seamless insertion of new events and updates to existing ones via decrease-key when priorities shift due to system dynamics. For instance, in queuing system models, the heap's union operation merges multiple event streams—such as from parallel processes—in logarithmic time, outperforming linear-time merges in simpler heaps.[16] This capability supports accurate modeling of time-dependent interactions, as seen in simulations of network protocols or manufacturing flows.[17]
Binomial heaps are selected for priority queue applications needing reliable O(log n) decrease-key performance without the implementation overhead of more advanced structures like Fibonacci heaps, which prioritize amortized efficiency but introduce greater complexity. They strike a balance for workloads where occasional unions occur alongside standard priority operations, such as in resource allocation systems.[18][19]
As an illustrative example, consider integrating a binomial heap into a basic task scheduler for processing jobs with dynamic priorities:
initialize empty binomial heap H
for each initial task t with [priority](/page/Priority) p:
insert(H, t, p) // O(1) amortized
while H is not empty:
current_task = extract_min(H) // O(log n)
[process](/page/Process)(current_task)
// Handle new arrivals or priority changes
for new task t' with [priority](/page/Priority) p':
insert(H, t', p') // O(1) amortized
if existing task t needs update to lower [priority](/page/Priority) p'':
decrease_key(H, [handle_of_t](/page/Handle), p'') // O(log n)
initialize empty binomial heap H
for each initial task t with [priority](/page/Priority) p:
insert(H, t, p) // O(1) amortized
while H is not empty:
current_task = extract_min(H) // O(log n)
[process](/page/Process)(current_task)
// Handle new arrivals or priority changes
for new task t' with [priority](/page/Priority) p':
insert(H, t', p') // O(1) amortized
if existing task t needs update to lower [priority](/page/Priority) p'':
decrease_key(H, [handle_of_t](/page/Handle), p'') // O(log n)
This pseudocode demonstrates how the heap schedules the highest-priority (lowest-value) task next, with updates reflecting real-time adjustments like deadline extensions.[20][3]
Algorithmic integrations
Binomial heaps play a key role in optimizing graph algorithms that rely on priority queues with frequent updates, such as Dijkstra's shortest-path algorithm. In this algorithm, the priority queue maintains tentative distances to vertices, with extract-min selecting the next vertex to process and decrease-key updating distances upon relaxation of edges. The amortized O(log n) time for both operations in binomial heaps results in an overall running time of O((V + E) log V), where V is the number of vertices and E the number of edges. This integration improves efficiency over simpler priority queue implementations by supporting direct access via handles for decrease-key without linear-time searches.[21]
A similar integration occurs in Prim's algorithm for constructing minimum spanning trees, where the priority queue tracks the minimum-weight edge connecting the growing tree to unvisited vertices. As edges are relaxed, decrease-key updates priorities for affected vertices, enabling the algorithm to achieve O((V + E) log V) time complexity through the binomial heap's efficient operations. This approach is particularly effective for dense graphs, where the logarithmic costs dominate.[22]
Binomial heaps also offer advantages in algorithms requiring heap mergers, such as variants of graph computations involving multiple components. Their O(log n) union operation allows seamless merging of disjoint heaps, avoiding the O(n) cost of binary heap unions and enabling scalable implementations where binary heaps would degrade due to repeated rebuilds or inefficient decrease-key via handle swaps.[23]