Journal of Computer Science and Technology

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 19–26 | Cite as

P-Tree Structures and Event Horizon: Efficient Event-Set Implementations

  • Katerina AsdreEmail author
  • Stavros D. Nikolopoulos


This paper describes efficient data structures, namely the Indexed P-tree, Block P-tree, and Indexed-Block P-tree (or IP-tree, BP-tree, and IBP-tree, respectively, for short), for maintaining future events in a general purpose discrete event simulation system, and studies the performance of their event set algorithms under the event horizon principle. For comparison reasons, some well-known event set algorithms have been selected and studied, that is, the Dynamic-heap and the P-tree algorithms. To gain insight into the performance of the proposed event set algorithms and allow comparisons with the other selected algorithms, they are tested under a wide variety of conditions in an experimental way. The time needed for the execution of the Hold operation is taken as the measure for estimating the average time complexity of the algorithms. The experimental results show that the BP-tree algorithm and the IBP-tree algorithm behave very well with the event set of all the sizes and their performance is almost independent of the stochastic distributions.


discrete-event simulation event set algorithms hold model event horizon data structures heap P-tree P-tree structures 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Fishman G S. Concepts and Methods in Discrete Event Digital Simulation. John Wiley & Sons, 1973.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Law A M, Kelton W D. Simulation Modeling and Analysis. 3rd Ed., McGraw-Hill Inc, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mitrani I. Simulation Techniques for Discrete Event Systems. Cambridge University Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Franta W R, Maly K. A comparison of heaps and the TL structure for the simulation event set. Comm. the ACM, 1978, 21: 873–875.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Franta W R, Maly K. An efficient data structure for the simulation event set. Comm. the ACM, 1977, 20: 569–602.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hwang H K, Steyaert J M. On the Number of Heaps and the Cost of Heap Construction. Mathematics and Computer Science II, Basel: Birkhauser Verlag, 2002, pp.294–310.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jonassen A, Dahl O J. Analysis of an algorithm for priority queue administration. BIT, 1975, 15: 409–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaplan H, Shafrir N, Tarjan R E. Meldable heaps and Boolean union find. In Proc. 34th ACM Symp. Theory of Computing (STOC'02), 2002, pp.573–582.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Andreou M, Nikolopoulos S D. An Efficient Data Structure for Maintaining Future Events in a Discrete-Event Simulation System. In Recent Advances in Information Science and Technology, World Scientific, 1998, pp.11–22.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brown R. A fast $O(1)$ priority queue implementation for the simulation event set problem. Comm. the ACM, 1988, 31: 1220–1227.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    McCormack W M, Sargent R G. Analysis of future event set algorithms for discrete event simulation. Comm. the ACM, 1981, 24: 801–812.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rao V N, Kumar V. Concurrent access of priority queues. IEEE Trans. Comput., 1988, 37: 1657–1665.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tan K L, Thng L J. SNOOPY calendar queue. In Proc. the 2000 Winter Simulation Conference, Orlando, Florida, Dec. 10–13, 2000, pp.487–495.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nikolopoulos S D, MacLeod R. An experimental analysis of event set algorithms for discrete event simulation. Microprocessing and Microprogramming, 1993, 36: 71–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Steinman J S. Discrete-event simulation and the event horizon, Part 2: Event list management. In Proc. 10th Workshop Parall. and Distrib. Simul. (PADS'96), Philadelphia, Pennsy Lvania, May 22–24, 1996, pp.170–178.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Steinman J S. SPEEDES: A multiple synchronization environment for parallel discrete-event simulation. Inter. J. Computer Simul., 1992, 2: 251–286.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Steinman J S. Discrete-event simulation and the event horizon. In Proc. 8th Workshop Parall. and Distrib. Simul. (PADS'94), Edinburgh, Scotland, July 6–8, 1994, pp.39–49.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lewis R, Denenberg L. Data Structures & Algorithms. New York: Harpel Collins Publishers, 1991.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reeves C M. Complexity analyses of event set algorithms. The Computer Journal, 1984, 27: 72–79.zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of IoanninaIoanninaGreece

Personalised recommendations