I think all my answers basically follow the O(N) rule—nothing more, nothing less.
First off, with my basic algorithm, I tried to keep it simple to figure out how many different ways you can
climb a staircase. To keep it straightforward, I skipped using memorization, making the program a bit
simpler. It's made up of two if statements and a recursive call. The if statements don't take much time to
run, no matter the computer. The key part is the recursive call, where the number of stairs goes down
one at a time. Since I make the recursive call twice, making it 2N, and considering the constant rule, the
whole runtime wraps up at O(N).
Similar to the basic one, the bottom-up staircase algorithm runtime is O(N). With memorization, I save
past solutions in an array, ditching the need for recursion. The algorithm goes through a while loop,
counting on the array length versus the number of stairs. The loop's rate of increase is pretty much
linear, not bothered by the array size. So, the while loop adds to the overall runtime at a linear pace.
Since that's the main change to the runtime, the whole thing stays O(N).
Lastly, my top-down approach is also cruising at O(N) time. Unlike the other one, this algorithm relies on
recursion and memorization to find out how many ways you can reach the top of the stairs. It has a basic
case that quickly gives back values for the first three potential numbers of stairs since we already know
them. After that, it checks if the result for the current number of stairs is already in the memorization
array, done in a quick constant time. If it is, it spits out that solution; if not, it uses recursion to work out
the ways to climb the stairs. This part is the deal-breaker that makes the whole runtime O(N) because in
each round of the recursive call, N or the number of stairs is going down in a straight line.
In conclusion, delving into the intricacies of staircase-climbing algorithms has provided insights into their
respective runtimes and methodologies. The naive algorithm, designed with simplicity in mind, adheres
to the O(N) rule due to its recursive nature, despite intentionally steering clear of memorization.
On the other hand, the bottom-up approach, incorporating memorization to store previously solved
problems, maintains an O(N) runtime. This strategy effectively replaces recursion with an iterative
process, showcasing how a linear increase in the rate of ascent contributes to the overall efficiency of
the algorithm.
The top-down methodology, leveraging both recursion and memorization, also aligns with an O(N)
runtime. With a judicious combination of base cases and stored solutions, this approach adeptly
navigates the challenge of calculating distinct ways to climb a staircase, further emphasizing the
efficiency achievable within a linear time complexity.
Ultimately, these explorations underscore the significance of runtime analysis in algorithmic design.
Striking a balance between simplicity and efficiency is paramount, and the O(N) complexity observed in
these staircase-climbing algorithms exemplifies a pragmatic approach to problem-solving within the
realm of computer science.
