Mathematical Validation Of Algorithmic Efficiency In Computational Data Science Applications
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29284/nq4gpz79Keywords:
Algorithmic Efficiency, Computational Data Science, Complexity Analysis, Mathematical Validation, Performance Evaluation.Abstract
The role of algorithmic efficiency in computational data science is quite critical, as computational methods based on scalable and mathematically sound algorithms become more popular in modern applications. The paper provides a streamlined but mathematical justification of the effectiveness of widely known algorithms, such as searching, sorting, clustering, and simple optimization algorithms. The research does not use expensive computation software or empirical simulation but uses a theoretical approach based on step-counting, use of asymptotic notations and use of an example-based verification. The study shows the evident performance behaviour differences between the logarithmic complexity, linear complexity, linear-logarithmic complexity, and quadratic complexity classes through breaking down the algorithms into basic operation steps and examining their behaviour in terms of the size of the input. The results indicate that algorithms including Binary Search and Merge sort have very efficient growth behaviours whereas algorithms like Bubble sort and simple pair wise clustering have large growth changes in operations as their input increases. The above example-based validation also proves the correctness of the mathematical predictions indicating that there is a consistent correspondence between the theoretical growth patterns and the observed operational trends. In general, the findings indicate the need to understand the behaviour of algorithms based on transparent mathematics, which underscores the value of available analytical models that may be used to facilitate teaching and learning algorithms in computational data science as well as practices in algorithm selection. This method presents a background to subsequent research that aims to assess the performance of the algorithms without the use of the complicated computational experimentation.
References
1. Antonov and V. Voevodin, The algorithms properties and structure study as a mandatory element of modern IT education, In: Russian Supercomputing Days, Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020), 524-535.
2. Anuradha and T. Velmurugan, A comparative analysis on the evaluation of classification algorithms in the prediction of students performance, Indian Journal of Science and technology, 8, No 15 (2015), 1-12.
3. E. Jacob, N. Ashodariya and A. Dhongade, Hybrid search algorithm: Combined linear and binary search algorithm, In: 2017 International Conference on Energy, Communication, Data Analytics and Soft Computing (ICECDS), IEEE, (2017), 1543-1547.
4. E. Taiwo, A. O. Christianah, A. N. Oluwatobi and K. A. Aderonke, Comparative study of two divide and conquer sorting algorithms: quicksort and merge sort, Procedia Computer Science, 171, (2020), 2532-2540.
5. F. Liu and D. Panagiotakos, Real-world data: a brief review of the methods, applications, challenges and opportunities, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 22, No 1 (2022), 287.
6. G. Mohammadi, M. H. Amini and H. R. Arabnia, Evolutionary computation, optimization, and learning algorithms for data science, In: Optimization, Learning, and Control for Interdependent Complex Networks, Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020), 37-65.
7. G. Mohammadi, M. H. Amini and H. R. Arabnia, Evolutionary computation, optimization, and learning algorithms for data science, In: Optimization, Learning, and Control for Interdependent Complex Networks, Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020), 37-65.
8. García-Jiménez, J. J. Torres-Gordillo and J. Rodríguez-Santero, Factors associated with school effectiveness: Detection of high-and low-efficiency schools through hierarchical linear models, Education Sciences, 12, No 1 (2022), 59.
9. H. Zenil, A review of methods for estimating algorithmic complexity: Options, challenges, and new directions, Entropy, 22, No 6 (2020), 612.
10. Hernandez and T. B. Brown, Measuring the algorithmic efficiency of neural networks, arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.04305, (2020).
11. J. L. Fernández-Martínez, Z. Fernández-Muñiz, A. Cernea and A. Kloczkowski, Predictive Mathematical Models of the Short‐Term and Long‐Term Growth of the COVID‐19 Pandemic, Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2021, No 1 (2021), 5556433.
12. J. López-Fernández, E. Guerra and J. de Lara, Example-based validation of domain-specific visual languages, In: Proc. 2015 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Software Language Engineering, (2015), 101-112.
13. Lin, Binary search algorithm, WikiJournal of Science, 2, No 1 (2019), 1-13.
14. Mala and R. Ali, The Big-O of mathematics and computer science, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computation, 6, No 1 (2022).
15. Mohammadagha, Hybridization and Optimization Modelling, Analysis, and Comparative Study of Sorting Algorithms: Adaptive Techniques, Parallelization, for Merge sort, Heapsort, Quicksort, Insertion Sort, Selection Sort, and Bubble Sort, (2025).
16. Orouskhani, D. Shi and Y. Orouskhani, Multi-objective evolutionary clustering with complex networks, Expert Systems with Applications, 165, (2021), 113916.
17. Panwar, M. Olfati, M. Pant and V. Snasel, A review on the 40 years of existence of data envelopment analysis models: historic development and current trends, Archives of computational methods in engineering, 29, No 7 (2022), 5397.
18. Pelagalli, S. Faccio and P. Casari, Mathematical Modelling and Simulation of Logistic Growth, Applied Sciences, 15, No 8 (2025), 4409.
19. Qudrat-Ullah, Theoretical Foundations of Complexity, In: Navigating Complexity: AI and Systems Thinking for Smarter Decisions, Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham (2025), 11-38.
20. Rossi, L. Pappalardo and P. Cintia, A narrative review for a machine learning application in sports: an example based on injury forecasting in soccer, Sports, 10, No 1 (2021), 5.
21. S. Gathu, High-performance computing and big data: Emerging trends in advanced computing systems for data-intensive applications, Journal of Advanced Computing Systems, 4, No 8 (2024), 22-35.
22. S. T. Muxtaraliyevich, ALGORITHMIC THINKING IN MATHEMATICS: A PEDAGOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR DEEP CONCEPTUAL LEARNING, Modern American Journal of Linguistics, Education, and Pedagogy, 1, No 3 (2025), 587-594.
23. Scholz and T. Wimmer, A comparison of classification methods across different data complexity scenarios and datasets, Expert Systems with Applications, 168, (2021), 114217.
24. Schweiger, H. Nilsson, J. Schoeggl, W. Birk and A. Posch, Modelling and simulation of large-scale systems: A systematic comparison of modelling paradigms, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 365, (2020), 124713.
25. W. Deng, H. Zhao, L. Zou, G. Li, X. Yang and D. Wu, A novel collaborative optimization algorithm in solving complex optimization problems, Soft Computing, 21, No 15 (2017), 4387-4398.
26. W. Li, W. D. Cook, Z. Li and J. Zhu, Efficiency measurement for hierarchical situations, Journal of the operational research society, 72, No 3 (2021), 654-662.
27. W. Mostert, K. M. Malan and A. P. Engelbrecht, A feature selection algorithm performance metric for comparative analysis, Algorithms, 14, No 3 (2021), 100.
28. Y. Yang, Quality evaluation method of a mathematics teaching model reform based on an improved genetic algorithm, Scientific Programming, 2021, No 1 (2021), 6395349.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

