Page actions
instrument implementation / implementation-contract
Binary Tree / Heap Visualizer & Property Calculator implementation
A source-bound implementation contract for Binary Tree / Heap Visualizer & Property Calculator; deployment and executable qualification remain separate.
Status: VERIFIED_CLEANLifecycle: implementation-contract
Binding contract
This record describes what an executable surface must bind and validate. It does not claim that a public calculator, package, or production route is deployed.
- Record owner
- Guth Instruments
- Lifecycle
- verified-clean
- Evidence ID
- t6-098
- Effect
- Computation or source lookup only
Input and validation requirements
- log2(0) causes an undefined-value or division/domain error unless the empty tree is handled before applying the formula.
- Using floor(log2(n)) for a non-complete tree gives an incorrect height; the implementation must compute the longest root-to-leaf path for arbitrary trees.
- A one-based heap-index implementation must use child indices 2i and 2i+1, while a zero-based implementation must use 2i+1 and 2i+2; mixing conventions can create invalid edges or missed checks.
- Duplicate BST values require an explicit policy, such as reject, always insert left, or always insert right.
- A balance factor needs a declared sign convention and empty-subtree height convention; otherwise reported values are ambiguous.
- Heap validation should handle missing children and should report which parent-child edge violates the selected min-heap or max-heap comparator.
- If arbitrary numeric strings, mixed units, NaN, or incomparable values are accepted, ordering and heap validation are not well-defined.
- The honest label is empty; the instrument should state the construction mode, height convention, balance-factor definition, duplicate policy, and that the complete-tree height shortcut is not applicable to arbitrary BSTs.
Required corrections
No binding erratum is attached to this unique-name record. Implementers must still preserve the declared units, domain, and failure behavior.
Inspectable interface fixture
The sample below is evidence for interface and validation tests, not a production implementation.
{
"inputs": {
"array": [
1,
3,
2,
7,
6,
5
],
"tree_type": "min-heap",
"construction": "level-order",
"height_convention": "edges",
"balance_convention": "left_height_minus_right_height"
},
"expected_outputs": {
"nodes_by_level": [
[
1
],
[
3,
2
],
[
7,
6,
5
]
],
"height_edges": 2,
"balance_factors_by_value": {
"1": 0,
"2": 1,
"3": 0,
"5": 0,
"6": 0,
"7": 0
},
"heap_valid": true,
"violations": []
},
"working": "n=6. Complete-tree height = floor(log2(6)) = floor(2.5849625007) = 2 edges. Levels are [1], [3,2], [7,6,5], so there are 3 levels and height 3-1=2. Heap checks: 1<=3, 1<=2, 3<=7, 3<=6, and 2<=5; all are true. Balance factors: BF(1)=1-1=0; BF(3)=0-0=0; BF(2)=0-(-1)=1; each leaf has 0-0=0. Therefore the min-heap is valid."
}Other records
Sources and evidence
These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment.
VERIFIED_LEDGER.jsonevidence-tranche6/tranche6-results.json