CLRS.Helper[Lite]
ASO Keyword Dashboard
Tracking 76 keywords for CLRS.Helper[Lite] in Apple App Store
CLRS.Helper[Lite] tracks 76 keywords (3 keywords rank; 73 need traction). Key metrics: 0% top-10 coverage, opportunity 69.6, difficulty 39.4, best rank 15.
Tracked keywords
76
3 ranked • 73 not ranking yet
Top 10 coverage
0%
Best rank 15 • Latest leader —
Avg opportunity
69.6
Top keyword: source
Avg difficulty
39.4
Lower scores indicate easier wins
Opportunity leaders
- 67.7
source
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 42.6 • Rank —
Competitors: 110
- 63.8
merge
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.4 • Rank —
Competitors: 184
- 64.1
operation
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 38.8 • Rank —
Competitors: 42
- 67.5
functions
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.6 • Rank —
Competitors: 108
- 64.6
black
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.0 • Rank —
Competitors: 135
Unranked opportunities
source
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 42.6 • Competitors: 110
merge
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.4 • Competitors: 184
operation
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 38.8 • Competitors: 42
functions
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.6 • Competitors: 108
black
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.0 • Competitors: 135
High competition keywords
time
Total apps: 189,872 • Major competitors: 2,979
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 55.0
help
Total apps: 162,244 • Major competitors: 2,472
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 54.9
track
Total apps: 125,707 • Major competitors: 1,580
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 52.7
using
Total apps: 114,639 • Major competitors: 1,562
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 53.1
data
Total apps: 97,683 • Major competitors: 1,018
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 51.5
All tracked keywords
Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks
| Major Competitors | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| complexity | 71 | 100 | 33 | 55 1,940 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.1 | 15 | 15 | 22 major competitor apps |
| algorithms | 72 | 100 | 37 | 61 4,732 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.0 | 82 | 76 | 51 major competitor apps |
| algorithm | 72 | 100 | 38 | 61 4,700 competing apps Median installs: 550 Avg rating: 4.1 | 86 | 84 | 54 major competitor apps |
| change | 69 | 100 | 48 | 77 40,802 competing apps Median installs: 600 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 783 major competitor apps |
| single | 69 | 100 | 48 | 77 41,009 competing apps Median installs: 550 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 614 major competitor apps |
| source | 73 | 100 | 43 | 68 11,748 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 110 major competitor apps |
| connected | 70 | 100 | 48 | 76 37,881 competing apps Median installs: 300 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 453 major competitor apps |
| step | 69 | 100 | 48 | 77 42,115 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 644 major competitor apps |
| merge | 73 | 100 | 41 | 64 6,874 competing apps Median installs: 900 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 184 major competitor apps |
| design | 69 | 100 | 48 | 77 40,747 competing apps Median installs: 534 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 678 major competitor apps |
| content | 68 | 100 | 52 | 79 60,391 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.2 | — | — | 953 major competitor apps |
| using | 66 | 100 | 53 | 84 114,639 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 1,562 major competitor apps |
| time | 65 | 100 | 55 | 88 189,872 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 2,979 major competitor apps |
| program | 72 | 100 | 44 | 71 18,525 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 230 major competitor apps |
| help | 65 | 100 | 55 | 87 162,244 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 2,472 major competitor apps |
| process | 70 | 100 | 46 | 74 28,694 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 230 major competitor apps |
| operation | 73 | 100 | 39 | 64 7,201 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 3.9 | — | — | 42 major competitor apps |
| search | 68 | 100 | 52 | 80 61,671 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 979 major competitor apps |
| function | 72 | 100 | 42 | 69 14,730 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 3.9 | — | — | 159 major competitor apps |
| dynamic | 71 | 100 | 45 | 72 20,951 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 292 major competitor apps |
| code | 71 | 100 | 45 | 73 22,997 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 246 major competitor apps |
| track | 66 | 100 | 53 | 85 125,707 competing apps Median installs: 431 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 1,580 major competitor apps |
| run | 71 | 100 | 46 | 73 24,002 competing apps Median installs: 550 Avg rating: 4.1 | — | — | 501 major competitor apps |
| minimum | 72 | 100 | 41 | 60 4,115 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.0 | — | — | 94 major competitor apps |
| functions | 73 | 100 | 42 | 67 11,457 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 3.8 | — | — | 108 major competitor apps |
App Description
2. Getting Started: Insertion sort, Merge sort;
4. Divide-and-Conquer: Maximum-subarray, Matrix Multiplication[normal, recursive, Strassen’s algorithm];
6. Heapsort: Heapsort[max-heap, min-heap];
7. Quicksort: Quicksort;
8. Sorting in Linear Time: Counting sort;
12. Binary Search Trees: Binary search tree[Inorder Walk, Search Recursive, Search Iterative, Minimum Iterative, Maximum Iterative, Successor, Predecessor, Insert, Delete];
13. Red-Black Trees: Red Black Tree[Insert, Delete];
15. Dynamic Programming: Rod cutting[Recursive, Top_down, Bottom_up, Print],Longest common subsequence;
16. Greedy Algorithms: Acitivity selection[Recursive, Iterative],Huffman codes;
22. Elementary Graph: Breadth-first search, Depth-first search, Topological sort, Strongly connected components;
23. Minimum Spanning Trees: Minimum spanning tree[Kruskal’s algorithm,Prim’s algorithm];
24. Single-Source Shortest Paths: The Bellman-Ford algorithm,DAG algorithm,Dijkstra’s algorithm;
25. All-pairs Shortest Paths: All-pairs Shortest paths algorithms[Slow,Faster,The Floyd-Warshall algorithm];
26. Maximum Flow: The Ford-Fulkerson algorithm;
Addition: Tower of Hanoi,N Queens Problem,Comparison of sorting algorithms;
The primary features:
You can run the pseudo-code single step or continuous, observe the change of parameters and data structures,it can help you to understand the design thought of the algorithm;
You can set breakpoints in program and ovserve the status of breakpoint, it can help you to understand why this algorithm is corrcet by using loop invariants;
With running-time function stacks and the returning positions,you can track the running process of recursive functions easily, and understand the operation mechanism of computer programs;
By recording the performed times of the pseudo-codes can help you to understand the running time of algorithms;
I wish this app can be helpful to you;