Which of the following is not a common approach to handling collisions in hash tables?OptionsChainingQuadratic probingLinear probingBinary search

Break Down the Problem

1. Identify the common collision resolution techniques used in hash tables.
2. Assess each of the provided options to determine which is not a common approach.

Relevant Concepts

1. Chaining: This method uses lists (or linked lists) to store multiple items that hash to the same index.
2. Linear Probing: A type of open addressing where, upon collision, the algorithm checks the next sequential index to find an empty slot.
3. Quadratic Probing: Another form of open addressing that checks the next available slots in a quadratic manner instead of linearly.
4. Binary Search: Typically used for searching in sorted data structures, not for collision resolution in hash tables.

Analysis and Detail

1. Both Chaining and Probings (Linear and Quadratic) are standard collision resolution techniques used directly in the context of hash tables.
2. Binary Search does not fit in the context of collision resolution methodologies as it pertains to searching sorted arrays or lists, and not to resolving conflicts in hash tables.

Verify and Summarize

The options Chaining, Quadratic probing, and Linear probing are valid collision resolution techniques for hash tables. Binary search, however, is unrelated to this context.

Final Answer

Binary search is not a common approach to handling collisions in hash tables.