Did you mean "3.6 Benchmarks: CHAMP versus Clojure’s and Scala’s HAMTs"?
"Speedups Compared to Clojure’s Maps: In every runtime measurement CHAMP is
better than Clojure. CHAMP improves by a median 72 % for Lookup, 24 % for Insert,
and 32 % for Delete. At iteration and equality checking, CHAMP significantly outperforms
Clojure. Iteration (Key) improves by a median 83 %, and Iteration (Entry) by
73 %. Further, CHAMP improves on Equality (Distinct) by a median 96 %, and scores
several magnitudes better at Equality (Derived).
Speedups Compared to Clojure’s Sets: The speedups of CHAMP for sets are similar
to maps across the board, with exception of insertion and deletion where it scores
even better."
Sure, you can point to algorithms that nobody experienced ever uses. But if you e.g. compare qsort usage with heapsort usage, people use qsort because of it's better constant factors, even though the worst case complexity is worse.
"Speedups Compared to Clojure’s Maps: In every runtime measurement CHAMP is better than Clojure. CHAMP improves by a median 72 % for Lookup, 24 % for Insert, and 32 % for Delete. At iteration and equality checking, CHAMP significantly outperforms Clojure. Iteration (Key) improves by a median 83 %, and Iteration (Entry) by 73 %. Further, CHAMP improves on Equality (Distinct) by a median 96 %, and scores several magnitudes better at Equality (Derived). Speedups Compared to Clojure’s Sets: The speedups of CHAMP for sets are similar to maps across the board, with exception of insertion and deletion where it scores even better."
Interesting indeed!