Related
Let's say I have an array A = [3, 6, 7, 5, 3, 5, 6, 2, 9, 1] and B = [2, 7, 0, 9, 3, 6, 0, 6, 2, 6]
Rearrange elements of array A so that when we do comparison element-wise like 3 with 2 and 6 with 7 and so on, we have maximum wins (combinations where A[i] > B[i] are maximum (0<=i<len(A))).
I tried below approach:
def optimal_reorder(A,B,N):
tagged_A = [('d',i) for i in A]
tagged_B = [('a',i) for i in B]
merged = tagged_A + tagged_B
merged = sorted(merged,key=lambda x: x[1])
max_wins = 0
for i in range(len(merged)-1):
print (i)
if set((merged[i][0],merged[i+1][0])) == {'a','d'}:
if (merged[i][0] == 'a') and (merged[i+1][0] == 'd'):
if (merged[i][1] < merged[i+1][1]):
print (merged[i][1],merged[i+1][1])
max_wins += 1
return max_wins
as referenced from
here
but this approach doesn't seem to give correct answer for given A and B i,e if A = [3, 6, 7, 5, 3, 5, 6, 2, 9, 1] and B = [2, 7, 0, 9, 3, 6, 0, 6, 2, 6] then maximum wins is 7 but my algorithm is giving 5.
is there something I am missing here.
revised solution as suggested by #chqrlie
def optimal_reorder2(A,B):
arrA = A.copy()
C = [None] * len(B)
for i in range(len(B)):
k = i + 1
all_ele = []
while (k < len(arrA)):
if arrA[k] > B[i]:
all_ele.append(arrA[k])
k += 1
if all_ele:
e = min(all_ele)
else:
e = min(arrA)
C[i] = e
arrA.remove(e)
return C
How about this algorithm:
start with an empty array C.
for each index i in range(len(B)).
if at least one of the remaining elements of A is larger than B[i], choose e as the smallest of these elements, otherwise choose e as the smallest element of A.
set C[i] = e and remove e from A.
C should be a reordering of A that maximises the number of true comparisons C[i] > B[i].
There’s probably a much better algorithm than this, but you can think of this as a maximum bipartite matching problem. Think of the arrays as the two groups of nodes in the bipartite graph, then add an edge from A[i] to B[j] if A[i] > B[j]. Then any matching tells you how to pair elements of A with elements of B such that the A element “wins” against the B element, and a maximum matching tells you how to do this to maximize the number of wins.
I’m sure there’s a better way to do this, and I’m excited to see what other folks come up with. But this at least shows you can solve this in polynomial time.
Let's say I have some numbers in an array like below
let numberArray = [1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 14, 16]
I know how to sum them all up by using reduce method but how can I start adding numbers from specific element. For example:
//Sum all up by reduce
let sumAll = numberArray.reduce(0, +)
//sumAll = 53
//I want to start counting from the fourth element in the array which is 6
//so the total should be 45. [6 + 9 + 14 + 16]
What method should I use to achieve this?
Thanks in advance.
You can either use dropFirst(_:) or use a range as the index.
If it's not a fixed number, you could first use firstIndex(of:) to determine the index where you want to start.
numberArray.dropFirst(3).reduce(0, +)
numberArray[3...].reduce(0, +)
Run reduce on the desired subarray:
let numberArray = [1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 14, 16]
let sum = numberArray[3...].reduce(0, +)
In Ruby, let's say I have an array of ordreed, unique numbers
[0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10]
If the first element of the array is zero, how do I remove all the elements from teh beginning of the array that are consecutive, starting wiht zero? That is, in the above example, I would want to remove "0", "1", and "2" leaving me with
[4, 6, 8, 10]
But if my array is
[1, 2, 3, 10, 15]
I would expect the array to be unchanged because the first element is not zero.
You could use a mix of drop_while and with_index to only remove the first matching elements:
[0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10].drop_while.with_index{|x, i| x == i}
# [4, 6, 8, 10]
[1, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10].drop_while.with_index{|x, i| x == i}
# [1, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10]
Note that the second and third elements don't get deleted in the second example, even though they're equal to their indices.
Drop elements, as long as they are equal to their index:
a=a.drop_while.with_index{|e,i| e==i}
Sounds like you're trying to delete entities if they match their idx (provided the first idx is 0). Try this:
if array.first == 0
new_array = array.reject.each_with_index{ |item, idx| item == idx }
end
Although this will only work with ordered arrays of unique numbers, if you're not sure that they are then include: array = array.sort.uniq
You could do:
x = -1
while my_array.first == x + 1 do
x = my_array.shift
end
Note that array.shift is the same as array.pop except that it works from the start of the array.
If I understand you right, then it can be one of possible solutions:
def foo(array)
if array.first.zero?
array.keep_if.with_index { |e, ind| e != ind }
else
array
end
end
> foo([0, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7])
#=> => [5, 6, 7]
> foo([1, 2, 3])
#=> [1, 2, 3]
In short form:
a[0] == 0 ? a[3..-1] : a
In longer form:
if a.first == 0
a[3..(a.size)]
else
a
end
Given an array, the output array consecutive elements where total sum is 0.
Eg:
For input [2, 3, -3, 4, -4, 5, 6, -6, -5, 10],
Output is [3, -3, 4, -4, 5, 6, -6, -5]
I just can't find an optimal solution.
Clarification 1: For any element in the output subarray, there should a subset in the subarray which adds with the element to zero.
Eg: For -5, either one of subsets {[-2, -3], [-1, -4], [-5], ....} should be present in output subarray.
Clarification 2: Output subarray should be all consecutive elements.
Here is a python solution that runs in O(n³):
def conSumZero(input):
take = [False] * len(input)
for i in range(len(input)):
for j in range(i+1, len(input)):
if sum(input[i:j]) == 0:
for k in range(i, j):
take[k] = True;
return numpy.where(take, input)
EDIT: Now more efficient! (Not sure if it's quite O(n²); will update once I finish calculating the complexity.)
def conSumZero(input):
take = [False] * len(input)
cs = numpy.cumsum(input)
cs.insert(0,0)
for i in range(len(input)):
for j in range(i+1, len(input)):
if cs[j] - cs[i] == 0:
for k in range(i, j):
take[k] = True;
return numpy.where(take, input)
The difference here is that I precompute the partial sums of the sequence, and use them to calculate subsequence sums - since sum(a[i:j]) = sum(a[0:j]) - sum(a[0:i]) - rather than iterating each time.
Why not just hash the incremental sum totals and update their indexes as you traverse the array, the winner being the one with largest index range. O(n) time complexity (assuming average hash table complexity).
[2, 3, -3, 4, -4, 5, 6, -6, -5, 10]
sum 0 2 5 2 6 2 7 13 7 2 12
The winner is 2, indexed 1 to 8!
To also guarantee an exact counterpart contiguous-subarray for each number in the output array, I don't yet see a way around checking/hashing all the sum subsequences in the candidate subarrays, which would raise the time complexity to O(n^2).
Based on the example, I assumed that you wanted to find only the ones where 2 values together added up to 0, if you want to include ones that add up to 0 if you add more of them together (like 5 + -2 + -3), then you would need to clarify your parameters a bit more.
The implementation is different based on language, but here is a javascript example that shows the algorithm, which you can implement in any language:
var inputArray = [2, 3, -3, 4, -4, 5, 6, -6, -5, 10];
var ouputArray = [];
for (var i=0;i<inputArray.length;i++){
var num1 = inputArray[i];
for (var x=0;x<inputArray.length;x++){
var num2 = inputArray[x];
var sumVal = num1+num2;
if (sumVal == 0){
outputArray.push(num1);
outputArray.push(num2);
}
}
}
Is this the problem you are trying to solve?
Given a sequence , find maximizing such that
If so, here is the algorithm for solving it:
let $U$ be a set of contiguous integers
for each contiguous $S\in\Bbb Z^+_{\le n}$
for each $\T in \wp\left([i,j)\right)$
if $\sum_{n\in T}a_n = 0$
if $\left|S\right| < \left|U\left$
$S \to u$
return $U$
(Will update with full latex once I get the chance.)
Let's say I have an array with 5 elements. How can I calculate all possible repetitive permutations of this array in C.
Edit: What I mean is creating all possible arrays by using that 5 number. So the positon matters.
Example:
array = [1,2,3,4,5]
[1,1,1,1,1]
[1,1,1,1,2]
[1,1,1,2,3]
.
.
A common way to generate combinations or permutations is to use recursion: enumerate each of the possibilities for the first element, and prepend those to each of the combinations or permutations for the same set reduced by one element. So, if we say that you're looking for the number of permutations of n things taken k at a time and we use the notation perms(n, k), you get:
perms(5,5) = {
[1, perms(5,4)]
[2, perms(5,4)]
[3, perms(5,4)]
[4, perms(5,4)]
[5, perms(5,4)]
}
Likewise, for perms(5,4) you get:
perms(5,4) = {
[1, perms(5,3)]
[2, perms(5,3)]
[3, perms(5,3)]
[4, perms(5,3)]
[5, perms(5,3)]
}
So part of perms(5,5) looks like:
[1, 1, perms(5,3)]
[1, 2, perms(5,3)]
[1, 3, perms(5,3)]
[1, 4, perms(5,3)]
[1, 5, perms(5,3)]
[2, 1, perms(5,3)]
[2, 2, perms(5,3)]
...
Defining perms(n, k) is easy. As for any recursive definition, you need two things: a base case and a recursion step. The base case is where k = 0: perms(n, 0) is an empty array, []. For the recursive step, you generate elements by prepending each of the possible values in your set to all of the elements of perms(n, k-1).
If I get your question correctly, you need to generate all 5 digit numbers with digits 1,2,3,4 and 5. So there is a simple solution - generate all numbers base five up to 44444 and then map the 0 to 1, 1 to 2 and so on. Add leading zeros where needed - so 10 becomes 00010 or [1,1,1,2,1].
NOTE: you don't actually have to generate the numbers themselves, you may just iterate the numbers up to 5**5(excluding) and for each of them find the corresponing sequence by getting it's digits base 5.
int increment(size_t *dst, size_t len, size_t base) {
if (len == 0) return 0;
if (dst[len-1] != base-1) {
++dst[len-1];
return 1;
} else {
dst[len-1] = 0;
return increment(dst, len-1, base);
}
}
Armed with this function you can iterate over all repetitive permutations of (0 ... 4) starting from {0, 0, 0, 0, 0}. The function will return 0 when it runs out of repetitive permutations.
Then for each repetitive permutation in turn, use the contents as indexes into your array so as to get a repetitive permutation of the array rather than of (0 ... 4).
In your given example, each position could be occupied by either 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. As there are 5 positions, the total number of possibilities = 5 * 5 * 5 * 5 * 5 = 5 ^ 5 = 3125. In general, it would be N ^ N. (where ^ is the exponentiation operator).
To generate these possibilities, in each of the positions, put the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, one by one, and increment starting from the last position, similar to a 5 digit counter.
Hence, start with 11111. Increment the last position to get 11112 ... until 11115.
Then wrap back to 1, and increment the next digit 11121 continue with 11122 ... 11125, etc. Repeat this till you reach the first position, and you would end at 55555.