checking for co-prime in C prgramming language - c

#include <stdio.h>
int iscoprime(int num1, int num2);
int main() {
int x;
x = iscoprime( 7, 8 );
printf("%d",x);a
}
int iscoprime(int num1, int num2) {
int r = 0;
int gcd = 0;
int i;
for(i = 0; (i < num1) || (i < num2) ; ++i) {
if( (num1 % i == 0) && (num2 % i == 0)) {
gcd = i;
}
}
if ( gcd == 1 ) r = 1;
return r;
}
Error: this program has stopped..??? :(

Your program has some flaws.
1) The for loop starts with i value 0. So, in the first iteration itself, floating point exception will occur. It should start from 1.
2) Your question stated that the program is finding the gcd. Which doesn't seem to be the matter. It seems to me that it is finding whether the given numbers are co-prime or not.
If its a GCD program, the return statement should be
return gcd; //without the previous if condition

Its unclear what you want your return value to mean from the iscoprime function. It looks like it returns the greatest common divisor and then checks if it is 1, then the two inputs are co-prime, and else it uses r's initial value of 0 hence meaning it will print 1 if the numbers are co-prime and 0 if they are not. Your for loop doesn't quite make sense. The max greatest common divisor of two numbers can have would be the lower of the two values. I would start your for loop at this value, 7 in your case and decrement i with each iteration and return i when both numbers divide by i without a remainder. This would would then be your greatest common divisor, if it is 1, then your two numbers are co-prime.
While this implementation is fine for small numbers, if the numbers are going to be very large, I would have a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_algorithm which can compute the GCD very fast and the same will still apply, if the GCD is 1, the two inputs are co-prime.

Related

How to reduce this piece of code in order to avoid TLE

The program is to find the number of digits in a factorial of a number
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
int main()
{
int n = 0 , i , count = 0 , dig ;
double sum = 0, fact;
scanf("%d" , &n );
for(i=1;i<=n;i++)
{
sum = sum + log(i);
}
fact = (exp(sum));
while(fact!=0)
{
dig = ((int)fact%10);
count++;
fact = floor(fact/10);
}
printf("%d\n",count);
return 0;
}
Feel free to comment on making improvements on this code since I don't have a broad experience in Coding yet.
The reason your code is taking so long is that once n reaches about 180, the value of fact becomes too large to hold in a double-precision floating point variable. When you execute this line:
fact = (exp(sum));
you're basically setting fact to a value of infinity. As a result, the following while() loop never terminates.
There's also not much point calculating logarithms in your code. It will only slow things down. Just calculate the factorial in a double variable and reset it whenever it gets too large. Like this, for example:
int factorial_digit_count(int n) {
int i, nd=1;
double f = 1.0;
for (i=2; i<=n; i++) {
f *= i;
if (f > 1.0E+100) {
f /= 1.0E+100;
nd += 100;
}
}
while (f > 1.0E+10) {
f /= 1.0E+10;
nd += 10;
}
while (f >= 10.0) {
f /= 10.0;
nd++;
}
return nd;
}
Assuming you don't want to use any mathematical calculation but want to "brute force" your way through - this would how I would shorten your run time (and mostly clean up you code).
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
int main()
{
int n, fact = 1;
scanf("%d" , &n );
for (int i = 1; i < n; i++)
fact *= i;
int sum = 0;
while (fact != 0)
{
fact /= 10;
sum++
}
printf("%d\n",count);
return 0;
}
Hopefully this answers your question, good luck!
There is a simple relationship between the base b logarithm of a number and the base b representation of that number:
len(repr(x, b)) = 1 + floor(log(x, b))
In particular, in base 10, the number of digits in x is 1 + floor(log10(x)). (To see why that's the case, look at the result of that formula for powers of 10.)
Now, the logarithm of a×b is the sum of the logarithms of a and b. So the logarithm of n! is simply the sum of the logarithms of the integers from 1 to n. If we do that computation in base 10, then we can easily extract the length of the decimal expansion of n!.
In other words, if you sum the log10 of each value instead of the log, then you can get rid of:
fact = (exp(sum));
and
while(fact!=0)
{
dig = ((int)fact%10);
count++;
fact = floor(fact/10);
}
and just output 1 + floor(sum).
In theory, that could suffer from a round-off error. However, you'd need to do an awful lot of logarithms in order for the error term to propagate enough to create an error in the computation. (Not to say it can't happen. But if it happens, n is a very big number indeed.)

How can I make this very small C program faster?

Is there any simple way to make this small program faster? I've made it for an assignment, and it's correct but too slow. The aim of the program is to print the nth pair of primes where the difference between the two is two, given n.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
bool isPrime(int number) {
for (int i = 3; i <= number/2; i += 2) {
if (!(number%i)) {
return 0;
}
}
return 1;
}
int findNumber(int n) {
int prevPrime, currentNumber = 3;
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
do {
prevPrime = currentNumber;
do {
currentNumber+=2;
} while (!isPrime(currentNumber));
} while (!(currentNumber - 2 == prevPrime));
}
return currentNumber;
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
int numberin, numberout;
scanf ("%d", &numberin);
numberout = findNumber(numberin);
printf("%d %d\n", numberout - 2, numberout);
return 0;
}
I considered using some kind of array or list that would contain all primes found up until the current number and divide each number by this list instead of all numbers, but we haven't really covered these different data structures yet so I feel I should be able to solve this problem without. I'm just starting with C, but I have some experience in Python and Java.
To find pairs of primes which differ by 2, you only need to find one prime and then add 2 and test if it is also prime.
if (isPrime(x) && isPrime(x+2)) { /* found pair */ }
To find primes the best algorithm is the Sieve of Eratosthenes. You need to build a lookup table up to (N) where N is the maximum number that you can get. You can use the Sieve to get in O(1) if a number is prime. While building the Sieve you can build a list of sorted primes.
If your N is big you can also profit from the fact that a number P is prime iif it doesn't have any prime factors <= SQRT(P) (because if it has a factor > SQRT(N) then it should also have one < SQRT(N)). You can build a Sieve of Eratosthenes with size SQRT(N) to get a list of primes and then test if any of those prime divides P. If none divides P, P is prime.
With this approach you can test numbers up to 1 billion or so relatively fast and with little memory.
Here is an improvement to speed up the loop in isPrime:
bool isPrime(int number) {
for (int i = 3; i * i <= number; i += 2) { // Changed the loop condition
if (!(number%i)) {
return 0;
}
}
return 1;
}
You are calling isPrime more often than necessary. You wrote
currentNummber = 3;
/* ... */
do {
currentNumber+=2;
} while (!isPrime(currentNumber));
...which means that isPrime is called for every odd number. However, when you identified that e.g. 5 is prime, you can already tell that 10, 15, 20 etc. are not going to be prime, so you don't need to test them.
This approach of 'crossing-out' multiples of primes is done when using a sieve filter, see e.g. Sieve of Eratosthenes algorithm in C for an implementation of a sieve filter for primes in C.
Avoid testing ever 3rd candidate
Pairs of primes a, a+2 may only be found a = 6*n + 5. (except pair 3,5).
Why?
a + 0 = 6*n + 5 Maybe a prime
a + 2 = 6*n + 7 Maybe a prime
a + 4 = 6*n + 9 Not a prime when more than 3 as 6*n + 9 is a multiple of 3
So rather than test ever other integer with + 2, test with
a = 5;
loop {
if (isPrime(a) && isPrime(a+2)) PairCount++;
a += 6;
}
Improve loop exit test
Many processors/compilers, when calculating the remainder, will also have available, for nearly "free" CPU time cost, the quotient. YMMV. Use the quotient rather than i <= number/2 or i*i <= number to limit the test loop.
Use of sqrt() has a number of problems: range of double vs. int, exactness, conversion to/from integer. Recommend avoid sqrt() for this task.
Use unsigned for additional range.
bool isPrime(unsigned x) {
// With OP's selective use, the following line is not needed.
// Yet needed for a general purpose `isPrime()`
if (x%2 == 0) return x == 2;
if (x <= 3) return x == 3;
unsigned p = 1;
unsigned quotient, remainder;
do {
p += 2;
remainder = x%p;
if (remainder == 0) return false;
quotient = x/p; // quotient for "free"
} while (p < quotient); // Low cost compare
return true;
}

find all Carmichael numbers in a given interval [a,b) - C

I am working in a math software with different features one of them to be to find all Carmichael numbers in a given interval [a,b)
This is my code, but I don't know if I have done it correctly or not cause I can't test it since the smallest Carmichael number is 560 which is too big for my pc to process.
#include <stdio.h>
int main() {
unsigned int begin, end;
printf("Write an int (begin):\n");
scanf("%d", &begin);
printf("Write an int (end):\n");
scanf("%d", &end);
int i;
for( int i=begin; i<end; i++ ) {
long unsigned int a_nr = i-1;
int a[a_nr];
for( int j=0; j<a_nr; j++ ) {
a[j] = j;
}
unsigned long c_nr[a_nr];
for( int k=0; k<a_nr; k++ ) {
unsigned long current_c_nr;
int mod;
for( int l=0; l<i; l++ ) {
current_c_nr= current_c_nr * a[k];
}
mod = current_c_nr%i;
if( mod==a[k] && mod!=a[k] ) {
c_nr[k] = i;
}
}
}
return 0;
}
If it is not correct, where is the mistake?
Thank you
P.S Overflow should be prevented.
When you say "This is my code, but I don't know if I have done it correctly or not cause I can't test it since the smallest Carmichael number is 560 which is too big for my pc to process" then the conclusion is -- you haven't done it correctly. You should be able to process 561 (560 must be a typo) in a small fraction of a second. Even if your algorithm is in principle correct, if it can't handle the smallest Carmichael number then it is useless.
n is Carmichael if and only if it is composite and, for all a with 1 < a < n which are relatively prime to n, the congruence a^(n-1) = 1 (mod n) holds. To use this definition directly, you need:
1) An efficient way to test if a and n are relatively prime
2) An efficient way to compute a^(n-1) (mod n)
For the first -- use the Euclidean algorithm for greatest common divisors. It is most efficiently computed in a loop, but can also be defined via the simple recurrence gcd(a,b) = gcd(b,a%b) with basis gcd(a,0) = a. In C this is just:
unsigned int gcd(unsigned int a, unsigned int b){
return b == 0? a : gcd(b, a%b);
}
For the second point -- almost the worst possible thing you can do when computing a^k (mod n) is to first compute a^k via repeated multiplication and to then mod the result by n. Instead -- use exponentiation by squaring, taking the remainder (mod n) at intermediate stages. It is a divide-and-conquer algorithm based on the observation that e.g. a^10 = (a^5)^2 and a^11 = (a^5)^2 * a. A simple C implementation is:
unsigned int modexp(unsigned int a, unsigned int p, unsigned int n){
unsigned long long b;
switch(p){
case 0:
return 1;
case 1:
return a%n;
default:
b = modexp(a,p/2,n);
b = (b*b) % n;
if(p%2 == 1) b = (b*a) % n;
return b;
}
}
Note the use of unsigned long long to guard against overflow in the calculation of b*b.
To test if n is Carmichael, you might as well first test if n is even and return 0 in that case. Otherwise, step through numbers, a, in the range 2 to n-1. First check if gcd(a,n) == 1 Note that if n is composite then you must have at least one a before you reach the square root of n with gcd(a,n) > 1). Keep a Boolean flag which keeps track of whether or not such an a has been encountered and if you exceed the square root without finding such an a, return 0. For those a with gcd(a,n) == 1, compute the modular exponentiation a^(n-1) (mod n). If this is ever different from 1, return 0. If your loop finishes checking all a below n without returning 0, then the number is Carmichael, so return 1. An implementation is:
int is_carmichael(unsigned int n){
int a,s;
int factor_found = 0;
if (n%2 == 0) return 0;
//else:
s = sqrt(n);
a = 2;
while(a < n){
if(a > s && !factor_found){
return 0;
}
if(gcd(a,n) > 1){
factor_found = 1;
}
else{
if(modexp(a,n-1,n) != 1){
return 0;
}
}
a++;
}
return 1; //anything that survives to here is a carmichael
}
A simple driver program:
int main(void){
unsigned int n;
for(n = 2; n < 100000; n ++){
if(is_carmichael(n)) printf("%u\n",n);
}
return 0;
}
output:
C:\Programs>gcc carmichael.c
C:\Programs>a
561
1105
1729
2465
2821
6601
8911
10585
15841
29341
41041
46657
52633
62745
63973
75361
This only takes about 2 seconds to run and matches the initial part of this list.
This is probably a somewhat practical method for checking if numbers up to a million or so are Carmichael numbers. For larger numbers, you should probably get yourself a good factoring algorithm and use Korseldt's criterion as described in the Wikipedia entry on Carmichael numbers.

Tricky and confusing C program about divisor sum and perfect numbers

The assignment is :
Write a program that calculates the sum of the divisors of a number from input.
A number is considered perfect if the sum of it's divisiors equal the number (ex: 6 = 1+2+3 ;28 = 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 +14).
Another definition:
a perfect number is a number that is half the sum of all of its positive divisors (including itself)
Generate the first k perfect numbers (k<150).
The main problem with this is that it's confusing the two asking points don't really relate.
In this program i calculated the sum of divisors of an entered number, but i don't know how to relate it with the second point (Generate the first k perfect numbers (k<150)).
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
main()
{
int x,i,y,div,suma,k;
printf("Introduceti numarul\n"); \\enter the number
scanf("%d",&x);
suma=0; \\sum is 0
for(i=1;i<=x;i++)
{
if(x%i==0)
suma=suma+i; \\sum=sum+i;
}
printf("Suma divizorilor naturali este: %d\n",suma); \\the sum of the divisors is
for(k=1;k<150;k++) \\ bad part
{
if (x==suma)
printf("%d",k);
}
}
Suppose you have a function which can tell whether a given integer is perfect or not:
int isPerfect(int);
(function body not shown)
Now your main program will look like:
int candidate;
int perfectNumbers;
for(candidate = 1, perfectNumbers = 0; perfectNumbers < 150; candidate++) {
if (isPerfect(candidate)) {
printf("Number %d is perfect\n", candidate);
perfectNumbers++;
}
}
EDIT
For the same program without functions:
int candidate;
int perfectNumbers;
for(candidate = 1, perfectNumbers = 0; perfectNumbers < 150; candidate++) {
[... here your algorithm to compute the sum of the divisors of "candidate" ...]
if (candidate*2 == sum_of_divisors) {
printf("Number %d is perfect\n", candidate);
perfectNumbers++;
}
}
EDIT2: Just a note on perfect numbers
As noted in the comments section below, perfect numbers are very rare, only 48th of them are known as of 2014. The sequence (A000396) also grows very fast: using 64-bit integers you'll be able to compute up to the 8th perfect number (which happen to be 2,305,843,008,139,952,128). In this case the variable candidate will wrap around and start "finding" "new" perfect numbers from the beginning (until 150 of them are found: actually 19 repetitions of the only 8 findable in 64-bit integers). Note though that your algorithm must not choke on a candidate equals to 0 or to negative numbers (only to 0 if you declare candidate as unsigned int).
I am interpreting the question to mean generate all numbers under 150 that could are perfect numbers.
Therefore, if your program works for calculating perfect numbers, you keep calculating them until the starting number is >= 150.
Hope that makes sense.
Well, here's my solution ..
First, you have to make a reliable way of getting divisors.Here's a function I made for that:
size_t
getdivisors(num, divisors)
long long num;
long long *divisors;
{
size_t divs = 0;
for(long long i = num; i > 0; --i)
if (num%i == 0)
divisors[divs++] = i;
return divs;
}
Second, you need to check if the number's divisors match the perfect number's divisors properties (the sum of them is half the number).
Here's a second function for that:
bool
isperfect(num)
long long num;
{
long long divisors[num/2+1];
size_t divs = getdivisors(num, divisors);
if (divs == 0)
return false;
long long n = 0;
for(int i = 1; i < divs; ++i)
n += divisors[i];
return (n == num);
}
Now, from your question, I think you need to print all perfect numbers less than 150, right ?
See this:
int
main(argc, argv)
int argc;
char ** argv;
{
for(int i = 1; i < 150; ++i)
if (isperfect(i))
printf("%d is perfect.\n", i);
return 0;
}
I hope that answers your question ..

Getting one too few divisors

This is a program to count the number of divisors for a number, but it is giving one less divisor than there actually is for that number.
#include <stdio.h>
int i = 20;
int divisor;
int total;
int main()
{
for (divisor = 1; divisor <= i; divisor++)
{
if ((i % divisor == 0) && (i != divisor))
{
total = total++;
}
}
printf("%d %d\n", i, total);
return 0;
}
The number 20 has 6 divisors, but the program says that there are 5 divisors.
&& (i != divisor)
means that 20 won't be considered a divisor. If you want it to be considered, ditch that bit of code, and you'll get the whole set, {1, 2, 4, 5, 10, 20}.
Even if you didn't want the number counted as a divisor, you could still ditch that code and just use < instead of <= in the for statement.
And:
total = total++;
is totally unnecessary. It may even be undefined, I'm just too lazy to check at the moment and it's not important since nobody writes code like that for long :-)
Use either:
total = total + 1;
or (better):
total++;
Divisor counting is perhaps simpler and certainly faster than any of these. The key fact to note is that if p is a divisor of n, then so is n/p. Whenever p is not the square root of n, then you get TWO divisors per division test, not one.
int divcount(int n)
{
int i, j, count=0;
for (i=1, j=n; i<j; j = n/++i)
{
if (i*j == n)
count += 2;
}
if (i == j && i*j == n)
++count;
return count;
}
That gets the job done with sqrt(n) divisions, and sqrt(n) multiplications. I choose that because, while j=n/i and another j%i can be done with a single division instruction on most CPUs, I haven't seen compilers pick up on that optimization. Since multiplication is single-clock on modern desktop processors, the i*j == n test is much cheaper than a second division.
PS: If you need a list of divisors, they come up in the loop as i and j values, and perhaps as the i==j==sqrt(n) value at the end, if n is a square.
You have added an extra check && (i != divisor) as explained in given answer.
Here, I wrote the same program using the prime factorisation. This is quick way to find the number of divisor for large number (reference).
// this function return the number of divisor for n.
// if n = (m^a) (n^b) ... where m, n.. are prime factors of n
// then number of divisor d(n) = (a+1)*(b+1)..
int divisorcount(int n){
int divider = 2;
int limit = n/2;
int divisorCount = 1;
int power = 0;
// loop through i=2...n/2
while(divider<=limit){
if(n%divider==0){
// dividing numper using prime factor
// (as smallest number devide a number
// is it's prime factor) and increase the
// power term for prime factor.
power++;
n/=divider;
}
else{
if(power != 0){
// use the prime factor count to calculate
// divisor count.
divisorCount*=(power+1);
}
power = 0;
divider++;
// if n become 1 then we have completed the
// prime factorization of n.
if(n==1){
break;
}
}
}
return divisorCount;
}

Resources