so I've been struggling with this example for a good hour now and I can't even begin to process how should I do this.
Write a program that, for given n and m, forms a matrix as described.
The matrix should be m x m, and it's filled "spirally" with it's
beginning in the upper left corner. The first value in the matrix is
the number n. It's repeated until the "edge" of the matrix, at which
point the number increments. After the number 9 goes 0. 0 ≤ n ≤ 9, 0 ≤
m ≤ 9
Some time ago I had made a function to display the numbers 1 to n on an odd-sized grid.
The principle was to start from the center and to shift by ;
x = 1
x box on the right
x box on the bottom
x++
x box on the left
x box at the top
x++
With this simple algorithm, you can easily imagine to maybe start from the center of your problem and decrement your value, it seems easier to start from the center.
Here is the code that illustrates the above solution, to be adapted of course for your problem, it's only a lead.
#define WE 5
void clock(int grid[WE][WE])
{
int count;
int i;
int reach;
int flag;
int tab[2] = {WE / 2, WE / 2}; //x , y
count = 0;
flag = 0;
i = 0;
reach = 1;
grid[tab[1]][tab[0]] = count;
for (int j = 0; j < WE - 1 && grid[0][WE - 1] != pow(WE, 2) - 1; j++)
for (i = 0; i < reach && grid[0][WE - 1] != pow(WE, 2) - 1; i++, reach++)
{
if(flag % 2 == 0)
{
for(int right = 0 ; right < reach ; right++, tab[0]++, count++, flag = 1)
grid[tab[1]][tab[0]] = count;
if(reach < WE - 1)
for(int bottom = 0; bottom < reach; bottom++, count++, tab[1]++)
grid[tab[1]][tab[0]] = count;
}
else
{
for(int left = 0; left < reach; left++, count++, tab[0]--, flag = 0)
grid[tab[1]][tab[0]] = count;
for(int top = 0; top < reach; top++, tab[1]--, count++)
grid[tab[1]][tab[0]] = count;
}
}
}
I finally solved it. If anybody's interested, here's how I did it:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <math.h>
//Fills the row number "row" with the number n
int fillRow(int m, int n, int arr[m][m], int row)
{
int j;
for(j=0;j<m;j++)
{
if(arr[row][j] == -1 || arr[row][j] == n-1) arr[row][j] = n;
}
}
//Fills the column number "col" with the number n
int fillCol(int m, int n, int arr[m][m], int col)
{
int i;
for(i=0;i<m;i++)
{
if(arr[i][col] == -1 || arr[i][col] == n-1) arr[i][col] = n;
}
}
int main()
{
int n, m, i, j, r=1, c=1, row=-1, col=-1;
scanf("%d %d",&n, &m);
int arr[m][m];
//Fill array with -1 everywhere
for(i=0;i<m;i++)
{
for(j=0;j<m;j++)
{
arr[i][j] = -1;
}
}
//Calculate which row/column to fill (variables row/col)
//Fill row then column then row than column...
for(i=0;i<2*m;i++)
{
if(i%2==0)
{
row = (r%2==0) ? m-r/2 : r/2;
fillRow(m, n, arr, row);
n++;
r++;
}
else if(i%2==1)
{
col = (c%2==0) ? c/2-1 : m-c/2-1;
fillCol(m, n, arr, col);
n++;
c++;
}
}
//If an element is larger than 9, decrease it by 10
//Prints the elements
for(i=0;i<m;i++)
{
for(j=0;j<m;j++)
{
if(arr[i][j]>9) arr[i][j] -=10;
printf("%d ",arr[i][j]);
}
printf("\n");
}
return 0;
}
DISCLAIMER:
Described problem looks like a task from a competition. I'm not participating in any of them, I'm not aware about any ongoing competitions, which might involve the problem. If there are any of them, I'll close the question to stay fair!
I have a problem:
given an array A of values and integer K, split A into exactly K non-overlapping contiguous subarrays in such way that difference between a subarray with minimal and a subarray maximum sums is minimal. It is allowed to rotate A by any number in any direction.
Consider an example:
Input: A = [5 1 1 1 3 2], K = 3
Output: [5][1 1 1][3 2], maximum sum = 5, minimum sum = 3, result = 2
I have partially working code (terribly ugly, my bad, but it does not meant to be production quality):
#include <climits>
#include <cstdio>
#include <cstring>
const int max_n = 50;
const int max_k = 20;
int deps[max_n];
int max (int x, int y) {
return x > y ? x : y;
}
int min (int x, int y) {
return x < y ? x : y;
}
int sum (int a[], int start, int end) {
int res = 0;
for (int i = start; i <= end; ++i) res += a[i];
return res;
}
int k_partitioning(int k, int n, int deps[]) {
int res = INT_MAX;
// consider all possible rotations/shifts
for(int offset = 0; offset < n; ++offset) {
for(int l_min = 0; l_min < n; ++l_min) {
for(int r_min = l_min; r_min < n; ++r_min) {
// check minimal sum subarray
int min_sum = sum (deps, l_min, r_min);
int dp[k][n];
for (int s = 0; s < k; ++s) {
for (int q = 0; q < n; ++q) {
dp[s][q] = 0;
}
}
// assuming that current sum is a target sum
dp[0][r_min-l_min] = min_sum;
for(int p = 1; p < k; ++p) {
for(int l_max = 0; l_max < n; ++l_max) {
for(int r_max = 0; r_max < n; ++r_max) {
int max_sum = sum(deps, l_max, r_max);
if (max_sum >= min_sum) dp[p][r_max] = max(dp[p-1][l_max], max_sum);
} // l_maxs
} // r_maxs
} // partitions
// printing dp
// skip incorrect partitioning, when not all K partitions were used
if (dp[k-1][n-1] == 0) continue;
// update difference
res = min (res, dp[k-1][n-1] - min_sum);
} // end min sum seg
} // start min sum seg
//break;
} // cuts
return res;
}
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
int k = 0;
scanf("%d", &k);
int n = 0;
scanf("%d", &n);
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
scanf("%d", &deps[i]);
}
printf ("%d\n", k_partitioning(k, n, deps));
return 0;
}
The idea is simple: assume that current partition has minimal sum, enumerate all possible maximal partitions, setup dynamic programming for generating maximum sum with minimal value, check for difference. Total complexity: O(K*N^4).
My problem is that it fails some tests and I'm stuck with troubleshooting it. Could someone help me with it?
Failed test, for example:
N = 4, K = 2, A = [6 13 10 2]
UPDATE
This version should fix some previous issues. First, it removes wasteful loop over "offsets" and adds just an array rotation in the end of l_min loop. Second, I've noticed, that dp can't be initialized with 0 - this is minimization task, so it should be initialized with some large value (depends on a problem's constants, max_value here already is out of value domain). Finally, intervals should not overlap anymore - each sum exclude left end of an interval. However, it still does not produce expected results.
#include <climits>
#include <cstdio>
#include <cstring>
const int max_value = 200000;
const int max_n = 50;
const int max_k = 20;
int deps[max_n];
int max (int x, int y) {
return x > y ? x : y;
}
int min (int x, int y) {
return x < y ? x : y;
}
int sum (int a[], int start, int end) {
int res = 0;
for (int i = start; i <= end; ++i) res += a[i];
return res;
}
int k_partitioning(int k, int n, int deps[]) {
int res = max_value;
for(int l_min = 0; l_min < n; ++l_min) {
for(int r_min = l_min; r_min < n; ++r_min) {
int min_sum = sum (deps, l_min+1, r_min);
int dp[k][n];
for (int s = 0; s < k; ++s) {
for (int q = 0; q < n; ++q) {
dp[s][q] = max_value;
}
}
// assuming that current sum is a target sum
dp[0][r_min-l_min] = min_sum;
for(int p = 1; p < k; ++p) {
for(int l_max = 0; l_max < n; ++l_max) {
for(int r_max = l_max; r_max < n; ++r_max) {
int max_sum = sum(deps, l_max+1, r_max);
if (max_sum >= min_sum) dp[p][r_max] = max(dp[p-1][l_max], max_sum);
} // l_maxs
} // r_maxs
} // partitions
// skip incorrect partitioning, when not all K partitions were used
if (dp[k-1][n-1] == max_value) continue;
// update difference
res = min (res, dp[k-1][n-1] - min_sum);
} // end min sum seg
// rotate an array to consider different starting points
int tmp[n];
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
int new_idx = i + n + 1;
tmp[new_idx % n] = deps[i];
}
for(int i = 0; i < n; ++i) deps[i] = tmp[i];
} // start min sum seg
return res;
}
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
int k = 0;
scanf("%d", &k);
int n = 0;
scanf("%d", &n);
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
scanf("%d", &deps[i]);
}
printf ("%d\n", k_partitioning(k, n, deps));
return 0;
}
Ok, I think I did it!
The idea is following: we assume that minimum sum interval always starts from 0. Then we start to enumerate maximum sum intervals, starting from the right boundary of the minimal interval. We build DP problem for current max interval to determine a minimum maximal sum. After that you update result and rotate an array by one.
My code is not perfect in a way that I compute current sums each iteration. One can pre-compute them and just index them each time.
This code might have some bugs, but it passes all test that I have.
#include <climits>
#include <cstdio>
#include <cstring>
const int max_value = 200000;
const int max_n = 50;
const int max_k = 20;
int deps[max_n];
int max (int x, int y) {
return x > y ? x : y;
}
int min (int x, int y) {
return x < y ? x : y;
}
int sum (int a[], int start, int end) {
int res = 0;
for (int i = start; i <= end; ++i) res += a[i];
return res;
}
int k_partitioning(int k, int n, int deps[]) {
int res = max_value;
for(int offset = 0; offset < n; ++offset) {
int l_min = 0;
for(int r_min = l_min; r_min < n; ++r_min) {
int min_sum = sum (deps, l_min, r_min);
int dp[k][n];
for (int s = 0; s < k; ++s) {
for (int q = 0; q < n; ++q) {
dp[s][q] = max_value;
}
}
// assuming that current sum is a target sum
dp[0][r_min-l_min] = min_sum;
for(int p = 1; p < k; ++p) {
for(int l_max = r_min; l_max < n; ++l_max) {
for(int r_max = l_max; r_max < n; ++r_max) {
int max_sum = sum(deps, l_max+1, r_max);
if (max_sum >= min_sum) {
dp[p][r_max] = min(dp[p][r_max], max(dp[p-1][l_max], max_sum));
}
} // l_maxs
} // r_maxs
} // partitions
// skip incorrect partitioning, when not all K partitions were used
if (dp[k-1][n-1] == max_value) continue;
// update difference
res = min (res, dp[k-1][n-1] - min_sum);
} // end min sum seg
int tmp[n];
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
int new_idx = i + n - 1;
tmp[new_idx % n] = deps[i];
}
for(int i = 0; i < n; ++i) deps[i] = tmp[i];
} // start min sum seg
return res;
}
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
int k = 0;
scanf("%d", &k);
int n = 0;
scanf("%d", &n);
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
scanf("%d", &deps[i]);
}
printf ("%d\n", k_partitioning(k, n, deps));
return 0;
}
Solution without rotations:
1) Compute max M and total S of the array - O(n)
2) Let there be a function F(P), which returns True if it is possible to get a Sum P or less with k (>= 0) partitions still remaining.
3) Do a binary search on range(M, S) using F. - O(log(S-M))
4) Logic behind F: Fill a bucket till it's not greater than S/K. Then move onto next bucket. If there are still items remaining and no buckets remaining, then the answer is false - O(n)
Time Complexity = O(n) + O(n) * (log(S-M)) = O(n*log(S-M))
Solution with Rotations:
For all rotations in [0, 1, ... N-1], compute min sum.
Total Time Complexity = O(n) * O(nlog(S-M)) = O(n^2*log(S-M))
Now that you've got your code working, here's an alternative method :)
Consider that for each k, we can pair a sum growing from A[i] to the left (sum A[i-j..i]) with all available intervals recorded for f(k-1, i-j-1) and update them - for each interval, (low, high), if the sum is greater than high, then new_interval = (low, sum) and if the sum is lower than low, then new_interval = (sum, high); otherwise, the interval stays the same. For example,
i: 0 1 2 3 4 5
A: [5 1 1 1 3 2]
k = 3
i = 3, j = 0
The ordered intervals available for f(3-1, 3-0-1) = f(2,2) are:
(2,5), (1,6) // These were the sums, (A[1..2], A[0]) and (A[2], A[0..1])
Sum = A[3..3-0] = 1
Update intervals: (2,5) -> (1,5)
(1,6) -> (1,6) no change
Now, we can make this iteration much more efficient by recognizing and pruning intervals during the previous k round.
Watch:
A: [5 1 1 1 3 2]
K = 1:
N = 0..5; Intervals: (5,5), (6,6), (7,7), (8,8), (11,11), (13,13)
K = 2:
N = 0: Intervals: N/A
N = 1: Intervals: (1,5)
N = 2: (1,6), (2,5)
Prune: remove (1,6) since any sum <= 1 would be better paired with (2,5)
and any sum >= 6 would be better paired with (2,5)
N = 3: (1,7), (2,6), (3,5)
Prune: remove (2,6) and (1,7)
N = 4: (3,8), (4,7), (5,6), (5,6)
Prune: remove (3,8) and (4,7)
N = 5: (2,11), (5,8), (6,7)
Prune: remove (2,11) and (5,8)
For k = 2, we are now left with the following pruned record:
{
k: 2,
n: {
1: (1,5),
2: (2,5),
3: (3,5),
4: (5,6),
5: (6,7)
}
}
We've cut down the iteration of k = 3 from a list of n choose 2 possible splits to n relevant splits!
The general algorithm applied to k = 3:
for k' = 1 to k
for sum A[i-j..i], for i <- [k'-1..n], j <- [0..i-k'+1]:
for interval in record[k'-1][i-j-1]: // records are for [k'][n']
update interval
prune intervals in k'
k' = 3
i = 2
sum = 1, record[2][1] = (1,5) -> no change
i = 3
// sums are accumulating right to left starting from A[i]
sum = 1, record[2][2] = (2,5) -> (1,5)
sum = 2, record[2][1] = (1,5) -> no change
i = 4
sum = 3, record[2][3] = (3,5) -> no change
sum = 4, record[2][2] = (2,5) -> no change
sum = 5, record[2][1] = (1,5) -> no change
i = 5
sum = 2, record[2][4] = (5,6) -> (2,6)
sum = 5, record[2][3] = (3,5) -> no change
sum = 6, record[2][2] = (2,5) -> (2,6)
sum = 7, record[2][1] = (1,5) -> (1,7)
The answer is 5 paired with record[2][3] = (3,5), yielding the updated interval, (3,5). I'll leave the pruning logic for the reader to work out. If we wanted to continue, here's the pruned list for k = 3
{
k: 3
n: {
2: (1,5),
3: (1,5),
4: (3,5),
5: (3,5)
}
}
I finally solved this question : Split array into three subarrays, It may help you.
here I'm splitting a array into three sub-array with java.
package com.array2;
public class SplitArray {
public static void main(String[] args) {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 5, 4, 6, 9, 8, 15, 52, 4, 6, 89 };
splitArray(a);
}
private static void splitArray(int[] a) {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
int a_l = a.length;
int[] a1 = new int[a.length / 3];
int[] a2 = new int[a.length / 3];
int[] a3 = new int[a.length / 3 + a.length % 3];
for (int i = 0; i < a3.length; i++) {
if (i < a1.length) {
a1[i] = a[i];
a2[i] = a[a1.length + i];
a3[i] = a[a1.length + a2.length + i];
} else {
a3[i] = a[a1.length + a2.length + i];
}
}
}
}
I'm trying to pass a recursive function that populates my 2D array of structs. My memory allocation is working fine, but when I try to do a recursion, I get the error: Segmentation fault (core dumped).
Any idea why this must be happening? I think I wrote my code so that no index out of bound occurs. I still don't know why this is happening. Any help is going to be appreciated. Thanks!
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
typedef struct {
char val;
bool filled;
} elements;
void assign(elements ** elements, int row, int column, int x, int y, int limit);
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
int row = 0;
int column = 0;
int x = 0;
int y = 0;
int limit = 0;
sscanf(argv[1], "%d", &row);
sscanf(argv[2], "%d", &column);
sscanf(argv[3], "%d", &x);
sscanf(argv[4], "%d", &y);
sscanf(argv[5], "%d", &limit);
elements **foo;
foo = (elements **)malloc(sizeof(elements *) * row);
for (int i = 0; i < column; i++)
foo[i] = (elements *)malloc( sizeof(elements) * row);
foo[y][x].val = 'C';
// printf("%c\n", foo[y][x].val);
assign(foo, row, column, x, y, limit);
for(int i = 0; i < row; i++)
{
for(int j = 0; j < column; j++)
{
// foo[i][j].val = '.';
printf("%d\t ", foo[i][j].filled);
}
printf("\n");
}
}
void assign(elements ** elements, int row, int column, int x, int y, int limit)
{
int tempX = x;
int tempY = y;
if(elements[y][x].filled != 0 )
{
//printf("reached.");
return;
}
else if(limit < 0)
{
//printf("reached.");
return;
}
else
{
if(elements[y][x].val != 'C')
elements[y][x].val = limit + '0';
elements[y][x].filled = true;
tempX = x - 1;
tempY = y;
if (!( x < 0 || y < 0 || x > column - 1 || y > row -1 ))
assign(elements, row, column, tempX, tempY, limit - 1); // go up
tempX = x;
tempY = y + 1;
if (!( x < 0 || y < 0 || x > column - 1 || y > row -1 ))
assign(elements, row, column, tempX, tempY, limit - 1); // go right
tempX = x + 1;
tempY = y;
if (!( x < 0 || y < 0 || x > column - 1 || y > row -1 ))
assign(elements, row, column, tempX, tempY, limit - 1); // go down
tempX = x;
tempY = y - 1;
if (!( x < 0 || y < 0 || x > column - 1 || y > row -1 ))
assign(elements, row, column, tempX, tempY, limit - 1); // go left
}
}
each of the if() code blocks in the last half of assign() are beginning with the same basic parameter values, except the limit changes.
so the total number of recursions (which the code seems to be limiting the the value in 'limit' is not actually limited,
because when limit is 0, it is not necessarily the last call to be made to assign() and once limit is <0 the code will recurse about 16 gig more times. (at least) This is probably why the program crashes
Suggest decrementing limit within assign() before any of the recursive calls to assign()
In the book "elements of programming interviews", I came across, the problem of returning the subarray of the maximum sum. I tried their solution and I don't think we need to keep track of the minimum sum to get the array of the maximum sum:
I wrote another version of it maximumSumMine where I removed the minSum and it worked fine, the output in the comments
What is the purpose of tracking minSum, do we really need it?
#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>
typedef struct range {
int start;
int end;
int maxSum;
} range;
void print(int *a, int start, int end) {
for (int i = start; i <= end; i++) {
printf("%d ", a[i]);
}
printf("\n");
}
// Book's code as it is
range maximumSum(int *a, int n) {
range r;
r.start = 0; r.end = 0;
int minSum = 0, sum = 0, minIndex = -1, maxSum = INT_MIN;
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
sum += a[i];
if (sum < minSum) {
minSum = sum;
minIndex = i;
}
if (sum - minSum > maxSum) {
maxSum = sum - minSum;
r.start = minIndex + 1;
r.end = i + 1;
}
}
return r;
}
range maximumSumMine(int *a, int n) {
range r;
r.start = 0; r.end = 0;
int sum = 0, minIndex = -1, maxSum = INT_MIN;
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
sum += a[i];
if (sum < 0) {
sum = 0;
minIndex = i + 1;
}
if (sum > maxSum) {
maxSum = sum;
r.start = minIndex;
r.end = i;
}
}
return r;
}
void unitTests() {
// Example 1
int a[5] = {-2, 5, 1, -1, 4};
range r = maximumSum(a, 5);
print(a, r.start, r.end); // output 5 1 -1 4 0
// Example 2
int b[5] = {2, -5, 5, -1, 3};
r = maximumSum(b, 5);
print(b, r.start, r.end); // 5 -1 3 1
// Example 1
r = maximumSumMine(a, 5);
print(a, r.start, r.end); // output 5 1 -1 4
// Example 2
r = maximumSum(b, 5);
print(b, r.start, r.end); // 5 -1 3 1
}
int main() {
unitTests();
return 0;
}
You need the minimum sum because the algorithm involves computing prefix sums:
sums[i] = a[0] + a[1] + ... + a[i]
So for each i, the maximum sum you can get that ends at a[i] is sums[i] - min(sums[j < i]).
The book code implements this without actually using an array, as you can simply keep track of the minimum and the current prefix sum.
If you only take the max of the prefix sums under the conditions that you do, it will not work for negative maximum sums: you will always output 0 if the maximum sum is negative, because you will set your prefix sum to 0 when it becomes negative.
Sometimes, ignoring negative maximum sums can be perfectly fine, other times not. I've seen both versions given as programming assignments / questions.
Example:
a = {-1, -2, -3}
book output = -1
your output = 0