Incorrect expected output in jump game leetcode problem - data-structures

I was doing data structure practice on leetcode.
Question: https://leetcode.com/problems/jump-game/
For this question, when I submitted my solution it failed for input
[2,5,0,0]
Leetcode expects the output to be true but I can't follow why it should be true. Can somone explain me the question?

I think you are getting confused here "represents your maximum jump length at that position".
Input: nums = [2, 5, 0, 0]
Output: true
Explanation: Jump 1 step from index 0 to 1, then 2 steps to the last index.
Here the jump length at each index is at most the value of the index.

Here's the explanation based on your input, [2,5,0,0]. Here the value at ith index/position represents the maximum jumps you can take from the ith index/position. So the input will be interpreted in the following way,
Index/position value What this means?
0 2 You can take maximum 2 jumps from index 0 i.e. you can reach index 1 and 2 from index 0 [0 --(1st jump)--> 1 --(2nd jump)--> 2]
1 5 You can take maximum 5 jumps from index 1 i.e. you can reach index 2 and 3 (array ends at index 3) from index 1 [1 --(1st jump)--> 2 --(2nd jump)--> 3]
2 0 You cannot jump to any other index from index 2.
3 0 You cannot jump to any other index from index 3 (the array ends here anyway).
Focus on the maximum jumps part because you may chose to take fewer number of jumps to reach the last index. Now I hope the question is clear to you, lets look at the solution i.e. why the expected answer is true?
[2,5,0,0] - here the goal is to reach index 3 from index 0.
You have to make sure that you don't end up at index 2 because you cannot take any jump from index 2 i.e. you cannot reach last index 3 from index 2. So, you have to first take 1 jump from index 0 (you can take maximum 2 jumps from index 0) to reach index 1, and then take 2 jumps from index 1 (you can take maximum 5 jumps from index 0) to reach the last index 3.

Related

How to perform range updates in sqrt{n} time?

I have an array and I have to perform query and updates on it.
For queries, I have to find frequency of a particular number in a range from l to r and for update, I have to add x from some range l to r.
How to perform this?
I thought of sqrt{n} optimization but I don't know how to perform range updates with this time complexity.
Edit - Since some people are asking for an example, here is one
Suppose the array is of size n = 8
and it is
1 3 3 4 5 1 2 3
And there are 3 queries to help everybody explain about what I am trying to say
Here they are
q 1 5 3 - This means that you have to find the frequency of 3 in range 1 to 5 which is 2 as 3 appears on 2nd and 3rd position.
second is update query and it goes like this - u 2 4 6 -> This means that you have to add 6 in the array from range 2 to 4. So the new array will become
1 9 9 10 5 1 2 3
And the last query is again the same as first one which will now return 0 as there is no 3 in the array from position 1 to 5 now.
I believe things must be more clear now. :)
I developed this algorithm long time (20+ years) ago for Arithmetic coder.
Both Update and Retrieve are performed in O(log(N)).
I named this algorithm "Method of Intervals". Let I show you the example.
Imagine, we have 8 intervals, with numbers 0-7:
+--0--+--1--+--2-+--3--+--4--+--5--+--6--+--7--+
Lets we create additional set of intervals, each spawns pair of original ones:
+----01-----+----23----+----45-----+----67-----+
Thereafter, we'll create the extra one layer of intervals, spawn pairs of 2nd:
+---------0123---------+---------4567----------+
And at last, we create single interval, covers all 8:
+------------------01234567--------------------+
As you see, in this structure, to retrieve right border of the interval [5], you needed just add together length of intervals [0123] + [45]. to retrieve left border of the interval [5], you needed sum of length the intervals [0123] + [4] (left border for 5 is right border for 4).
Of course, left border of the interval [0] is always = 0.
When you'll watch this proposed structure carefully, you will see, the odd elements in the each layers aren't needed. I say, you do not needed elements 1, 3, 5, 7, 23, 67, 4567, since these elements aren't used, during Retrieval or Update.
Lets we remove the odd elements and make following remuneration:
+--1--+--x--+--3-+--x--+--5--+--x--+--7--+--x--+
+-----2-----+-----x----+-----6-----+-----x-----+
+-----------4----------+-----------x-----------+
+----------------------8-----------------------+
As you see, with this remuneration, used the numbers [1-8]. Lets they will be array indexes. So, you see, there is used memory O(N).
To retrieve right border of the interval [7], you needed add length of the values with indexes 4,6,7. To update length of the interval [7], you needed add difference to all 3 of these values. As result, both Retrieval and Update are performed for Log(N) time.
Now is needed algorithm, how by the original interval number compute set of indexes in this data structure. For instance - how to convert:
1 -> 1
2 -> 2
3 -> 3,2
...
7 -> 7,6,4
This is easy, if we will see binary representation for these numbers:
1 -> 1
10 -> 10
11 -> 11,10
111 -> 111,110,100
As you see, in the each chain - next value is previous value, where rightmost "1" changed to "0". Using simple bit operation "x & (x - 1)", we can wtite a simple loop to iterate array indexes, related to the interval number:
int interval = 7;
do {
int index = interval;
do_something(index);
} while(interval &= interval - 1);

Heap sort pseudo code algorithm

In heap sort algorithm
n=m
for k:= m div 2 down to 0
downheap(k);
repeat
t:=a[0]
a[0]:=a[n-1]
a[n-1]:=t
n—
downheap(0);
until n <= 0
Can some one please explain to me what is done in lines
n=m
for k:= m div 2 down to 0
downheap(k);
I think that is the heap building process but what is mean by for k:= m div 2 down to 0
Also is n the number of items.So in an array representation last element is stored at a[n-1]?
But why do it for n> = 0. Can't we finish at n>0.Because the first element gets automatically sorted?
n=m
for k:= m div 2 down to 0
downheap(k);
In a binary heap, half of the nodes have no children. So you can build a heap by starting at the midpoint and sifting items down. What you're doing here is building the heap from the bottom up. Consider this array of five items:
[5, 3, 2, 4, 1]
Or, as a tree:
5
3 2
4 1
The length is 5, so we want to start at index 2 (assume a 1-based heap array). downheap, then, will look at the node labeled 3 and compare it with the smallest child. Since 1 is smaller than 3, we swap the items giving:
5
1 2
4 3
Since we reached a leaf level, we're done with that item. Move on to the first item, 5. It's smaller than 1, so we swap items:
1
5 2
4 3
But the item 5 is still larger than its children, so we do another swap:
1
3 2
4 5
And we're done. You have a valid heap.
It's instructive to do that by hand (with pencil and paper) to build a larger heap--say 10 items. That will give you a very good understanding of how the algorithm works.
For purposes of building the heap in this way, it doesn't matter if the array indexes start at 0 or 1. If the array is 0-based, then you end up making one extra call to downheap, but that doesn't do anything because the node you're trying to move down is already a leaf node. So it's slightly inefficient (one extra call to downheap), but not harmful.
It is important, however, that if your root node is at index 1, that you stop your loop with n > 0 rather than n >= 0. In the latter case, you could very well end up adding a bogus value to your heap and removing an item that's supposed to be there.
for k:= m div 2 down to 0
This appears to be pseudocode for:
for(int k = m/2; k >= 0; k--)
Or possibly
for(int k = m/2; k > 0; k--)
Depending on whether "down to 0" is inclusive or not.
Also is n the number of items?
Initially, yes, but it decrements on the line n-.
Can't we finish at n>0.Because the first element gets automatically sorted?
Yes, this is effectively what happens. Once N becomes zero at n-, it's most of the way through the loop body, so the only thing that gets executed after that and before until n <= 0 terminates is downheap(0);

Cycle sort Algorithm

I was browsing through the internet when i found out that there is an algorithm called cycle sort which makes the least number of memory writes.But i am not able to find the algorithm anywhere.How to detect whether a cycle is there or not in an array?
Can anybody give a complete explanation for this algorithm?
The cycle sort algorithm is motivated by something called a cycle decomposition. Cycle decompositions are best explained by example. Let's suppose that you have this array:
4 3 0 1 2
Let's imagine that we have this sequence in sorted order, as shown here:
0 1 2 3 4
How would we have to shuffle this sorted array to get to the shuffled version? Well, let's place them side-by-side:
0 1 2 3 4
4 3 0 1 2
Let's start from the beginning. Notice that the number 0 got swapped to the position initially held by 2. The number 2, in turn, got swapped to the position initially held by 4. Finally, 4 got swapped to the position initially held by 0. In other words, the elements 0, 2, and 4 all were cycled forward one position. That leaves behind the numbers 1 and 3. Notice that 1 swaps to where 3 is and 3 swaps to where 1 is. In other words, the elements 1 and 3 were cycled forward one position.
As a result of the above observations, we'd say that the sequence 4 3 0 1 2 has cycle decomposition (0 2 4)(1 3). Here, each group of terms in parentheses means "circularly cycle these elements forward." This means to cycle 0 to the spot where 2 is, 2 to the spot where 4 is, and 4 to the spot where 0 was, then to cycle 1 to the spot where 3 was and 3 to the spot where 1 is.
If you have the cycle decomposition for a particular array, you can get it back in sorted order making the fewest number of writes by just cycling everything backward one spot. The idea behind cycle sort is to try to determine what the cycle decomposition of the input array is, then to reverse it to put everything back in its place.
Part of the challenge of this is figuring out where everything initially belongs since a cycle decomposition assumes you know this. Typically, cycle sort works by going to each element and counting up how many elements are smaller than it. This is expensive - it contributes to the Θ(n2) runtime of the sorting algorithm - but doesn't require any writes.
here's a python implementation if anyone needs
def cycleSort(vector):
writes = 0
# Loop through the vector to find cycles to rotate.
for cycleStart, item in enumerate(vector):
# Find where to put the item.
pos = cycleStart
for item2 in vector[cycleStart + 1:]:
if item2 < item:
pos += 1
# If the item is already there, this is not a cycle.
if pos == cycleStart:
continue
# Otherwise, put the item there or right after any duplicates.
while item == vector[pos]:
pos += 1
vector[pos], item = item, vector[pos]
writes += 1
# Rotate the rest of the cycle.
while pos != cycleStart:
# Find where to put the item.
pos = cycleStart
for item2 in vector[cycleStart + 1:]:
if item2 < item:
pos += 1
# Put the item there or right after any duplicates.
while item == vector[pos]:
pos += 1
vector[pos], item = item, vector[pos]
writes += 1
return writes
x = [0, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1, 9, 3.5, 5, 8, 4, 7, 0, 6]
w = cycleSort(x)
print w, x

How to display unique numbers with their frequencies as occurring in a matrix?

I have a matrice with some number:
1 2 3 6
6 7 2 1
1 4 5 6
And the program should display all different number with own frequency for example:
1 -> 3
2 -> 2
3 -> 1
4 -> 1
5 -> 1
6 -> 3
7 -> 1
Please help me
You probably mean
1->3
Create vector (array), filled with zeros, that have size of max value in matrice (like [0..9]), travell by whole matrice and with every step increment index of vector that equals actual number.
This is soluction for short range values in matrice. If you excpect some big values, use joined list insted of vector, or matrice like this for counting:
1 0
5 0
15 0
142 0
2412 0
And increment values in second column and expand this matrice rows every time you find a new number.
Using pointers this problem reduces from matrix to a single dimensional array. Maintain a 1D array whose size is equal to the total no. of elements in the matrix, say it COUNT. Initialize it with zero. Now start with first element of the matrix and compare it with all the other elements. If we use pointers this problem transforms into traversing a 1D array and finding the no of occurrences of each element. For traversing all you have to do is just increment the pointer. While comparing when you encounter the same number just shift forward all the consecutive numbers one place ahead. For example, if 0th element is 1 and you again found 1 on 4th index, then shift forward element on 5th index to 4th, 6th to 5th and so on till the last element. This way the duplicate entry at 4th index is lost. Now decrease the count of total no of elements in the matrix by 1 and increase the corresponding entry in array COUNT by 1. Continuing this way till the last element we get a matrix with distinct nos. and their corresponding frequency in array COUNT.
This implementation is very effective for languages which support pointers.
Here's an example of how it could be done in Python.
The dict is of this format: {key:value, key2:value2}. So you can use that so you have something like {'2':3} so it'll tell you what number has how many occurances. (I'm not assuming you're going to use Python. It's just so you understand the code... maybe)
matrix = [[1,5,6],
[2,6,3],
[5,3,9]]
dict = {}
for row in matrix:
for column in row:
if str(column) in dict.keys():
dict[str(column)] += 1
else:
dict[str(column)] = 1
for key in sorted(dict.keys()):
print key, '->', dict[key]
I hope you can figure out what this does. This codepad shows the output and nice syntax hightlighting.
(I don't get why SO isn't aligning the code properly... it's monospaced but not aligned :S ... turns out it's because I was using IE6 (It's the only browser at work :-(

Permutation of a vector

suppose I have a vector:
0 1 2 3 4 5
[45,89,22,31,23,76]
And a permutation of its indices:
[5,3,2,1,0,4]
Is there an efficient way to resort it according to the permutation thus obtaining:
[76,31,22,89,45,23]
Using at most O(1) additional space?
Yes. Starting from the leftmost position, we put the element there in its correct position i by swapping it with the (other) misplaced element at that position i. This is where we need the O(1) additional space. We keep swapping pairs of elements around until the element in this position is correct. Only then do we proceed to the next position and do the same thing.
Example:
[5 3 2 1 0 4] initial state
[4 3 2 1 0 5] swapped (5,4), 5 is now in the correct position, but 4 is still wrong
[0 3 2 1 4 5] swapped (4,0), now both 4 and 0 are in the correct positions, move on to next position
[0 1 2 3 4 5] swapped (3,1), now 1 and 3 are both in the correct positions, move on to next position
[0 1 2 3 4 5] all elements are in the correct positions, end.
Note:
Since each swap operation puts at least one (of the two) elements in the correct position, we need no more than N such swaps altogether.
Zach's solution is very good.
Still, I was wondering why there is any need to sort. If you have the permutation of the indices, use the values as a pointer to the old array.
This may eliminate the need to sort the array in the first place. This is not a solution that can be used in all cases, but it will work fine in most cases.
For example:
a = [45,89,22,31,23,76];
b = [5,3,2,1,0,4]
Now if you want to lop through the values in a, you can do something like (pseudo-code):
for i=0 to 4
{
process(a[i]);
}
If you want to loop through the values in the new order, do:
for i=0 to 4
{
process(a[b[i]]);
}
As mentioned earlier, this soluion may be sufficient in many cases, but may not in some other cases. For other cases you can use the solution by Zach.But for the cases where this solution can be used, it is better because no sorting is needed at all.

Resources