I understand that median element is calculated based on index/total number of elements in an Array while Average is based on total value of the array.
I am trying to solve the question :
Given an integer K and a matrix of N rows and M columns, the task is to find the minimum number of operations required to make all the elements of the matrix equal. In a single operation, K can be added to or subtracted from any element of the matrix.
Which element we should take here (to which all the elements will be made equal in minimum steps) and why?
I am more interested in understanding the why part.
Average value provides minimal sum of absolute distances from it to all elements, so it is suitable here.
Related
I have an array of integers. Lets denote it by A. There is another array W containing weights associated with each entry of A.
In other words, associated with each entry A[i] is a certain weight entry W[i]. (Note that the weights are out of a limited set S_w = {w1,w2,w3,w4} so only few possible values)
The problem statement is as follows: Pick a random number of entries out of A such that when summed together, give you the highest value (SUM_A) under the constraint that the sum of their respective weights (SUM_W) doesn't exceed a threshold, W_threshold.
One possibility is brute force: Compute all permutations of A and for each permutation, select first n entries such that their sum weight SUM_W doesn't exceed W_threshold. Finally, the permutation that gives the maximum SUM_A shall be selected. But the complexity of this scheme is very high due to permutation computation step since the length of A is not constrained.
One other (sub-optimal) possibility is to sort A in descending order and then select first n entries such that their SUM_W doesn't exceed W_threshold. This has lower complexity but the result would be suboptimal.
Could someone give me tips if their already exists an algorithm to resolve the above stated problem? Or if anyone has ideas better than the ones I described above. Many thanks
From a set A of N positive numbers, a set of Sum of all possible subsets of the set A is formed and given. We have to find the set A.
My approach is to sort first and then keep sbtracting the Nth largest number from the largest number to find the elements of the set. What is wrong with that approach?
Consider the set of elements to be {a,b,c,d}, in such a case the possible subset sums of the set would be (1){a}, (2){b+c}, (3){b+c+d}, (4){a+b+c+d} and more. However the largest subset sum would be (4) and as visible, the subtraction of (4) - (2) will yield {a+d} which is just another subset sum of the set and not the actual element.
A possible way to solve the problem is to sort the array, and start picking up elements from the smallest in a sack. Every time we pick a new element, we compute all the possible subset sums possible which always includes this element and other elements from our maintained sack, and then remove these computed subset sums from the given subset sum list. We then proceed to pickup the next smallest element from the given subset list which hasn't been removed yet.
EDIT: Added possible solution to the given question.
So I want to find the smallest values in a matrix in the following way.
[[ 1000. 930. 940. 740.]
[ 1000. 1000. 990. 670.]
M1= [ 1000. 1000. 1000. 680.]
[ 1000. 1000. 1000. 1000.]]
The sum of 2 matrix values should be chosen in such a way that the indexes are used once 0,1,2,3. But also the sum of matrix values should be minimized.
So in this case the solution would be M1[2][3] and M1[0][1].
Incorrect would be M1[2][3] and M1[1][3], which hase a lower sum but is does not contain unique index numbers.
The solution should work for NxN matrices, N is even. So for 8x8 matrix, i want to find 4 elements. So that the index Numbers. 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7 are uses once. So four matrix values.
Another constraint is that the matrix contains only values of intrest in the upper trangle matrix. So were the matrix elements are 1000, these elements can be ignored in finding the minimum sum.
I have tried to alter the Hungarian algorithm, but this was not successful.
Does anybody know of an algorithm that does what I want? Maybe a python package wich I can abuse
Or has a smart solution which would help, I have to do this matrix with about 200X200 elements max.
I will say a solution that is probably not the fastest but it may work.
You can build a graph this way:
the graph will contain (N×N+1) vertexes, which represent the indexes of the matrix and a new one, which will be the source
the source will be connected to all other vertexes with a distance equivalent to the value of the index each of them represents.
then you must connect each vertex (except the source) to every other vertex that is possible to go to (for example, M1[1][2] can go to M1[0][3] but not to M1[1][3]). The distance from any vertex to a vertex V will correspond to the value of V in the matrix.
after you build this graph, you should walk on it K steps (being K the number of possible matrix' indexes you will consider, for example, 2 in a 4x4 matrix like your example).
For each step you take, you store in a stack and in 2 hashes the last position you were (the first to store all rows already used, the second to store all columns already used) and you mark the vertex you get into.
Always you get into a vertex, you should check if is possible to stay in it by using the hashes (theoretically O(1) checking), and if is possible, you add that value to the current sum, otherwise you go to the previous position (stored in the stack) and remove the weight you added when you went into the current vertex.
You should also store a global variable and always you walk K steps, you check if the current sum is smaller than the global sum, and if it is, you change it.
After you walk all possible ways, the global sum will be your answer.
Hope this helps :)
In a recent campus Facebook interview i have asked to divide an array into 3 equal parts such that the sum in each array is roughly equal to sum/3.My Approach1. Sort The Array2. Fill the array[k] (k=0) uptil (array[k]<=sum/3)3. After that increment k and repeat the above step for array[k]Is there any better algorithm for this or it is NP Hard Problem
This is a variant of the partition problem (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_problem for details). In fact a solution to this can solve that one (take an array, pad with 0s, and then solve this problem) so this problem is NP hard.
There is a dynamic programming approach that is pseudo-polynomial. For each i from 0 to the size of the array, you keep track of all possible combinations of current sizes for the sub arrays, and their current sums. As long as there are a limited number possible sums of subsets of the array, this runs acceptably fast.
The solution that I would have suggested is to just go for "good enough" closeness. First let's consider the simpler problem with all values positive. Then sort by value descending. Take that array in threes. Build up the three subsets by always adding the largest of the triple to the one with the smallest sum, the smallest to the one with the largest, and the middle to the middle. You will end up dividing the array evenly, and the difference will be no more than the value of the third smallest element.
For the general case you can divide into positive and negative, use the above approach on each, and then brute force all combinations of a group of positives, a group of negatives, and the few leftover values in the middle that did not divide evenly.
Here are details on a dynamic programming solution if you are interested. The running time and memory usage is O(n*(sum)^2) where n is the size of your array and sum is the sum of absolute values of your array values. For each array index j from 1 to n, store all the possible values you can get for your 3 subset sums when you split the array from index 1 to j into 3 subsets. Also for each possibility, store one possible way to split the array to get the 3 sums. Then to extend this information for 1 to (j+1) given the information from 1 to j, simply take each possible combination of 3 sums for splitting 1 to j and form the 3 combinations of 3 sums you get when you choose to add the (j+1)th array element to any one of the 3 subsets. Finally, when you are done and reach j = n, go through the set of all combinations of 3 subset sums you can get when you split array positions 1 to n into 3 sets, and choose the one whose maximum deviation from sum/3 is minimized. At first this may seem like O(n*(sum)^3) complexity, but for each j and each combination of the first 2 subset sums, the 3rd subset sum is uniquely determined. (because you are not allowed to omit any elements of the array). Thus the complexity really is O(n*(sum)^2).
Suppose we have a list of numbers like [6,5,4,7,3]. How can we tell that the array contains consecutive numbers? One way is ofcourse to sort them or we can find the minimum and maximum. But can we determine based on the sum of the elements ? E.g. in the example above, it is 25. Could anyone help me with this?
The sum of elements by itself is not enough.
Instead you could check for:
All elements being unique.
and either:
Difference between min and max being right
or
Sum of all elements being right.
Approach 1
Sort the list and check the first element and last element.
In general this is O( n log(n) ), but if you have a limited data set you can sort in O( n ) time using counting sort or radix sort.
Approach 2
Pass over the data to get the highest and lowest elements.
As you pass through, add each element into a hash table and see if that element has now been added twice. This is more or less O( n ).
Approach 3
To save storage space (hash table), use an approximate approach.
Pass over the data to get the highest and lowest elements.
As you do, implement an algorithm which will with high (read User defined) probability determine that each element is distinct. Many such algorithms exist, and are in use in Data Mining. Here's a link to a paper describing different approaches.
The numbers in the array would be consecutive if the difference between the max and the minimum number of the array is equal to n-1 provided numbers are unique ( where n is the size of the array ). And ofcourse minimum and maximum number can be calculated in O(n).