Consider a recursive algorithm that break a given problem into five parts. Out of these five parts the algorithm utilizes three parts and discards two parts. The chosen parts are broken into five again and the same process is recursively repeated until the problem size is 1. Once the problem size is 1, the individual parts are recombined.
Write a recurrence relation for the above algorithm. Please state your assumptions.
Solve the recurrence relation developed in part 1 above using the Substitution Method. Specify the guess and the method you used in deciding that guess.
Please let know the answer even if you know only for the part 1.
Thank you!
This depends on what you mean by the "parts" of the problem. If the initial problem is some sort of data structure, particularly an array of numbers, then in the first part you would divide the structure into five categories based on certain properties of the numbers, and then discard two of those categories and repeat the process on the remaining 3. Just to be clear, is this the exact wording of a homework problem you were given? It would be good to have some information.
Related
I'm reading the The Algorithm Design Manual by Steven S Skiena, and trying to understand the solution to the problem of War Story: What’s Past is Prolog.
The problem is also well described here.
Basically, the problem is, given an ordered list of strings, give a optimal solution to construct a trie with minimum size (the string character as the node), with the constraint that the order of the strings must be reserved, while the character index can be reordered.
Maybe this is not an appropriate question here for stackoverflow, still I'm wondering if anyone could give me some hint on the solution, especially what this recurrence means by its arguments:
the recurrence for the Dynamic Programming algorithm
You can think about it this way:
Let's assume that we fix the index of the first character. All strings get split into r bins based on the value of the character in this position (bins are essentially subtrees).
We can work with each bin independently. It won't change the order across different bins because two strings in different bins are different in the first character.
Thus, we can solve the problem for each bin independently. After that, we need exactly one edge to connect the root to each bin (that is, subtree). That's where the formula
C[i_k, j_k] + 1 comes from.
As we want to minimize the total number of edges and we're free to pick the first position, we just try all possible options among m positions.
Note: this algorithm is correct under assumption that we can reorder the rest of the characters in each subtree independently. If it's not the case, the dynamic programming solution is incorrect.
I have a problem that I have a number of questions about. First, I'm mostly looking for help describing and understanding the problem at hand. Solutions are always welcome, but most importantly I could use some advice from someone more experienced than I. Now, to the problem at hand:
I have a set of orders that each require some number of items. I also have several groupings of items that each contain some number of some items (call them groups). The goal is to find a subset of the orders that can be fulfilled using as few groups as possible and where the total number of items contained within the orders is between n and N.
Edit: The constraints on the number of items contained in the orders (n and N) are chosen independently.
To me at least, that's a really complicated way of saying the problem so I've been trying to re-phrase it as a knapsack problem (I suspect this might reduce to a subset-sum). To help my conceptual understanding of this I've started using the following definitions:
First, lets say that a dimension exists for each possible item, and somethings 'length' in that dimension is the number of that particular type of item it either has or requires.
From this, an order becomes an 'n-dimensional object' where its value in each dimension corresponds to the number of that item that it requires.
In addition, a group can be seen as an 'n-dimensional box' that has space in each dimension corresponding to the number of items it provides.
An objects value is equal to the sum of its length in all dimensions.
Boxes can be combined.
Given the above I've rephrased the problem to this:
What is the smallest combination of boxes that can hold a combination of items with value between n and N.
Question #1: Is this a correct/useful way to express the problem? Does it seem like I've missed anything obvious?
As I see it, since there are two combinations that I'm looking for I need to break the problem into two parts. So far I think breaking the problem up like this is a good step:
How many objects can box (or combination of boxes) X hold?
Check all (or preferably some small subset of) the possible combinations of boxes and pick the 'best'.
That makes it a little more manageable, but I'm still struggling with the details.
Question #2: Solved To solve the first part I think it's appropriate to say that the cost of an object is equal to the sum of its length in all dimensions, so is it's value. That places me into a subset-sum problem, right? Obviously it's a special case, but does this problem have a name?
Question #3: Solved I've been looking into subset-sum solutions a lot, but I don't understand how to apply them to something like this in multiple dimensions. I assume it's been done before, but I'm unsure where to start my research. Could someone either describe the principles at work or point me in a research direction?
Edit: After looking at everyone's feedback and digging into the terms I think I've found a good algorithm I can implement to solve part 1. Since I will have a very large number of dimensions compared to the number of items it looks like using a 'primal effective capacity heuristic (PECH)' will be a good fit. I'd be interested in hearing someones thoughts about it if they have experience with such an algorithm.
Question #4: For the second part, performance is a concern and I doubt it will be realistic to brute force it. So I intend to treat all combinations of boxes as a really big tree of solutions. The idea is to compute part 1 for all combinations of M-1 boxes where M is the total number of boxes. Somehow determine the 'best' couple box combinations from that set and do the same to their child nodes on the tree. Does this sound like it would help me arrive at something close to optimal? How would I choose the 'best' box combinations?
Thanks for reading! Suggestions for edits and clarifications are welcome.
I have 'n' number of amounts (non-negative integers). My requirement is to determine an optimal set of amounts so that the sum of the combination is less than or equal to a given fixed limit and the total is as large as possible. There is no limit to the number of amounts that can be included in the optimal set.
for sake of example: amounts are 143,2054,546,3564,1402 and the given limit is 5000.
As per my understanding the knapsack problem has 2 attributes for each item (weight and value). But the problem stated above has only one attribute (amount). I hope that would make things simpler? :)
Can someone please help me with the algorithm or source code for solving this?
this is still an NP-hard problem, but if you want to (or have to) to do something like that, maybe this topic helps you out a bit:
find two or more numbers from a list of numbers that add up towards a given amount
where i solved it like this and NikiC modified it to be faster. only difference: that one was about getting the exact amount, not "as close as possible", but that would be only some small changes in code (and you'll have to translate it into the language you're using).
take a look at the comments in my code to understand what i'm trying to do, wich is, in short form:
calculating all possible combinations of the given parts and sum them up
if the result is the amount i'm looking for, save the solution to an array
at least, sort all possible solutions to get the one using the least parts
so you'll have to change:
save a solution if it's lower than the amount you're looking for
sort solutions by total amount instead of number of used parts
The book "Knapsack Problems" By Hans Kellerer, Ulrich Pferschy and David Pisinger calls this The Subset Sum Problem and dedicates an entire chapter (Ch 4) to it. The chapter is very comprehensive and covers algorithms as well as computational results.
Even though this problem is a special case of the knapsack problem, it is still NP-hard.
I am trying to write a match-three puzzle game like 'call of Atlantis' myself. The most important algorithm is to find out all possible match-three possibilities. Is there any open source projects that can be referenced? Or any keywords to the algorithm? I am trying to look for a faster algorithm to calculate all possibilities. Thanks.
To match 3 objects using one swap, you need already 2 objects lined up in the right way. Identify these pairs first. Then there are just a few possibilities from where a third object can be swapped in. Try to encode these patterns.
For smaller boards the easy brute force algorithm (try out all possible swaps and check if three objects line up in the neighborhood after a swap) may be sufficient.
Sorry, I can't say much more without a more precise description.
Hey guys, if I have an array that looks like [A,B,C,A,B,C,A,C,B] (random order), and I wish to arrange it into [A,A,A,B,B,B,C,C,C] (each group is together), and the only operations allowed are:
1)query the i-th item of the array
2)swap two items in the array.
How to design an algorithm that does the job in O(n)?
Thanks!
Sort algorithms aren't something you design fresh (i.e. first step of your development process) anymore; you should research known sort algorithms and see what meets your needs.
(It is of course possible you might really require your own new sort algorithm, but usually that has different—and highly-specific—requirements.)
If this isn't your first step (but I don't think that's the case), it would be helpful to know what you've already tried and how it failed you.
This is actually just counting sort.
Scan the array once, count the number of As, Bs, Cs—that should give you an idea. This becomes like bucket sort—not quite but along those lines. The count of As Bs and Cs should give you an idea about where the string of As, Bs and Cs belongs.