How to count number-sequences - random

I want to do the following: I want to enter a "random" squence of 1 and 0.
Then I want to analyze this squence for sequences of 1's, so that I get the length and number of those squences and that I get in the end something like: there are x chains of n 1's in the squence for all lengths n that appear. For example:
11011100011
-> there are 2 chains of n=2 ('11')
and there is 1 chain of n=3 ('111').
Can I realize that with the count function? And if so, how? And if not, how else?
I hope my english is good enough for you to get my question : )

Sorry, I´m using Python.
I´ve got this so far, and it´s working:
from collections import Counter
a = [1,0,0,1,1,0,1,0,0,1,1,1,0,0,1,0,0,1,0]
x=0
h=0
n_list=[]
for x in range (0,len(a)):
if (a[x]==1):
h=h+1
else:
if (h>0):
n_list.append(h)
h=0
x=x+1
print (n_list)
counts = Counter (n_list)
print (counts)
But now I would like to be able to write this:
10101010101010101010100 as a string and convert to a list like above.
(I want to show some people, that even if you are just "randomly" hammer on the keys 1 and 0 you will never create a "real" random number, and because of that it would be bad if they had to typ a comma between every two digits)
Another Problem: there hast to be a zero at the end of the List, how can I change that?

Here's short code that requires long comments.
import collections
import itertools
def count(seq):
# count the number of items in a sequence.
return sum(1 for _ in seq)
def count_things(input_string, what):
grouped = itertools.groupby(input_string)
counts = [count(subseq) for (key, subseq) in grouped if key == what]
return collections.Counter(counts)
Now try it:
>>> one_counts = count_things('11100111101110110011', '1')
>>> print(one_counts)
Counter({2: 2, 3: 2, 4: 1})
How many sequences of length 3?
>>> print one_counts[3]
2
We of course can count anything with it if we need:
>>> print(count_things('aaabbccaaabaa', 'a'))
Counter({3: 2, 2: 1})
How does all this work?
The strangest thing is groupby. It takes a sequence and cuts it into a sequence of pairs. Each pair is (value, sequence of the same values). The sequences are generators, not lists, but for simplicity I show them here as lists:
itertools.groupby('110011100011') ->
[('1', ['1', '1']), ('0', ['0', '0']), ('1', ['1', '1', '1']), ('0', ['0', '0', '0']), ('1', ['1', '1'])]
The count function is needed to count the length of a sequence. For generators, len does not work. We could just go with len(list(...)), but it creates an intermediate list that we throw away after counting its items. Insted I opted to generate a sequence of 1s, one for each item in the source sequence: (1 for _ in seq) Here _ is a valid identifier; it usually stands for "a value I don't care about".
Then, using a list comprehension, we've turned our list of pairs above into a list of lengths, only for sequences that contain '1's (or actually what we'd like).
Now Counter takes a sequence of values and counts the numbers of occurrences of each. This is what we finally need. Its interface is like dict's, where keys are the things we count, and values are the counts of the things.
See, no loops, no state machines, standard library does most things. Batteries included, as they say.

Related

Binary random number with a specific number of ones

I am looking to randomly insert ones into a binary number where each specific set of bits has a fixed number of ones.
For example, if I have a 15 bit number, all 3 sets of 5 bits must have exactly 3 ones each. I need to generate say, 40 such unique binary numbers.
import numpy as np
N = 15
K = 9 # K zeros, N-K ones
arr = np.array([0] * K + [1] * (N-K))
np.random.shuffle(arr)
This is something that I discovered, but the issue is, here, this solution means that it is not necessary that the ones are distributed in the way that I want - through this solution, all ones can be grouped together right at the beginning, such that the last set of 5 bits are all zeroes - and this is not what I'm looking for.
Also, this method does not guarantee that all combinations I have are unique.
Looking for any suggestions regarding this. Thank you!
If I understand the question correctly, you could do something like this in Python:
import random
def valgen():
set_bits = [
*random.sample(range(0, 5), 3),
*random.sample(range(5, 10), 3),
*random.sample(range(10, 15), 3),
]
return sum(1<<i for i in set_bits)
i.e. sample three sets of integer values, without replacement, in each block and set those bits in the result.
if you want 40 unique values, I'd do:
vals = {valgen() for _ in range(40)}
while len(vals) < 40:
vals.add(valgen())
see the birthday problem for why you should expect approx one duplicate per set of 40

List of random numbers

I need to generate a list of numbers (about 120.) The numbers range from 1 to X (max 10), both included. The algorithm should use every number an equal amount of times, or at least try, if some numbers are used once less, that's OK.
This is the first time I have to make this kind of algorithm, I've created very simple once, but I'm stumped on how to do this. I tried googling first, though don't really know what to call this kind of algorithms, so I couldn't find anything.
Thanks a lot!
It sounds like what you want to do is first fill a list with the numbers you want and then shuffle that list. One way to do this would be to add each of your numbers to the list and then repeat that process until the list has as many items as you want. After that, randomly shuffle the list.
In pseudo-code, generating the initial list might look something like this:
list = []
while length(list) < N
for i in 1, 2, ..., X
if length(list) >= N
break
end if
list.append(i)
end for
end while
I leave the shuffling part as an exercise to the reader.
EDIT:
As pointed out in the comments the above will always put more smaller numbers than larger numbers. If this isn't what's desired, you could iterate over the possible numbers in a random order. For example:
list = []
numbers = shuffle( [1, 2, ..., X] )
while length(list) < N
for i in 1, 2, ..., X
if length(list) >= N
break
end if
list.append( numbers[i] )
end for
end while
I think this should remove that bias.
What you want is a uniformly distributed random number (wiki). It means that if you generate 10 numbers between 1 to 10 then there is a high probability that all the numbers 1 upto 10 are present in the list.
The Random() class in java gives a fairly uniform distribution. So just go for it. To test, just check this:
Random rand = new Random();
for(int i=0;i<10;i++)
int rNum = rand.nextInt(10);
And see in the result whether you get all the numbers between 1 to 10.
One more similar discussion that might help: Uniform distribution with Random class

How to generate all unique 4 character permutations of a seed string? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Algorithm to return all combinations of k elements from n
Generate Distinct Combinations PHP
I have an array containing a number of characters/letter,s e.g:
$seed = array('a','b','c','d','e','f',.....,'z','1','2','3',...'9');
I want to get all possible unique 4 character combinations/permutations from the seed, for example:
abcd, azxy, ag12, aaaa, etc
What's the best way to accomplish this?
I have thought about dividing the seed array into 4 letter groups, then go through each group and generate all possible combinations of that group, but that will leave out many combinations (i.e it will process abcd and wxyz, but not abyz and wxcd)
For each character in the array, write that character followed by each of the unique 3 character strings either from the characters after it (if you actually mean combinations) or from all the characters (which is what I think you mean).
How to generate all unique 3 character permutations of a seed string?
See this very similar question.
You may also want to read about recursion.
Python code
>>> def product(chars, n):
if n == 0:
yield ''
else:
for c in chars:
for result in product(x, n - 1): # Recursive call
yield c + result
>>> list(product(['a', 'b', 'c'], 2))
['aa', 'ab', 'ac', 'ba', 'bb', 'bc', 'ca', 'cb', 'cc']
(Note: in real Python code you should use itertools.product rather than writing it yourself.)
Generating permutations is like summing up numbers. This is beautifully explained in the freely available book Higher Order Perl, page 128

Generating Balls in Boxes

Given two sorted vectors a and b, find all vectors which are sums of a and some permutation of b, and which are unique once sorted.
You can create one of the sought vectors in the following way:
Take vector a and a permutation of vector b.
Sum them together so c[i]=a[i]+b[i].
Sort c.
I'm interested in finding the set of b-permutations that yield the entire set of unique c vectors.
Example 0: a='ccdd' and b='xxyy'
Gives the summed vectors: 'cycydxdx', 'cxcxdydy', 'cxcydxdy'.
Notice that the permutations of b: 'xyxy' and 'yxyx' are equal, because in both cases the "box c" and the "box d" both get exactly one 'x' and one 'y'.
I guess this is similar to putting M balls in M boxes (one in each) with some groups of balls and boxes being identical.
Update: Given a string a='aabbbcdddd' and b='xxyyzzttqq' your problem will be 10 balls in 4 boxes. There are 4 distinct boxes of size 2, 3, 1 and 4. The balls are pair wise indistinguishable.
Example 1: Given strings are a='xyy' and b='kkd'.
Possible solution: 'kkd', 'dkk'.
Reason: We see that all unique permutations of b are 'kkd', 'kdk' and 'dkk'. However with our restraints, the two first permutations are considered equal as the indices on which the differ maps to the same char 'y' in string a.
Example 2: Given strings are a='xyy' and b='khd'.
Possible solution: 'khd', 'dkh', 'hkd'.
Example 3: Given strings are a='xxxx' and b='khhd'.
Possible solution: 'khhd'.
I can solve the problem of generating unique candidate b permutations using Narayana Pandita's algorithm as decribed on Wikipedia/Permutation.
The second part seams harder. My best shot is to join the two strings pairwise to a list, sort it and use it as a key in a lookup set. ('xx'+'hd' join→'xh','xd' sort→'xd','xh').
As my M is often very big, and as similarities in the strings are common, I currently generate way more b permutations than actually goes through the set filter. I would love to have an algorithm generating the correct ones directly. Any improvement is welcome.
To generate k-combinations of possibly repeated elements (multiset), the following could be useful: A Gray Code for Combinations of a Multiset (1995).
For a recursive solution you try the following:
Count the number of times each character appears. Say they are x1 x2 ... xm, corresponding to m distinct characters.
Then you need to find all possible ordered pairs (y1 y2 ... ym) such that
0 <= yi <= xi
and Sum yi = k.
Here yi is the number of times character i appears.
The idea is, fix the number of times char 1 appears (y1). Then recursively generate all combinations of k-y1 from the remaining.
psuedocode:
List Generate (int [] x /* array index starting at 1*/,
int k /* size of set */) {
list = List.Empty;
if (Sum(x) < k) return list;
for (int i = 0; i <= x[1], i++) {
// Remove first element and generate subsets of size k-i.
remaining = x.Remove(1);
list_i = Generate(remaining, k-i);
if (list_i.NotEmpty()) {
list = list + list_i;
} else {
return list;
}
}
return list;
}
PRIOR TO EDITS:
If I understood it correctly, you need to look at string a, see the symbols that appear exactly once. Say there are k such symbols. Then you need to generate all possible permutations of b, which contain k elements and map to those symbols at the corresponding positions. The rest you can ignore/fill in as you see fit.
I remember posting C# code for that here: How to find permutation of k in a given length?
I am assuming xxyy will give only 1 unique string and the ones that appear exactly once are the 'distinguishing' points.
Eg in case of a=xyy, b=add
distinguishing point is x
So you select permuations of 'add' of length 1. Those gives you a and d.
Thus add and dad (or dda) are the ones you need.
For a=xyyz b=good
distinguishing points are x and z
So you generate permutations of b of length 2 giving
go
og
oo
od
do
gd
dg
giving you 7 unique permutations.
Does that help? Is my understanding correct?
Ok, I'm sorry I never was able to clearly explain the problem, but here is a solution.
We need two functions combinations and runvector(v). combinations(s,k) generates the unique combinations of a multiset of a length k. For s='xxyy' these would be ['xx','xy','yy']. runvector(v) transforms a multiset represented as a sorted vector into a more simple structure, the runvector. runvector('cddeee')=[1,2,3].
To solve the problem, we will use recursive generators. We run through all the combinations that fits in box1 and the recourse on the rest of the boxes, banning the values we already chose. To accomplish the banning, combinations will maintain a bitarray across of calls.
In python the approach looks like this:
def fillrest(banned,out,rv,b,i):
if i == len(rv):
yield None
return
for comb in combinations(b,rv[i],banned):
out[i] = comb
for rest in fillrest(banned,out,rv,b,i+1):
yield None
def balls(a,b):
rv = runvector(a)
banned = [False for _ in b]
out = [None for _ in rv]
for _ in fill(out,rv,0,b,banned):
yield out[:]
>>> print list(balls('abbccc','xyyzzz'))
[['x', 'yy', 'zzz'],
['x', 'yz', 'yzz'],
['x', 'zz', 'yyz'],
['y', 'xy', 'zzz'],
['y', 'xz', 'yzz'],
['y', 'yz', 'xzz'],
['y', 'zz', 'xyz'],
['z', 'xy', 'yzz'],
['z', 'xz', 'yyz'],
['z', 'yy', 'xzz'],
['z', 'yz', 'xyz'],
['z', 'zz', 'xyy']]
The output are in 'box' format, but can easily be merged back to simple strings: 'xyyzzzz', 'xyzyzz'...

Sorting numbers from 1 to 999,999,999 in words as strings

Interesting programming puzzle:
If the integers from 1 to 999,999,999
are written as words, sorted
alphabetically, and concatenated, what
is the 51 billionth letter?
To be precise: if the integers from 1
to 999,999,999 are expressed in words
(omitting spaces, ‘and’, and
punctuation - see note below for format), and sorted
alphabetically so that the first six
integers are
eight
eighteen
eighteenmillion
eighteenmillioneight
eighteenmillioneighteen
eighteenmillioneighteenthousand
and the last is
twothousandtwohundredtwo
then reading top to bottom, left to
right, the 28th letter completes the
spelling of the integer
“eighteenmillion”.
The 51 billionth letter also completes
the spelling of an integer. Which one,
and what is the sum of all the
integers to that point?
Note: For example, 911,610,034 is
written
“ninehundredelevenmillionsixhundredtenthousandthirtyfour”;
500,000,000 is written
“fivehundredmillion”; 1,709 is written
“onethousandsevenhundrednine”.
I stumbled across this on a programming blog 'Occasionally Sane', and couldn't think of a neat way of doing it, the author of the relevant post says his initial attempt ate through 1.5GB of memory in 10 minutes, and he'd only made it up to 20,000,000 ("twentymillion").
Can anyone think of come up with share with the group a novel/clever approach to this?
Edit: Solved!
You can create a generator that outputs the numbers in sorted order. There are a few rules for comparing concatenated strings that I think most of us know implicitly:
a < a+b, where b is non-null.
a+b < a+c, where b < c.
a+b < c+d, where a < c, and a is not a subset of c.
If you start with a sorted list of the first 1000 numbers, you can easily generate the rest by appending "thousand" or "million" and concatenating another group of 1000.
Here's the full code, in Python:
import heapq
first_thousand=[('', 0), ('one', 1), ('two', 2), ('three', 3), ('four', 4),
('five', 5), ('six', 6), ('seven', 7), ('eight', 8),
('nine', 9), ('ten', 10), ('eleven', 11), ('twelve', 12),
('thirteen', 13), ('fourteen', 14), ('fifteen', 15),
('sixteen', 16), ('seventeen', 17), ('eighteen', 18),
('nineteen', 19)]
tens_name = (None, 'ten', 'twenty', 'thirty', 'forty', 'fifty', 'sixty',
'seventy','eighty','ninety')
for number in range(20, 100):
name = tens_name[number/10] + first_thousand[number%10][0]
first_thousand.append((name, number))
for number in range(100, 1000):
name = first_thousand[number/100][0] + 'hundred' + first_thousand[number%100][0]
first_thousand.append((name, number))
first_thousand.sort()
def make_sequence(base_generator, suffix, multiplier):
prefix_list = [(name+suffix, number*multiplier)
for name, number in first_thousand[1:]]
prefix_list.sort()
for prefix_name, base_number in prefix_list:
for name, number in base_generator():
yield prefix_name + name, base_number + number
return
def thousand_sequence():
for name, number in first_thousand:
yield name, number
return
def million_sequence():
return heapq.merge(first_thousand,
make_sequence(thousand_sequence, 'thousand', 1000))
def billion_sequence():
return heapq.merge(million_sequence(),
make_sequence(million_sequence, 'million', 1000000))
def solve(stopping_size = 51000000000):
total_chars = 0
total_sum = 0
for name, number in billion_sequence():
total_chars += len(name)
total_sum += number
if total_chars >= stopping_size:
break
return total_chars, total_sum, name, number
It took a while to run, about an hour. The 51 billionth character is the last character of sixhundredseventysixmillionsevenhundredfortysixthousandfivehundredseventyfive, and the sum of the integers to that point is 413,540,008,163,475,743.
I'd sort the names of the first 20 integers and the names of the tens, hundreds and thousands, work out how many numbers start with each of those, and go from there.
For example, the first few are [ eight, eighteen, eighthundred, eightmillion, eightthousand, eighty, eleven, ....
The numbers starting with "eight" are 8. With "eighthundred", 800-899, 800,000-899,999, 800,000,000-899,999,999. And so on.
The number of letters in the concatenation of words for 0 ( represented by the empty string ) to 99 can be found and totalled; this can be multiplied with "thousand"=8 or "million"=7 added for higher ranges. The value for 800-899 will be 100 times the length of "eighthundred" plus the length of 0-99. And so on.
This guy has a solution to the puzzle written in Haskell. Apparently Michael Borgwardt was right about using a Trie for finding the solution.
Those strings are going to have lots and lots of common prefixes - perfect use case for a trie, which would drastically reduce memory usage and probably also running time.
Here's my python solution that prints out the correct answer in a fraction of a second. I'm not a python programmer generally, so apologies for any egregious code style errors.
#!/usr/bin/env python
import sys
ONES=[
"", "one", "two", "three", "four",
"five", "six", "seven", "eight", "nine",
"ten", "eleven", "twelve", "thirteen", "fourteen",
"fifteen", "sixteen", "seventeen","eighteen", "nineteen",
]
TENS=[
"zero", "ten", "twenty", "thirty", "forty",
"fifty", "sixty", "seventy", "eighty", "ninety",
]
def to_s_h(i):
if(i<20):
return(ONES[i])
return(TENS[i/10] + ONES[i%10])
def to_s_t(i):
if(i<100):
return(to_s_h(i))
return(ONES[i/100] + "hundred" + to_s_h(i%100))
def to_s_m(i):
if(i<1000):
return(to_s_t(i))
return(to_s_t(i/1000) + "thousand" + to_s_t(i%1000))
def to_s_b(i):
if(i<1000000):
return(to_s_m(i))
return(to_s_m(i/1000000) + "million" + to_s_m(i%1000000))
def try_string(s,t):
global letters_to_go,word_sum
l=len(s)
letters_to_go -= l
word_sum += t
if(letters_to_go == 0):
print "solved: " + s
print "sum is: " + str(word_sum)
sys.exit(0)
elif(letters_to_go < 0):
print "failed: " + s + " " + str(letters_to_go)
sys.exit(-1)
def solve(depth,prefix,prefix_num):
global millions,thousands,ones,letters_to_go,onelen,thousandlen,word_sum
src=[ millions,thousands,ones ][depth]
for x in src:
num=prefix + x[2]
nn=prefix_num+x[1]
try_string(num,nn)
if(x[0] == 0):
continue
if(x[0] == 1):
stl=(len(num) * 999) + onelen
ss=(nn*999) + onesum
else:
stl=(len(num) * 999999) + thousandlen + onelen*999
ss=(nn*999999) + thousandsum
if(stl < letters_to_go):
letters_to_go -= stl
word_sum += ss
else:
solve(depth+1,num,nn)
ones=[]
thousands=[]
millions=[]
onelen=0
thousandlen=0
onesum=(999*1000)/2
thousandsum=(999999*1000000)/2
for x in range(1,1000):
s=to_s_b(x)
l=len(s)
ones.append( (0,x,s) )
onelen += l
thousands.append( (0,x,s) )
thousands.append( (1,x*1000,s + "thousand") )
thousandlen += l + (l+len("thousand"))*1000
millions.append( (0,x,s) )
millions.append( (1,x*1000,s + "thousand") )
millions.append( (2,x*1000000,s + "million") )
ones.sort(key=lambda x: x[2])
thousands.sort(key=lambda x: x[2])
millions.sort(key=lambda x: x[2])
letters_to_go=51000000000
word_sum=0
solve(0,"",0)
It works by precomputing the length of the numbers from 1..999 and 1..999999 so that it can skip entire subtrees unless it knows that the answer lies somewhere within them.
(The first attempt at this is wrong, but I will leave it up since it's more useful to see mistakes on the way to solving something rather than just the final answer.)
I would first generate the strings from 0 to 999 and store them into an array called thousandsStrings. The 0 element is "", and "" represents a blank in the lists below.
The thousandsString setup uses the following:
Units: "" one two three ... nine
Teens: ten eleven twelve ... nineteen
Tens: "" "" twenty thirty forty ... ninety
The thousandsString setup is something like this:
thousandsString[0] = ""
for (i in 1..10)
thousandsString[i] = Units[i]
end
for (i in 10..19)
thousandsString[i] = Teens[i]
end
for (i in 20..99)
thousandsString[i] = Tens[i/10] + Units[i%10]
end
for (i in 100..999)
thousandsString[i] = Units[i/100] + "hundred" + thousandsString[i%100]
end
Then, I would sort that array alphabetically.
Then, assuming t1 t2 t3 are strings taken from thousandsString, all of the strings have the form
t1
OR
t1 + million + t2 + thousand + t3
OR
t1 + thousand + t2
To output them in the proper order, I would process the individual strings, followed by the millions strings followed by the string + thousands strings.
foreach (t1 in thousandsStrings)
if (t1 == "")
continue;
process(t1)
foreach (t2 in thousandsStrings)
foreach (t3 in thousandsStrings)
process (t1 + "million" + t2 + "thousand" + t3)
end
end
foreach (t2 in thousandsStrings)
process (t1 + "thousand" + t2)
end
end
where process means store the previous sum length and then add the new string length to the sum and if the new sum is >= your target sum, you spit out the results, and maybe return or break out of the loops, whatever makes you happy.
=====================================================================
Second attempt, the other answers were right that you need to use 3k strings instead of 1k strings as a base.
Start with the thousandsString from above, but drop the blank "" for zero. That leaves 999 elements and call this uStr (units string).
Create two more sets:
tStr = the set of all uStr + "thousand"
mStr = the set of all uStr + "million"
Now create two more set unions:
mtuStr = mStr union tStr union uStr
tuStr = tStr union uStr
Order uStr, tuStr, mtuStr
Now the looping and logic here are a bit different than before.
foreach (s1 in mtuStr)
process(s1)
// If this is a millions or thousands string, add the extra strings that can
// go after the millions or thousands parts.
if (s1.contains("million"))
foreach (s2 in tuStr)
process (s1+s2)
if (s2.contains("thousand"))
foreach (s3 in uStr)
process (s1+s2+s3)
end
end
end
end
if (s1.contains("thousand"))
foreach (s2 in uStr)
process (s1+s2)
end
end
end
What I did:
1) Iterate through 1 - 999 and generate the words for each of these.
As we generate:
2) Create 3 data structures where each node has a pointer to children and each node has a character value, and a pointer to Siblings. (A binary tree, in fact, but we don't want to think of it that way necessarily - for me it's easier to conceptualise as a list of siblings with lists of children hanging off, but if you think about it {draw a pic} you'll realise it is in fact a Binary Tree).
These 3 data structures are created cocurrently as follows:
a) first one with the word as generated (ie 1-999 sorted alphabetically)
b) all the values in the first + all the values with 'thousand' appended (ie 1-999 and 1,000 - 999,000 (step 1000) (1998 values in total)
c) all the values in B + all the values in a with million appended (2997 values in total)
3) For every leaf node in(b) add a Child as (a). For every leaf node in (c) add a child as (b).
4) Traverse the tree, counting how many characters we pass and stopping at 51 Billion.
NOTE: This doesn't sum the values (I didn't read that bit when I originally did it), and runs in just over 3 minutes (about 192 secs usually, using c++).
NOTE 2: (in case it isn't obvious) there are only 5,994 values stored, but they are stored in such a way that there are a billion paths through the tree
I did this about a year or two ago when I stumbled accross it, and have since realised there are many optimisations (the most time consuming bit is traversing the tree - by a LONG WAY). There are a few optimisations that I think would significantly improve this approach, but I could never be bothered taking it further, other than to optimise redundant nodes in the tree slightly, so they stored strings rather than characters
I have seen people claim on line that they've solved it in less than 5 seconds....
weird but fun idea.
build a sparse list of the lengths of the number from 0 to 9, then 10-90 by tens, then 100, 1000, etc etc, to billion, indexes are the value of the integer part who's lenght is stored.
write a function to calculate the number as a string length using the table.
(breaking the number into it's parts, and looking up the length of the aprts, never actally creating a string.)
then you're only doing math as you traverse the numbers, calculating the length from the
table afterward summing for your sum.
with the sum, and the value of the final integer, figure out the integer that's being spelled, and volia, you're done.
Yes, me again, but a completely different approach.
Simply, rather than storing the "onethousandeleventyseven" words, you write the sort to use that when comparing.
Crude java POC:
public class BillionsBillions implements Comparator {
public int compare(Object a, Object b) {
String s1 = (String)a; // "1234";
String s2 = (String)b; // "1235";
int n1 = Integer.valueOf(s1);
int n2 = Integer.valueOf(s2);
String w1 = numberToWords(n1);
String w2 = numberToWords(n2);
return w1.compare(w2);
}
public static void main(String args[]) {
long numbers[] = new long[1000000000]; // Bring your 64 bit JVMs
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000000; i++) {
numbers[i] = i;
}
Arrays.sort(numbers, 0, numbers.length, new BillionsBillions());
long total = 0;
for(int i : numbers) {
String l = numberToWords(i);
long offset = total + l - 51000000000;
if (offset >= 0) {
String c = l.substring(l - offset, l - offset + 1);
System.out.println(c);
break;
}
}
}
}
"numberToWords" is left as an exercise for the reader.
Do you need to save the entire string in memory?
If not, just save how many characters you've appended so far. For each iteration, you check the length the next number's textual representation. If it exceeds the nth letter you are looking for, the letter must be in that string, so extract it by it's index, print it, and stop execution. Otherwise, add the string length to the character count and move to the next number.
All the strings are going to start with either one, ten, two, twenty, three, thirty, four, etc so I'd start with figuring out how many are in each of the buckets. Then you should at least know which bucket you need to look closer at.
Then I'd look at subdividing the buckets further based on the possible prefixes. For example, within ninehundred, you are going to have all the same buckets that you had to start off with, just for numbers starting with 900.
The question is about efficient data storage not string manipulation. Create an enum to represent the words. the words should appear in sorted order so that when it comes time to sort it is a simplish compare. Now generate the list and sort. use the fact that you know how long each word is in conjunction with the enum to add up to the character you need.
Code wins...
#!/bin/bash
n=0
while [ $n -lt 1000000000 ]; do
number -l $n | sed -e 's/[^a-z]//g'
let n=n+1
done | sort > /tmp/bignumbers
awk '
BEGIN {
total = 0;
}
{
l = length($0);
offset = total + l - 51000000000;
print total " " offset
if (offset >= 0) {
c = substr($0, l - offset, 1);
print c;
exit;
}
total = total + l;
}' /tmp/bignumbers
Tested for a much smaller range ;-). Requires a LOT of diskspace, a compressed filesystem would be, umm, valuable, but not so much memory.
Sort has options to compress work files as well, and you could toss in gzip to directly compress data.
Not the zippiest solution.
But it does work.
Honestly I would let an RDBMS like SQL Server or Oracle do the work for me.
Insert the billion strings into an indexed table.
Compute a string length column.
Start pulling off the top X records at a time with a SUM, until I get to 51 billion.
Might beat up the server for a while as it would need to do a lot of Disk IO, but overall I think I could find an answer faster than someone who would write a program to do it.
Sometimes just getting it done is what the client really wants, and could care less what fancy design pattern or data structure you used.
figure out lengths for 1-999 and include length for 0 as 0.
so now you have an array for 0-999 namely uint32 sizes999[1000];
(not going to get into the details of generating this)
also need an array of thousand last letters last_letters[1000]
(again not going to get into the details of generating this as it is even easier even hundreds d even tens y except 10 which is n others cycle though last of on e through nin e zero is irrelavant)
uint32 sizes999[1000];
uint64 totallen = 0;
strlen_million = strlen("million");
strlen_thousand = strlen("thousand");
for (uint32 i = 0; i<1000;++i){
for (uint32 j = 0; j<1000;++j){
for (uint32 j = 0; j<1000;++j){
total_len += sizes999[i]+strlen_million +
sizes999[j]+strlen_thousand +
sizes999[k];
if totallen == 51000000000 goto done;
ASSERT(totallen <51000000000);//he claimed 51000000000 was not intermediate
}
}
}
done:
//now use i j k to get last letter by using last_letters999
//think of i,j,k as digits base 1000
//if k = 0 & j ==0 then the letter is n million
//if only k = 0 then the letter is d thousand
//other wise use the array of last_letters since
//the units digit base 1000, that is k, is not zero
//for the sum of the numbers i,j,k are the digits of the number base 1000 so
n = i*1000000 + j*1000 + k;
//represent the number and use
sum = n*(n+1)/2;
if you need to do it for number other than 51000000000 then also calculate sums_sizes999 and use that in the natural way.
total memory: 0(1000);
total time: 0(n) where n is the number
This is what I'd do:
Create an array of 2,997 strings: "one" through "ninehundredninetynine", "onethousand" through "ninehundredninetyninethousand", and "onemillion" through "ninehundredninetyninemillion".
Store the following about each string: length (this can be calculated of course), the integer value represented by the string, and some enum to signify whether it's "ones", "thousands", or "millions".
Sort the 2,997 strings alphabetically.
With this array created, it's straightforward to find all 999,999,999 strings in order alphabetically based on the following observations:
Nothing can follow a "ones" string
Either nothing, or a "ones" string, can follow a "thousands" string
Either nothing, a "ones" string, a "thousands" string, or a "thousands" string then a "ones" string, can follow a "millions" string.
Constructing the words basically involves creating one- to three-letter "words" based on these 2,997 tokens, making sure that the order of the tokens makes a valid number according to the rules above. Given a particular "word", the next "word" is found like this:
Lengthen the "word" by adding the token first alphabetically, if possible.
If this can't be done, advance the rightmost token to the next one alphabetically, if possible.
If this too is not possible, then remove the rightmost token, and advance the second-rightmost token to the next one alphabetically, if possible.
If this too is not possible, you're done.
At each step you can calculate the total length of the string and the sum of the numbers by just keeping two running totals.
It's important to note that there is a lot of overlapping and double counting if you iterate over all 100 billion possible numbers. It's important to realize that the number of strings that start with "eight" is the same number of numbers that start with "nin" or "seven" or "six" etc...
To me, this begs for a dynamic programming solution where the number of strings for tens, hundreds, thousands, etc are calculated and stored in some type of look up table. Ofcourse, there will be special cases for one vs eleven, two vs twelve, etc
I'll update this if I can get a quick running solution.
WRONG!!!!!!!!! I READ THE PROBLEM WRONG. I thought it meant "what's the last letter of the alphabetically last number"
what's wrong with:
public class Nums {
// if overflows happen, switch to an BigDecimal or something
// with arbitrary precision
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("last letter: " + lastLetter(1L, 51000000L);
System.out.println("sum: " + sum(1L, 51000000L);
}
static char lastLetter(long start, long end) {
String last = toWord(start);
for(long i = start; i < end; i++)
String current = toWord(i);
if(current.compareTo(last) > 1)
last = current;
return last.charAt(last.length()-1);
}
static String toWord(long num) {
// should be relatively easy, but for now ...
return "one";
}
static long sum(long first, long n) {
return (n * first + n*n) / 2;
}
}
haven't actually tried this :/ LOL
You have one billion numbers and 51 billion characters - there's a good chance that this is a trick question, as there are an average of 51 characters per number. Sum up the conversions of all the numbers and see if it adds up to 51 billion.
Edit: It adds up to 70,305,000,000 characters, so this is the wrong answer.
I solved this in Java sometime in 2008 as part of an application to work at ITA Software.
The code is long, and it now being three years later, I look at it with a bit of horror... So I'm not going to post it.
But I'll post quotes from some notes that I included with the application.
The problem with this puzzle is of course the size. The naïve approach would be to sort the list in word number order and then to iterate through the sorted list counting characters and summing. With a list of size 999,999,999 this would of course take a rather long time and the sort could likely not be done in memory.
But there are natural patterns in the ordering which allow shortcuts.
Immediately following any entry (say the number is X) ending in “million” will come 999,999 entries starting with the same text, representing all the numbers from X +1
to X + 10^6 -1.
The sum of all these numbers can be computed by a classic formula (an “arithmetic series”), and the character count can be computed by a similarly simple formula based on the prefix (X above) and a once-computed character count for the numbers from 1 to 999,999. Both depend only on the “millions” part of the number at the base of the range. Thus if the character count for the entire range will keep the entire count below the search goal, the individual entries need not be traversed.
Similar shortcuts apply for “thousand”, and indeed could be applied to “hundred” or “billion” though I didn’t bother with shortcuts at the hundreds level and the billions level is out of range for this problem.
In order to apply these shortcuts, my code creates and sorts a list of 2997 objects representing the numbers:
1 to 999 stepping by 1
1000 to 999000 stepping by 1000
1000000 to 999000000 stepping by 1000000
The code iterates through this list, accumulating sums and character counts, recursively creating, sorting and traversing similar but smaller lists as needed.
Explicit counting and adding is only needed near the end.
I didn't get the job, but later used the code as a "code sample" for another job, which I did get.
The Java code using these techniques for skipping much of the explicit counting and adding runs in about 8 seconds.

Resources