I must write a Scheme predicate that computes the function f(N -> N) defined as :
if n < 4 :f(n)= (n^2) + 5
if n ≥ 4 :f(n) = [f(n−1) + f(n−2)] * f(n−4)
I wrote a simple predicate that works :
(define functionfNaive
(lambda (n)
(if (< n 4) (+ (* n n) 5)
(* (+ (functionfNaive (- n 1)) (functionfNaive (- n 2)))
(functionfNaive (- n 4))))))
Now, I try a method with an accumulator but it doesn't work...
My code :
(define functionf
(lambda(n)
(functionfAux n 5 9 14)))
(define functionfAux
(lambda (n n1 n2 n4)
(cond
[(< n 4) (+ (* n n) 5)]
[(= n 4) (* n1 (+ n2 n4))]
[else (functionfAux (- n 1) n2 n4 (* n1 (+ n2 n4)))])))
As requested, here's a memoized version of your code that performs better than the naïve version:
(define functionf
(let ((cache (make-hash)))
(lambda (n)
(hash-ref!
cache
n
(thunk
(if (< n 4)
(+ (* n n) 5)
(* (+ (functionf (- n 1)) (functionf (- n 2))) (functionf (- n 4)))))))))
BTW... computing the result for large values of n is very quick, but printing takes a lot of time. To measure the time, use something like
(time (functionf 50) 'done)
AND here's a generic memoize procedure, should you need it:
(define (memoize fn)
(let ((cache (make-hash)))
(λ arg (hash-ref! cache arg (thunk (apply fn arg))))))
which in your case could be used like
(define functionf
(memoize
(lambda (n)
(if (< n 4)
(+ (* n n) 5)
(* (+ (functionf (- n 1)) (functionf (- n 2))) (functionf (- n 4)))))))
First, that's not a predicate. A Predicate is a function which returns a Boolean value.
To calculate the nth result, start with the first four and count up, maintaining the last four known elements. Stop when n is reached:
(define (step a b c d n)
(list b c d (* (+ c d) a)) (+ n 1)))
etc. Simple. The first call will be (step 5 6 9 14 3).
The depth of the recursion tree may be the biggest question, so may be use the iteration which means use some variables to memory the intermediate processes.
#lang racket
(define (functionf n)
(define (iter now n1 n2 n3 n4 back)
(if (= n now)
back
(iter (+ now 1) back n1 n2 n3 (* n3 (+ back n1)))))
(if (< n 4)
(+ 5 (* n n))
(iter 4 14 9 6 5 125)))
(functionf 5)
in this way, the depth of the stack only be 1 and the code is speeded up.
Related
This is my first post on StackOverflow. I have been working on Exercise 1.11 from SICP and feel I have a viable solution. In transferring from paper to Emacs I seem to have some syntax error that I am unaware of. I tried my best to double and triple check the parenthesis and solve it but the terminal is still giving me an 'object #t is not applicable' message. Could someone please point me in the right direction of how to fix the code so I can test its output properly?"
Exercise 1.11: A function f
is defined by the rule that:
f(n)=n
if n<3
, and
f(n)=f(n−1)+2f(n−2)+3f(n−3)
if n>=3
Write a procedure that computes f by means of a recursive process.
Write a procedure that computes f by means of an iterative process.
(define (f-recur n)
(if ((< n 3) n)
(+ (f(- n 1))
(* 2 (f(n-2)))
(* 3 (f(n-3)))))
(define (f-iter n)
(define (counter n)
(if (<= n 3) 0)
(- n 3))
(define (d n) (+ n (* 2 n) (* 3 n)))
(define (c n) (+ d (* 2 n) (* 3 n)))
(define (b n) (+ c (* 2 d) (* 3 n)))
(define (a n) (+ b (* 2 c) (* 3 d)))
(define (f a b c d counter)
(if ((> (+ counter 3) n) a)
(f (+ b (* 2 c) (* 3 d)) a b c (+ counter 1)))))
(cond ((= counter 0) d)
((= counter 1) c)
((= counter 2) b)
((= counter 3) a)
(else (f a b c d counter))))
I'm pretty sure SICP is looking for a solution in the manner of this iterative fibonnacci:
(define (fib n)
(define (helper n a b)
(if (zero? n)
a
(helper (- n 1) b (+ a b))))
(helper n 0 1))
Fibonacci is f(n)=f(n−1)+f(n−2) so I guess f(n)=f(n−1)+2f(n−2)+3f(n−3) can be made exactly the same way with one extra variable. Your iterative solution looks more like Fortran than Scheme. Try avoiding set!.
I have made a program that returns the number of a fibonacci series by using tail recursion, and I would like to add its results to a list. I have done the following:
(define listAux '())
(define (fibTail n1 n2 c)
(if (= c 0)
(appendList -1)
(begin
(appendList n2)
(fibT (+ n1 n2) n1 (- c 1))
)))
(define (appendList n)
(if (= n -1)
listAux
(append (list n) listAux)))
(define (fib n)
(fibTail 1 0 n))
I would like that appendList returns a list with the elements of the fibonacci series, when I call it like (fib 8) for example.
Any help?
Thanks
When programming in Lisp, we avoid using append for building lists - it's very inefficient because to insert a single element at the end, we have to traverse the whole list... and then again, and again. It's better to build the list in reverse order using cons and invert it at the end. Also, the ideal way of writing a tail recursion is to accumulate the results in a parameter, not in an externally defined variable (which anyway won't work, unless you set! its value somewhere). This is what I mean:
(define (fib n)
(fibTail 1 0 n '()))
(define (fibTail n1 n2 c lst)
(if (< c 0)
(reverse lst)
(fibTail (+ n1 n2) n1 (- c 1) (cons n2 lst))))
For example:
(fib 10)
=> '(0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55)
I need to write a function that will return the number of ways in which can be n (n is a natural number) written as the sum of natural numbers.
For example: 4 can be written as 1+1+1+1, 1+1+2, 2+2, 3+1 and 4.
I have written a function that returns the number of all the options, but does not take into account that the possibilities 1 + 1 + 2 and 2 + 1 + 1 (and all similar cases) are equal. So for n=4 it returns 8 instead of 5.
Here is my function:
(define (possibilities n)
(define (loop i)
(cond [(= i n) 1]
[(> i n) 0]
[(+ (possibilities (- n i)) (loop (+ i 1)))]))
(cond [(< n 1) 0]
[#t (loop 1)]))
Could you please help me with fixing my function, so it will work the way it should be. Thank you.
This is a well-known function, it's called the partition function P, its possible values are referenced as A000041 in the on-line encyclopedia of integer sequences.
One simple solution (not the fastest!) would be to use this helper function, which denotes the number of ways of writing n as a sum of exactly k terms:
(define (p n k)
(cond ((> k n) 0)
((= k 0) 0)
((= k n) 1)
(else
(+ (p (sub1 n) (sub1 k))
(p (- n k) k)))))
Then we just have to add the possible results, being careful with the edge cases:
(define (possibilities n)
(cond ((negative? n) 0)
((zero? n) 1)
(else
(for/sum ([i (in-range (add1 n))])
(p n i)))))
For example:
(map possibilities (range 11))
=> '(1 1 2 3 5 7 11 15 22 30 42)
How could I use this procedure:
(define (sum f n )
(if (= n 1)
(f 1)
(+ ( f n ) (sum f (- n 1)))))
in order to redefine the following one?
(define (zeno n)
(cond ((= n 1)
(/ 1 2))
((> n 1)
(+ (zeno (- n 1))
(/ 1 (expt 2 n))))))
Basically, I am trying to create another function called zeno-sec that uses the sum function written above.
The procedure sum accepts another procedure f and you have to find that f. If you look at the second procedure zeno you can spot a possible body of f in the second clause of cond, that is (/ 1 (expt 2 n)). So f will be (lambda (a) (/ 1 (expt 2 a))). Combining it with sum, the zeno-sec will look like:
(define (zeno-sec n)
(sum (lambda (a)
(/ 1 (expt 2 a)))
n))
Edit: Maybe some clarifications could help. If you look at the two procedures, sum and zeno, you can see they have very similar structure: a conditional form and a recursion. Also if you switch the places of the subexpressions in the last expressions you will notice that they are almost the same:
(+ (sum f (- n 1))
(f n))
and
(+ (zeno (- n 1))
(/ 1 (expt 2 n)))
See how the call (zeno (- n 1)) resembles the (sum f (- n 1)) and the (f n) becomes (/ 1 (expt 2 n)). I hope that makes some sense.
So i'm trying to solve the collatz function iteratively in scheme but my test cases keep showing up as
(define (collatz n)
(define (collatz-iter n counter)
(if (<= n 1)
1
(if (even? n) (collatz-iter (/ n 2) (+ counter 1))
(collatz-iter (+ (* n 3) 1) (+ counter 1))
)
)
)
)
However, my test cases keep resulting in "#[constant 13 #x2]". What did I write wrong, if anything?
You forgot to call collatz-iter. Also, it's not clear what do you intend to do with counter, you just increment it, but never actually use its value - your procedure will always return 1 (assuming that the Collatz conjecture is true, which seems quite possible).
I'm guessing you intended to return the counter, so here's how to fix your procedure:
(define (collatz n)
(define (collatz-iter n counter)
(if (<= n 1)
counter ; return the counter
(if (even? n)
(collatz-iter (/ n 2) (+ counter 1))
(collatz-iter (+ (* n 3) 1) (+ counter 1)))))
(collatz-iter n 1)) ; call collatz-iter
And this is how it works for the examples in wikipedia:
(collatz 6)
=> 9
(collatz 11)
=> 15
(collatz 27)
=> 112
So basically we're counting the length of the Collatz sequence for a given number.
You should indent your code properly. With proper formatting, it's
(define (collatz n)
(define (collatz-iter n counter)
(if (<= n 1)
1
(if (even? n)
(collatz-iter (/ n 2) (+ counter 1))
(collatz-iter (+ (* n 3) 1) (+ counter 1))))))
which clearly has no body forms to execute, just an internal definition. You need to add a call to collatz-iter, like this:
(define (collatz n)
(define (collatz-iter n counter)
(if (<= n 1)
1
(if (even? n)
(collatz-iter (/ n 2) (+ counter 1))
(collatz-iter (+ (* n 3) 1) (+ counter 1)))))
(collatz-iter n 1))
(I'm not sure what your initial counter value should be. I'm assuming 1 is reasonable, but perhaps it should be zero?) Better yet, since the body it just a call to collatz-iter, you can make this a named let, which is more like your original code:
(define (collatz n)
(let iter ((n n) (counter 1))
(if (<= n 1)
1
(if (even? n)
(iter (/ n 2) (+ counter 1))
(iter (+ (* n 3) 1) (+ counter 1))))))
It's sort of like combining the internal definition with the single call to the local function. Once you've done this, though, you'll see that it always returns 1, when it eventually gets to the base case (assuming the Collatz conjecture is true, of course). Fixing this, you'll end up with:
(define (collatz n)
(let iter ((n n) (counter 1))
(if (<= n 1)
counter
(if (even? n)
(iter (/ n 2) (+ counter 1))
(iter (+ (* n 3) 1) (+ counter 1))))))
When I try to run your code in Racket I get the error:
no expression after a sequence of internal definitions
This is telling us that the collatz function conatains the collatz-iter definition, but no expression to call it (other than the recursive calls in collatz-iter). That can be fixed by adding a call to (collatz-iter n 0) as the last line in collatz.
However, when you run the program it always returns 1. Not very interesting. If instead you change it to return the value of counter you can see how many steps it took for the sequence to reach 1.
(define (collatz n)
(define (collatz-iter n counter)
(if (<= n 1)
counter
(if (even? n) (collatz-iter (/ n 2) (+ counter 1))
(collatz-iter (+ (* n 3) 1) (+ counter 1))
)
)
)
(collatz-iter n 0)
)
We can check it against a few examples given on the Wikipedia Collatz conjecture article.
> (collatz 6)
8
> (collatz 11)
14
> (collatz 27)
111
>