Two different lists having radii of upper hemisphere and lower hemisphere is provided. The first list consists of N upper hemispheres indexed 1 to N and the second has M lower hemispheres indexed 1 to M. A sphere of radius of R can be made taking one upper half of the radius R and one lower half of the radius R. Also, you can put a sphere into a bigger one and create a sequence of nested concentric spheres. But you can't put two or more spheres directly into another one.
If there is a sequence of (D+1) nested spheres, we can call this sequence as a D-sequence.
Find out how many different X-sequence are possible (1 <= X <= C). An X sequence is different from another if the index of any of the hemisphere used in one X-sequence is different from the other.
INPUT
The first line contains a three integers: N denoting the number of upper sphere halves, M denoting the number of lower sphere halves and C.
The second line contains N space-separated integers denoting the radii of upper hemispheres.
The third line contains M space-separated integers denoting the radii of lower hemispheres.
OUTPUT
Output a single line containing C space-separated integers , the number of ways there are to build i-sequence in modulo 1000000007.
Example
Input
3 4 3
1 2 3
1 1 3 2
Output
5 2 0
I am looking for those elements which are part of both the lists of upper as well as lower hemispheres, so that they can form a sphere and then taking their maximum count by comparing their counts in both radii lists.
And, So, for different C sum of products of counts of C+1 elements yields the answer.
How to calculate the above efficiently or is there any other approach ??
Guys this is my first answer. Spare me the whip for now as i am here to learn.
You first find the numbers of spheres possible for each radii.
no of spheres: 2 1 1
Having Radii: 1 2 3
Now since we can fit a sphere with radius r inside a sphere with radii R such that R>r, all we need to do is to find the no . of increasing subsequences of length 2,3,...till c in the list of all possible spheres formed.
List of possible spheres:[1,1*,2,3](* used for marking)
consider D1: it has 2 spheres. Try finding the no. of increasing subsequences of length 2 in the above list.
They are:
[1,2],[1*,2][1,3][1*,3][2,3]
hence the ans is 5.
Get it??
Now how to solve:
It can be done by using Dp. Naive solution has complexity .O(n^2*constant).
You may follow along the lines as provided in the following link :Dp solution.
It is worth mentioning that faster methods do exist which use BIT , segment trees etc.
It is similar to this SPOJ problem.
Related
Below I have represented 2 permutations of bits in a 2D bit array (1s are red). The matrix on the left has a single group of contiguous 1s but the right matrix has 2.
I would like to loop through every possible permutation of binary values in such an array that has a single group of contiguous 1s. I am aware that for a 10×7 grid like above there are 2(10 × 7) permutations when you include non-contiguous permutations, but my hope is that by excluding non-contiguous permutations I will be able to go through them all in reasonable CPU time.
Speaking of reasonableness, I am also interested in an algorithm to determine how many permutations are contiguous.
My question is similar to, but different from, these:
2D Bit matrix with every possible combination
Finding Contiguous Areas of Bits in 2D Bit Array
Any help is appreciated. I'm a bit stuck.
So, I found that the OEIS (Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences) has a sequence from n = 0..7 for the "number of nonzero n X n binary arrays with all 1's connected" (A059525). They provide no formula though except for grids fixed at 1 cell wide (triangular numbers), or 2 or 3 cells wide. There's a sequence for 4 x n too but no formula.
Two approaches I can think of. One is to iterate through all possible sequences and devise a test for non-contiguous groups and some method for skipping over large regions guaranteed to be non-contiguous.
A second approach is to attempt to build all sets of contiguous groups so you don't need to test. This is the approach I would take:
Let n = width * height
Enumerate blocks left to right, top to bottom from 0 to n - 1
Fix a block at position 0.
Generate all contiguous solutions between 1 and n blocks extending from position 0
Omit position 0 and fix a block at position 1
Find all contiguous solutions between 1 and n - 1 blocks extending from position 1
Continue until you've reached position n
You can place your pieces according to the following rules, backtracking for the next placement at each depth:
To left of most recently placed piece if placed in row above prior piece provided that no other neighbors exist for that vacancy.
Above left-most available piece in row of most recently placed piece if no other neighbors exist for that vacancy.
To right of most recently placed piece (if adjacent piece exists)
On the next row, farthest left vacancy such that upper row has a piece above any contiguous right remaining neighbors
Next move for any backtracked position is first available move to the right of, or in the row below, the backtracked position (obeying prior 4 rules)
Can anyone please suggest me algorithm for this.
You are given starting and the ending points of N segments over the x-axis.
How many of these segments can be touched, even on their edges, by exactly two lines perpendicular to them?
Sample Input :
3
5
2 3
1 3
1 5
3 4
4 5
5
1 2
1 3
2 3
1 4
1 5
3
1 2
3 4
5 6
Sample Output :
Case 1: 5
Case 2: 5
Case 3: 2
Explanation :
Case 1: We will draw two lines (parallel to Y-axis) crossing X-axis at point 2 and 4. These two lines will touch all the five segments.
Case 2: We can touch all the points even with one line crossing X-axis at 2.
Case 3: It is not possible to touch more than two points in this case.
Constraints:
1 ≤ N ≤ 10^5
0 ≤ a < b ≤ 10^9
Let assume that we have a data structure that supports the following operations efficiently:
Add a segment.
Delete a segment.
Return the maximum number of segments that cover one point(that is, the "best" point).
If have such a structure, we can get use the initial problem efficiently in the following manner:
Let's create an array of events(one event for the start of each segment and one for the end) and sort by the x-coordinate.
Add all segments to the magical data structure.
Iterate over all events and do the following: when a segment start, add one to the number of currently covered segments and remove it from that data structure. When a segment ends, subtract one from the number of currently covered segment and add this segment to the magical data structure. After each event, update the answer with the value of the number of currently covered segments(it shows how many segments are covered by the point which corresponds to the current event) plus the maximum returned by the data structure described above(it shows how we can choose another point in the best possible way).
If this data structure can perform all given operations in O(log n), then we have an O(n log n) solution(we sort the events and make one pass over the sorted array making a constant number of queries to this data structure for each event).
So how can we implement this data structure? Well, a segment tree works fine here. Adding a segment is adding one to a specific range. Removing a segment is subtracting one from all elements in a specific range. Get ting the maximum is just a standard maximum operation on a segment tree. So we need a segment tree that supports two operations: add a constant to a range and get maximum for the entire tree. It can be done in O(log n) time per query.
One more note: a standard segment tree requires coordinates to be small. We may assume that they never exceed 2 * n(if it is not the case, we can compress them).
An O(N*max(logN, M)) solution, where M is the medium segment size, implemented in Common Lisp: touching-segments.lisp.
The idea is to first calculate from left to right at every interesting point the number of segments that would be touched by a line there (open-left-to-right on the lisp code). Cost: O(NlogN)
Then, from right to left it calculates, again at every interesting point P, the best location for a line considering segments fully to the right of P (open-right-to-left on the lisp code). Cost O(N*max(logN, M))
Then it is just a matter of looking for the point where the sum of both values tops. Cost O(N).
The code is barely tested and may contain bugs. Also, I have not bothered to handle edge cases as when the number of segments is zero.
The problem can be solved in O(Nlog(N)) time per test case.
Observe that there is an optimal placement of two vertical lines each of which go through some segment endpoints
Compress segments' coordinates. More info at What is coordinate compression?
Build a sorted set of segment endpoints X
Sort segments [a_i,b_i] by a_i
Let Q be a priority queue which stores right endpoints of segments processed so far
Let T be a max interval tree built over x-coordinates. Some useful reading atWhat are some sources (books, etc.) from where I can learn about Interval, Segment, Range trees?
For each segment make [a_i,b_i]-range increment-by-1 query to T. It allows to find maximum number of segments covering some x in [a,b]
Iterate over elements x of X. For each x process segments (not already processed) with x >= a_i. The processing includes pushing b_i to Q and making [a_i,b_i]-range increment-by-(-1) query to T. After removing from Q all elements < x, A= Q.size is equal to number of segments covering x. B = T.rmq(x + 1, M) returns maximum number of segments that do not cover x and cover some fixed y > x. A + B is a candidate for an answer.
Source:
http://www.quora.com/What-are-the-intended-solutions-for-the-Touching-segments-and-the-Smallest-String-and-Regex-problems-from-the-Cisco-Software-Challenge-held-on-Hackerrank
I'm currently trying to solve an algorithm problem from last year's Polish Collegiate Championships which reads as follows:
The Lord Mayor of Bytetown plans to locate a number of radar speed
cameras in the city. There are n intersections in Bytetown numbered
from 1 to n, and n-1 two way street segments. Each of these street
segments stretches between two intersections. The street network
allows getting from each intersection to any other.
The speed cameras are to be located at the intersections (maximum one
per intersection), wherein The Lord Mayor wants to maximise the number
of speed cameras. However, in order not to aggravate Byteland
motorists too much, he decided that on every route running across
Bytetown roads that does not pass through any intersection twice there
can be maximum k speed cameras (including those on endpoints of the
route). Your task is to write a program which will determine where the
speed cameras should be located.
Input
The first line of input contains two integers n and k (1 <= n, k <=
1000000): the number of intersections in Bytetown and maximum number
of speed cameras which can be set up on an individual route. The lines
that follow describe Bytetown street network: the i-th line contains
two integers a_i and b_i (1 <= a_i, b_i <= n), meaning that there is a
two-way street segment which joins two intersections numbered a_i and
b_i.
Output
The first output line should produce m: the number describing the
maximum number of speed cameras, that can be set up in Byteland. The
second line should produce a sequence of m numbers describing the
intersections where the speed cameras should be constructed. Should
there be many solutions, your program may output any one of them.
Example
For the following input data:
5 2
1 3
2 3
3 4
4 5
one of the correct results is:
3 1 2 4
So judging by how many teams solved it, I'm guessing it can't be too hard but still, I got stuck almost immediately with no idea as to how to move on. Since we know that "on every route running across Bytetown roads that does not pass through any intersection twice there can be maximum k speed camera", I guess we first have to somehow dissect the graphs into components being possible routes around the town. This alone seems like a really hard thing to do cause supposing there's an intersection with four motorways coming out of it, it already creates three possible directions for every enter point, thus making 12 routes. Not to mention how the situation complicates when there's more such four-handed intersections.
Maybe I'm approaching the task from the wrong angle? Could you please help?
It seems greedy works here
while k >= 2
mark all leaves of the tree and remove them
k = k - 2;
if ( k == 1 )
mark any 1 of remaining vertices
you are given an N X M rectangular field with bottom left point at the origin. You have to construct a tower with square base in the field. There are trees in the field with associated cost to uproot them. So you have to minimize the number of trees uprooted to minimize the cost of constructing the tower.
Example Input:
N = 4
M = 3
Lenght of side of Tower = 1
Number of Trees in the field = 4
1 3 5
3 3 4
2 2 1
2 1 2
The 4 rows in the Input are the coordinates of the tree with cost for uprooting as the third integer.
Tree coinciding with the edge of the tower is considered as placed inside the tower and have to be uprooted as well.
I'm facing problem in formulating the Dynamic Programming relation for this problem
thanks
It sounds like your problem boils down to: find the KxK subblock of an MxN matrix with the smallest sum. You can solve this problem efficiently (proportional to the size of your input) by using an integral transform. Of course, this doesn't necessarily help you with your dynamic programming issue -- I'm not sure this solution is equivalent to any dynamic programming formulation....
At any rate, for each index pair (a,b) of your original matrix M, compute an "integral transform" matrix I[a,b] = sum[i<=a, j<=b](M[i,j]). This is computable by traversing the matrix in order, referring to the value computed from the previous row/column. (with a bit of thought, you can also do this efficiently with a sparse matrix)
Then, you can compute the sum of any subblock (a1..a2, b1..b2) in constant time as I[a2,b2] - I[a1-1,b2] - I[a2,b1-1] + I[a1-1,b1-1]. Iterating through all KxK subblocks to find the smallest sum will then take time proportional to the size of your original matrix also.
Since the original problem is phrased as a list of integral coordinates (and, presumably, expects the tower location to be output as an integral coordinate pair), you likely do need to represent your field as a sparse matrix for an efficient solution -- this involves sorting your trees' coordinates in lexicographic order (e.g. first by x-coordinate, then by y-coordinate). Note that this sorting step may take O(L log L) for input of size L, dominating the following steps, which take only O(L) in the size of the input.
Also note that, due to the problem specifying that "trees coinciding with the edge of the tower are uprooted...", a tower with edge length K actually corresponds to an (K+1)x(K+1) subblock.
Given an N x N matrix, where N <= 25, and each cell has a positive integer value, how can you partition it with at most K lines (with straight up/down lines or straight left/right lines [note: they have to extend from one side to the other]) so that the maximum value group (as determined by the partitions) is minimum?
For example, given the following matrix
1 1 2
1 1 2
2 2 4
and we are allowed to use 2 lines to partition it, we should draw a line between column 2 and 3, as well as a line between rows 2 and 3, which gives the minimized maximum value, 4.
My first thought would be a bitmask representing the state of each lines, with 2 integers to represent it. However, this is too slow. I think the complexity is O(2^(2N))Maybe you could solve it for the rows, then solve it for the columns?
Anyone have any ideas?
Edit: Here is the problem after I googled it: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0166218X94001546
another paper: http://cis.poly.edu/suel/papers/pxp.pdf
I'm trying to read that^
You can try all subsets for vertical lines, and then do dynamic programming for horizontal lines.
Let's say you have fixed the set of vertical lines as S. Denote the answer for the subproblem consisting of first K lines of matrix with fixed set of vertical lines S as D(K, S). It is then trivial to find a recurrence to solve D(K, S) with subproblems of smaller size.
Overall complexity should be O(2^N * N^2) if you precompute the sizes of each submatrix in the beginning.