Related
Can we do the run-length encoding in place(assuming the input array is very large)
We can do for the cases such as AAAABBBBCCCCDDDD
A4B4C4D4
But how to do it for the case such as ABCDEFG?
where the output would be A1B1C1D1E1F1G1
My first thought was to start encoding from the end, so we will use the free space (if any), after that we can shift the encoded array to the start. A problem with this approach is that it will not work for AAAAB, because there is no free space (it's not needed for A4B1) and we will try to write AAAAB1 on the first iteration.
Below is corrected solution:
(let's assume the sequence is AAABBC)
encode all groups with two or more elements and leave the rest unchanged (this will not increase length of the array) -> A3_B2C
shift everything right eliminating empty spaces after first step -> _A3B2C
encode the array from the start (reusing the already encoded groups of course) -> A3B2C1
Every step is O(n) and as far as I can see only constant additional memory is needed.
Limitations:
Digits are not supported, but that anyway would create problems with decoding as Petar Petrov mentioned.
We need some kind of "empty" character, but this can be worked around by adding zeros: A03 instead of A3_
C++ solution O(n) time O(1) space
string runLengthEncode(string str)
{
int len = str.length();
int j=0,k=0,cnt=0;
for(int i=0;i<len;i++)
{
j=i;
cnt=1;
while(i<len-1 && str[i]==str[i+1])
{
i++;
cnt++;
}
str[k++]=str[j];
string temp =to_string(cnt);
for(auto m:temp)
str[k++] = m;
}
str.resize(k);
return str;
}
null is used to indicate which items are empty and will be ignored for encoding. Also you can't encode digits (AAA2222 => A324 => 324 times 'A', but it's A3;24). Your question opens more questions.
Here's a "solution" in C#
public static void Encode(string[] input)
{
var writeIndex = 0;
var i = 0;
while (i < input.Length)
{
var symbol = input[i];
if (symbol == null)
{
break;
}
var nextIndex = i + 1;
var offset = 0;
var count = CountSymbol(input, symbol, nextIndex) + 1;
if (count == 1)
{
ShiftRight(input, nextIndex);
offset++;
}
input[writeIndex++] = symbol;
input[writeIndex++] = count.ToString();
i += count + offset;
}
Array.Clear(input, writeIndex, input.Length - writeIndex);
}
private static void ShiftRight(string[] input, int nextIndex)
{
var count = CountSymbol(input, null, nextIndex, (a, b) => a != b);
Array.Copy(input, nextIndex, input, nextIndex + 1, count);
}
private static int CountSymbol(string[] input, string symbol, int nextIndex)
{
return CountSymbol(input, symbol, nextIndex, (a, b) => a == b);
}
private static int CountSymbol(string[] input, string symbol, int nextIndex, Func<string, string, bool> cmp)
{
var count = 0;
var i = nextIndex;
while (i < input.Length && cmp(input[i], symbol))
{
count++;
i++;
}
return count;
}
The 1st solution does not take care of single characters. For example - 'Hi!' will not work. I've used totally different approach, used 'insert()' functions to add inplace. This take care of everything, whether the total 'same' character is > 10 or >100 or = 1.
#include<iostream>
#include<algorithm>
using namespace std;
int main(){
string name = "Hello Buddy!!";
int start = 0;
char distinct = name[0];
for(int i=1;i<name.length()+1;){
if(distinct!=name[i]){
string s = to_string(i-start);
name.insert(start+1,s);
name.erase(name.begin() + start + 1 + s.length(),name.begin() + s.length() + i);
i=start+s.length()+1;
start=i;
distinct=name[start];
continue;
}
i++;
}
cout<<name;
}
Suggest me if you find anything incorrect.
O(n), in-place RLE, I couldn't think better than this. It will not place a number, if chars occurence is just 1. Will also place a9a2, if the character comes 11 times.
void RLE(char *str) {
int len = strlen(str);
int count = 1, j = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < len; i++){
if (str[i] == str[i + 1])
count++;
else {
int times = count / 9;
int rem = count % 9;
for (int k = 0; k < times; k++) {
str[j++] = str[i];
_itoa(9, &str[j++], 10);
count = count - 9;
}
if (count > 1) {
str[j++] = str[i];
_itoa(rem, &str[j++], 10);
count = 1;
}
else
str[j++] = str[i];
}
}
cout << str;
}
I/P => aaabcdeeeefghijklaaaaa
O/P => a3bcde4fghijkla5
Inplace solution using c++ ( assumes length of encoding string is not more than actual string length):
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
using namespace std;
void replacePattern(char *str)
{
int len = strlen(str);
if (len == 0)
return;
int i = 1, j = 1;
int count;
// for each character
while (str[j])
{
count = 1;
while (str[j] == str[j-1])
{
j = j + 1;
count++;
}
while(count > 0) {
int rem = count%10;
str[i++] = to_string(rem)[0];
count = count/10;
}
// copy character at current position j
// to position i and increment i and j
if (str[j])
str[i++] = str[j++];
}
// add a null character to terminate string
if(str[len-1] != str[len-2]) {
str[i] = '1';
i++;
}
str[i] = '\0';
}
// Driver code
int main()
{
char str[] = "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaabccccc";
replacePattern(str);
cout << str;
return 0;
}
Given a set of numbers, divide the numbers into two subsets such that difference between the sum of numbers in two subsets is minimal.
This is the idea that I have, but I am not sure if this is a correct solution:
Sort the array
Take the first 2 elements. Consider them as 2 sets (each having 1 element)
Take the next element from the array.
Decide in which set should this element go (by computing the sum => it should be minimum)
Repeat
Is this the correct solution? Can we do better?
The decision version of the problem you are describing is an NP-complete problem and it is called the partition problem. There are a number of approximations which provide, in many cases, optimal or, at least, good enough solutions.
The simple algorithm you described is a way playground kids would pick teams. This greedy algorithm performs remarkably well if the numbers in the set are of similar orders of magnitude.
The article The Easiest Hardest Problem, by American Scientist, gives an excellent analysis of the problem. You should go through and read it!
No, that doesn't work. There is no polynomial time solution (unless P=NP). The best you can do is just look at all different subsets. Have a look at the subset sum problem.
Consider the list [0, 1, 5, 6]. You will claim {0, 5} and {1, 6}, when the best answer is actually {0, 1, 5} and {6}.
No, Your algorithm is wrong. Your algo follows a greedy approach.
I implemented your approach and it failed over this test case:
(You may try here)
A greedy algorithm:
#include<bits/stdc++.h>
#define rep(i,_n) for(int i=0;i<_n;i++)
using namespace std;
#define MXN 55
int a[MXN];
int main() {
//code
int t,n,c;
cin>>t;
while(t--){
cin>>n;
rep(i,n) cin>>a[i];
sort(a, a+n);
reverse(a, a+n);
ll sum1 = 0, sum2 = 0;
rep(i,n){
cout<<a[i]<<endl;
if(sum1<=sum2)
sum1 += a[i];
else
sum2 += a[i];
}
cout<<abs(sum1-sum2)<<endl;
}
return 0;
}
Test case:
1
8
16 14 13 13 12 10 9 3
Wrong Ans: 6
16 13 10 9
14 13 12 3
Correct Ans: 0
16 13 13 3
14 12 10 9
The reason greedy algorithm fails is that it does not consider cases when taking a larger element in current larger sum set and later a much smaller in the larger sum set may result much better results. It always try to minimize current difference without exploring or knowing further possibilities, while in a correct solution you might include an element in a larger set and include a much smaller element later to compensate this difference, same as in above test case.
Correct Solution:
To understand the solution, you will need to understand all below problems in order:
0/1 Knapsack with Dynamic Programming
Partition Equal Subset Sum with DP
Solution
My Code (Same logic as this):
#include<bits/stdc++.h>
#define rep(i,_n) for(int i=0;i<_n;i++)
using namespace std;
#define MXN 55
int arr[MXN];
int dp[MXN][MXN*MXN];
int main() {
//code
int t,N,c;
cin>>t;
while(t--){
rep(i,MXN) fill(dp[i], dp[i]+MXN*MXN, 0);
cin>>N;
rep(i,N) cin>>arr[i];
int sum = accumulate(arr, arr+N, 0);
dp[0][0] = 1;
for(int i=1; i<=N; i++)
for(int j=sum; j>=0; j--)
dp[i][j] |= (dp[i-1][j] | (j>=arr[i-1] ? dp[i-1][j-arr[i-1]] : 0));
int res = sum;
for(int i=0; i<=sum/2; i++)
if(dp[N][i]) res = min(res, abs(i - (sum-i)));
cout<<res<<endl;
}
return 0;
}
Combinations over combinations approach:
import itertools as it
def min_diff_sets(data):
"""
Parameters:
- `data`: input list.
Return:
- min diff between sum of numbers in two sets
"""
if len(data) == 1:
return data[0]
s = sum(data)
# `a` is list of all possible combinations of all possible lengths (from 1
# to len(data) )
a = []
for i in range(1, len(data)):
a.extend(list(it.combinations(data, i)))
# `b` is list of all possible pairs (combinations) of all elements from `a`
b = it.combinations(a, 2)
# `c` is going to be final correct list of combinations.
# Let's apply 2 filters:
# 1. leave only pairs where: sum of all elements == sum(data)
# 2. leave only pairs where: flat list from pairs == data
c = filter(lambda x: sum(x[0])+sum(x[1])==s, b)
c = filter(lambda x: sorted([i for sub in x for i in sub])==sorted(data), c)
# `res` = [min_diff_between_sum_of_numbers_in_two_sets,
# ((set_1), (set_2))
# ]
res = sorted([(abs(sum(i[0]) - sum(i[1])), i) for i in c],
key=lambda x: x[0])
return min([i[0] for i in res])
if __name__ == '__main__':
assert min_diff_sets([10, 10]) == 0, "1st example"
assert min_diff_sets([10]) == 10, "2nd example"
assert min_diff_sets([5, 8, 13, 27, 14]) == 3, "3rd example"
assert min_diff_sets([5, 5, 6, 5]) == 1, "4th example"
assert min_diff_sets([12, 30, 30, 32, 42, 49]) == 9, "5th example"
assert min_diff_sets([1, 1, 1, 3]) == 0, "6th example"
The recursive approach is to generate all possible sums from all the values of array and to check
which solution is the most optimal one.
To generate sums we either include the i’th item in set 1 or don’t include, i.e., include in
set 2.
The time complexity is O(n*sum) for both time and space.T
public class MinimumSubsetSum {
static int dp[][];
public static int minDiffSubsets(int arr[], int i, int calculatedSum, int totalSum) {
if(dp[i][calculatedSum] != -1) return dp[i][calculatedSum];
/**
* If i=0, then the sum of one subset has been calculated as we have reached the last
* element. The sum of another subset is totalSum - calculated sum. We need to return the
* difference between them.
*/
if(i == 0) {
return Math.abs((totalSum - calculatedSum) - calculatedSum);
}
//Including the ith element
int iElementIncluded = minDiffSubsets(arr, i-1, arr[i-1] + calculatedSum,
totalSum);
//Excluding the ith element
int iElementExcluded = minDiffSubsets(arr, i-1, calculatedSum, totalSum);
int res = Math.min(iElementIncluded, iElementExcluded);
dp[i][calculatedSum] = res;
return res;
}
public static void util(int arr[]) {
int totalSum = 0;
int n = arr.length;
for(Integer e : arr) totalSum += e;
dp = new int[n+1][totalSum+1];
for(int i=0; i <= n; i++)
for(int j=0; j <= totalSum; j++)
dp[i][j] = -1;
int res = minDiffSubsets(arr, n, 0, totalSum);
System.out.println("The min difference between two subset is " + res);
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
util(new int[]{3, 1, 4, 2, 2, 1});
}
}
We can use Dynamic Programming (similar to the way we find if a set can be partitioned into two equal sum subsets). Then we find the max possible sum, which will be our first partition.
Second partition will be the difference of the total sum and firstSum.
Answer will be the difference of the first and second partitions.
public int minDiffernce(int set[]) {
int sum = 0;
int n = set.length;
for(int i=0; i<n; i++)
sum+=set[i];
//finding half of total sum, because min difference can be at max 0, if one subset reaches half
int target = sum/2;
boolean[][] dp = new boolean[n+1][target+1];//2
for(int i = 0; i<=n; i++)
dp[i][0] = true;
for(int i= 1; i<=n; i++){
for(int j = 1; j<=target;j++){
if(set[i-1]>j) dp[i][j] = dp[i-1][j];
else dp[i][j] = dp[i-1][j] || dp[i-1][j-set[i-1]];
}
}
// we now find the max sum possible starting from target
int firstPart = 0;
for(int j = target; j>=0; j--){
if(dp[n][j] == true) {
firstPart = j; break;
}
}
int secondPart = sum - firstPart;
return Math.abs(firstPart - secondPart);
}
One small change: reverse the order - start with the largest number and work down. This will minimize the error.
Are you sorting your subset into decending order or ascending order?
Think about it like this, the array {1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 25}
if you were to divide, you would have {1,8,9} =18 {3,5,25} =33
If it were sorted into descending order it would work out a lot better
{25,1}=26 {9,8,5,3}=25
So your solution is basically correct, it just needs to make sure to take the largest values first.
EDIT: Read tskuzzy's post. Mine does not work
This is a variation of the knapsack and subset sum problem.
In subset sum problem, given n positive integers and a value k and we have to find the sum of subset whose value is less than or equal to k.
In the above problem we have given an array, here we have to find the subset whose sum is less than or equal to total_sum(sum of array values).
So the
subset sum can be found using a variation in knapsack algorithm,by
taking profits as given array values. And the final answer is
total_sum-dp[n][total_sum/2]. Have a look at the below code for clear
understanding.
#include<iostream>
#include<cstdio>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int n;
cin>>n;
int arr[n],sum=0;
for(int i=1;i<=n;i++)
cin>>arr[i],sum+=arr[i];
int temp=sum/2;
int dp[n+1][temp+2];
for(int i=0;i<=n;i++)
{
for(int j=0;j<=temp;j++)
{
if(i==0 || j==0)
dp[i][j]=0;
else if(arr[i]<=j)
dp[i][j]=max(dp[i-1][j],dp[i-1][j-arr[i]]+arr[i]);
else
{
dp[i][j]=dp[i-1][j];
}
}
}
cout<<sum-2*dp[n][temp]<<endl;
}
This can be solve using BST.
First sort the array say arr1
To start create another arr2 with the last element of arr1 (remove this ele from arr1)
Now:Repeat the steps till no swap happens.
Check arr1 for an element which can be moved to arr2 using BST such that the diff is less MIN diff found till now.
if we find an element move this element to arr2 and go to step1 again.
if we don't find any element in above steps do steps 1 & 2 for arr2 & arr1.
i.e. now check if we have any element in arr2 which can be moved to arr1
continue steps 1-4 till we don't need any swap..
we get the solution.
Sample Java Code:
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.List;
/**
* Divide an array so that the difference between these 2 is min
*
* #author shaikhjamir
*
*/
public class DivideArrayForMinDiff {
/**
* Create 2 arrays and try to find the element from 2nd one so that diff is
* min than the current one
*/
private static int sum(List<Integer> arr) {
int total = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < arr.size(); i++) {
total += arr.get(i);
}
return total;
}
private static int diff(ArrayList<Integer> arr, ArrayList<Integer> arr2) {
int diff = sum(arr) - sum(arr2);
if (diff < 0)
diff = diff * -1;
return diff;
}
private static int MIN = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
private static int binarySearch(int low, int high, ArrayList<Integer> arr1, int arr2sum) {
if (low > high || low < 0)
return -1;
int mid = (low + high) / 2;
int midVal = arr1.get(mid);
int sum1 = sum(arr1);
int resultOfMoveOrg = (sum1 - midVal) - (arr2sum + midVal);
int resultOfMove = (sum1 - midVal) - (arr2sum + midVal);
if (resultOfMove < 0)
resultOfMove = resultOfMove * -1;
if (resultOfMove < MIN) {
// lets do the swap
return mid;
}
// this is positive number greater than min
// which mean we should move left
if (resultOfMoveOrg < 0) {
// 1,10, 19 ==> 30
// 100
// 20, 110 = -90
// 29, 111 = -83
return binarySearch(low, mid - 1, arr1, arr2sum);
} else {
// resultOfMoveOrg > 0
// 1,5,10, 15, 19, 20 => 70
// 21
// For 10
// 60, 31 it will be 29
// now if we move 1
// 71, 22 ==> 49
// but now if we move 20
// 50, 41 ==> 9
return binarySearch(mid + 1, high, arr1, arr2sum);
}
}
private static int findMin(ArrayList<Integer> arr1) {
ArrayList<Integer> list2 = new ArrayList<>(arr1.subList(arr1.size() - 1, arr1.size()));
arr1.remove(arr1.size() - 1);
while (true) {
int index = binarySearch(0, arr1.size(), arr1, sum(list2));
if (index != -1) {
int val = arr1.get(index);
arr1.remove(index);
list2.add(val);
Collections.sort(list2);
MIN = diff(arr1, list2);
} else {
// now try for arr2
int index2 = binarySearch(0, list2.size(), list2, sum(arr1));
if (index2 != -1) {
int val = list2.get(index2);
list2.remove(index2);
arr1.add(val);
Collections.sort(arr1);
MIN = diff(arr1, list2);
} else {
// no switch in both the cases
break;
}
}
}
System.out.println("MIN==>" + MIN);
System.out.println("arr1==>" + arr1 + ":" + sum(arr1));
System.out.println("list2==>" + list2 + ":" + sum(list2));
return 0;
}
public static void main(String args[]) {
ArrayList<Integer> org = new ArrayList<>();
org = new ArrayList<>();
org.add(1);
org.add(2);
org.add(3);
org.add(7);
org.add(8);
org.add(10);
findMin(org);
}
}
you can use bits to solve this problem by looping over all the possible combinations using bits:
main algorithm:
for(int i = 0; i < 1<<n; i++) {
int s = 0;
for(int j = 0; j < n; j++) {
if(i & 1<<j) s += arr[j];
}
int curr = abs((total-s)-s);
ans = min(ans, curr);
}
use long long for greater inputs.
but here I found a recursive and dynamic programming solution and I used both the approaches to solve the question and both worked for greater inputs perfectly fine. Hope this helps :) link to solution
Please check this logic which I have written for this problem. It worked for few scenarios I checked. Please comment on the solution,
Approach :
Sort the main array and divide it into 2 teams.
Then start making the team equal by shift and swapping elements from one array to other, based on the conditions mentioned in the code.
If the difference is difference of sum is less than the minimum number of the larger array(array with bigger sum), then shift the elements from the bigger array to smaller array.Shifting happens with the condition, that element from the bigger array with value less than or equal to the difference.When all the elements from the bigger array is greater than the difference, the shifting stops and swapping happens. I m just swapping the last elements of the array (It can be made more efficient by finding which two elements to swap), but still this worked. Let me know if this logic failed in any scenario.
public class SmallestDifference {
static int sum1 = 0, sum2 = 0, diff, minDiff;
private static List<Integer> minArr1;
private static List<Integer> minArr2;
private static List<Integer> biggerArr;
/**
* #param args
*/
public static void main(String[] args) {
SmallestDifference sm = new SmallestDifference();
Integer[] array1 = { 2, 7, 1, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11 };
List<Integer> array = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (Integer val : array1) {
array.add(val);
}
Collections.sort(array);
CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr1 = new CopyOnWriteArrayList<>(array.subList(0, array.size() / 2));
CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr2 = new CopyOnWriteArrayList<>(array.subList(array.size() / 2, array.size()));
diff = Math.abs(sm.getSum(arr1) - sm.getSum(arr2));
minDiff = array.get(0);
sm.updateSum(arr1, arr2);
System.out.println(arr1 + " : " + arr2);
System.out.println(sum1 + " - " + sum2 + " = " + diff + " : minDiff = " + minDiff);
int k = arr2.size();
biggerArr = arr2;
while (diff != 0 && k >= 0) {
while (diff != 0 && sm.findMin(biggerArr) < diff) {
sm.swich(arr1, arr2);
int sum1 = sm.getSum(arr1), sum2 = sm.getSum(arr2);
diff = Math.abs(sum1 - sum2);
if (sum1 > sum2) {
biggerArr = arr1;
} else {
biggerArr = arr2;
}
if (minDiff > diff || sm.findMin(biggerArr) > diff) {
minDiff = diff;
minArr1 = new CopyOnWriteArrayList<>(arr1);
minArr2 = new CopyOnWriteArrayList<>(arr2);
}
sm.updateSum(arr1, arr2);
System.out.println("Shifting : " + sum1 + " - " + sum2 + " = " + diff + " : minDiff = " + minDiff);
}
while (k >= 0 && minDiff > array.get(0) && minDiff != 0) {
sm.swap(arr1, arr2);
diff = Math.abs(sm.getSum(arr1) - sm.getSum(arr2));
if (minDiff > diff) {
minDiff = diff;
minArr1 = new CopyOnWriteArrayList<>(arr1);
minArr2 = new CopyOnWriteArrayList<>(arr2);
}
sm.updateSum(arr1, arr2);
System.out.println("Swapping : " + sum1 + " - " + sum2 + " = " + diff + " : minDiff = " + minDiff);
k--;
}
k--;
}
System.out.println(minArr1 + " : " + minArr2 + " = " + minDiff);
}
private void updateSum(CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr1, CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr2) {
SmallestDifference sm1 = new SmallestDifference();
sum1 = sm1.getSum(arr1);
sum2 = sm1.getSum(arr2);
}
private int findMin(List<Integer> biggerArr2) {
Integer min = biggerArr2.get(0);
for (Integer integer : biggerArr2) {
if(min > integer) {
min = integer;
}
}
return min;
}
private int getSum(CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr) {
int sum = 0;
for (Integer val : arr) {
sum += val;
}
return sum;
}
private void swap(CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr1, CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr2) {
int l1 = arr1.size(), l2 = arr2.size(), temp2 = arr2.get(l2 - 1), temp1 = arr1.get(l1 - 1);
arr1.remove(l1 - 1);
arr1.add(temp2);
arr2.remove(l2 - 1);
arr2.add(temp1);
System.out.println(arr1 + " : " + arr2);
}
private void swich(CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr1, CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr2) {
Integer e;
if (sum1 > sum2) {
e = this.findElementJustLessThanMinDiff(arr1);
arr1.remove(e);
arr2.add(e);
} else {
e = this.findElementJustLessThanMinDiff(arr2);
arr2.remove(e);
arr1.add(e);
}
System.out.println(arr1 + " : " + arr2);
}
private Integer findElementJustLessThanMinDiff(CopyOnWriteArrayList<Integer> arr1) {
Integer e = arr1.get(0);
int tempDiff = diff - e;
for (Integer integer : arr1) {
if (diff > integer && (diff - integer) < tempDiff) {
e = integer;
tempDiff = diff - e;
}
}
return e;
}
}
A possible solution here- https://stackoverflow.com/a/31228461/4955513
This Java program seems to solve this problem, provided one condition is fulfilled- that there is one and only one solution to the problem.
I'll convert this problem to subset sum problem
let's take array int[] A = { 10,20,15,5,25,33 };
it should be divided into {25 20 10} and { 33 20 } and answer is 55-53=2
Notations : SUM == sum of whole array
sum1 == sum of subset1
sum2 == sum of subset1
step 1: get sum of whole array SUM=108
step 2: whichever way we divide our array into two part one thing will remain true
sum1+ sum2= SUM
step 3: if our intention is to get minimum sum difference then sum1 and sum2 should be near SUM/2 (example sum1=54 and sum2=54 then diff=0 )
steon 4: let's try combinations
sum1 = 54 AND sum2 = 54 (not possible to divide like this)
sum1 = 55 AND sum2 = 53 (possible and our solution, should break here)
sum1 = 56 AND sum2 = 52
sum1 = 57 AND sum2 = 51 .......so on
pseudo code
SUM=Array.sum();
sum1 = SUM/2;
sum2 = SUM-sum1;
while(true){
if(subSetSuMProblem(A,sum1) && subSetSuMProblem(A,sum2){
print "possible"
break;
}
else{
sum1++;
sum2--;
}
}
Java code for the same
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
public class MinimumSumSubsetPrint {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int[] A = {10, 20, 15, 5, 25, 32};
int sum = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < A.length; i++) {
sum += A[i];
}
subsetSumDynamic(A, sum);
}
private static boolean subsetSumDynamic(int[] A, int sum) {
int n = A.length;
boolean[][] T = new boolean[n + 1][sum + 1];
// sum2[0][0]=true;
for (int i = 0; i <= n; i++) {
T[i][0] = true;
}
for (int i = 1; i <= n; i++) {
for (int j = 1; j <= sum; j++) {
if (A[i - 1] > j) {
T[i][j] = T[i - 1][j];
} else {
T[i][j] = T[i - 1][j] || T[i - 1][j - A[i - 1]];
}
}
}
int sum1 = sum / 2;
int sum2 = sum - sum1;
while (true) {
if (T[n][sum1] && T[n][sum2]) {
printSubsets(T, sum1, n, A);
printSubsets(T, sum2, n, A);
break;
} else {
sum1 = sum1 - 1;
sum2 = sum - sum1;
System.out.println(sum1 + ":" + sum2);
}
}
return T[n][sum];
}
private static void printSubsets(boolean[][] T, int sum, int n, int[] A) {
List<Integer> sumvals = new ArrayList<Integer>();
int i = n;
int j = sum;
while (i > 0 && j > 0) {
if (T[i][j] == T[i - 1][j]) {
i--;
} else {
sumvals.add(A[i - 1]);
j = j - A[i - 1];
i--;
}
}
System.out.println();
for (int p : sumvals) {
System.out.print(p + " ");
}
System.out.println();
}
}
Here is recursive approach
def helper(arr,sumCal,sumTot,n):
if n==0:
return abs(abs(sumCal-sumTot)-sumCal)
return min(helper(arr,sumCal+arr[n-1],sumTot,n-1),helper(arr,sumCal,sumTot,n-1))
def minimum_subset_diff(arr,n):
sum=0
for i in range(n):
sum+=arr[i]
return helper(arr,0,sum,n)
Here is a Top down Dynamic approach to reduce the time complexity
dp=[[-1]*100 for i in range(100)]
def helper_dp(arr,sumCal,sumTot,n):
if n==0:
return abs(abs(sumCal-sumTot)-sumCal)
if dp[n][sumTot]!=-1:
return dp[n][sumTot]
return min(helper_dp(arr,sumCal+arr[n-1],sumTot,n-1),helper_dp(arr,sumCal,sumTot,n-1))
def minimum_subset_diff_dp(arr,n):
sum=0
for i in range(n):
sum+=arr[i]
return helper_dp(arr,0,sum,n)
int ModDiff(int a, int b)
{
if(a < b)return b - a;
return a-b;
}
int EqDiv(int *a, int l, int *SumI, int *SumE)
{
static int tc = 0;
int min = ModDiff(*SumI,*SumE);
for(int i = 0; i < l; i++)
{
swap(a,0,i);
a++;
int m1 = EqDiv(a, l-1, SumI,SumE);
a--;
swap(a,0,i);
*SumI = *SumI + a[i];
*SumE = *SumE - a[i];
swap(a,0,i);
a++;
int m2 = EqDiv(a,l-1, SumI,SumE);
a--;
swap(a,0,i);
*SumI = *SumI - a[i];
*SumE = *SumE + a[i];
min = min3(min,m1,m2);
}
return min;
}
call the function with SumI =0 and SumE= sumof all the elements in a.
This O(n!) solution does compute the way we can divide the given array into 2 parts such the difference is minimum.
But definitely not practical due to the n! time complexity looking to improve this using DP.
#include<bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
bool ison(int i,int x)
{
if((i>>x) & 1)return true;
return false;
}
int main()
{
// cout<<"enter the number of elements : ";
int n;
cin>>n;
int a[n];
for(int i=0;i<n;i++)
cin>>a[i];
int sumarr1[(1<<n)-1];
int sumarr2[(1<<n)-1];
memset(sumarr1,0,sizeof(sumarr1));
memset(sumarr2,0,sizeof(sumarr2));
int index=0;
vector<int>v1[(1<<n)-1];
vector<int>v2[(1<<n)-1];
for(int i=1;i<(1<<n);i++)
{
for(int j=0;j<n;j++)
{
if(ison(i,j))
{
sumarr1[index]+=a[j];
v1[index].push_back(a[j]);
}
else
{
sumarr2[index]+=a[j];
v2[index].push_back(a[j]);
}
}index++;
}
int ans=INT_MAX;
int ii;
for(int i=0;i<index;i++)
{
if(abs(sumarr1[i]-sumarr2[i])<ans)
{
ii=i;
ans=abs(sumarr1[i]-sumarr2[i]);
}
}
cout<<"first partitioned array : ";
for(int i=0;i<v1[ii].size();i++)
{
cout<<v1[ii][i]<<" ";
}
cout<<endl;
cout<<"2nd partitioned array : ";
for(int i=0;i<v2[ii].size();i++)
{
cout<<v2[ii][i]<<" ";
}
cout<<endl;
cout<<"minimum difference is : "<<ans<<endl;
}
Many answers mentioned about getting an 'approximate' solution in a very acceptable time bound . But since it is asked in an interview , I dont expect they need an approximation algorithm. Also I dont expect they need a naive exponential algorithm either.
Coming to the problem , assuming the maximum value of sum of numbers is known , it can infact be solved in polynomial time using dynamic programming. Refer this link
https://people.cs.clemson.edu/~bcdean/dp_practice/dp_4.swf
HI I think This Problem can be solved in Linear Time on a sorted array , no Polynomial Time is required , rather than Choosing Next Element u can choose nest two Element and decide which side which element to go. in This Way
in this way minimize the difference, let suppose
{0,1,5,6} ,
choose {0,1}
{0} , {1}
choose 5,6
{0,6}, {1,5}
but still that is not exact solution , now at the end there will be difference of sum in 2 array let suppose x
but there can be better solution of difference of (less than x)
for that Find again 1 greedy approach over sorted half sized array
and move x/2(or nearby) element from 1 set to another or exchange element of(difference x/2) so that difference can be minimized***
I want to calculate the sum of digits of N!.
I want to do this for really large values of N, say N(1500). I am not using .NET 4.0. I cannot use the BigInteger class to solve this.
Can this be solved by some other algorithm or procedure? Please help.
I want to do some thing like this Calculate the factorial of an arbitrarily large number, showing all the digits but in C#. However I am unable to solve.
There is no special magic that allows you to calculate the sum of the digits, as far as I am concerned.
It shouldn't be that hard to create your own BigInteger class anyway - you only need to implement the long multiplication algorithm from 3rd grade.
If your goal is to calculate the sum of the digits of N!, and if N is reasonably bounded, you can do the following without a BigInteger type:
Find a list of factorial values online (table lookup will be much more efficient than calculating from scratch, and does not require BigInteger)
Store as a string data type
Parse each character in the string as an integer
Add the resulting integers
There are two performance shortcuts that you can use for whatever implementation you choose.
Chop off any zeros from the numbers.
If the number is evenly divisible by 5^n, divide it by 10^n.
in this way,
16*15*14*13*12*11*10*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*2 = 20,922,789,888,000
//-->
16*1.5*14*13*12*11*1*9*8*7*6*0.5*4*3*2 = 20,922,789,888 //Sum of 63
Also, it feels like there should be some algorithm without reverting to calculating it all out. Going to 18!, the sums of the digits are:
2,6,6,3,9,9,9,27,27,36,27,27,45,45,63,63,63
//the sums of the resulting digits are:
2,6,6,3,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9
and notably, the sum of the digits of 1500! is 16749 (the sum of whose digits are 27)
Here's some working code. Some components can be improved upon to increase efficiency. The idea is to use whatever multiplication algorithm I was told in school, and to store long integers as strings.
As an afterthought, I think it would be smarter to represent large numbers with List<int>() instead of string. But I'll leave that as an exercise to the reader.
Code Sample
static string Mult(string a, string b)
{
int shift = 0;
List<int> result = new List<int>();
foreach (int aDigit in a.Reverse().Select(c => int.Parse(c.ToString())))
{
List<int> subresult = new List<int>();
int store = 0;
foreach (int bDigit in b.Reverse().Select(c => int.Parse(c.ToString())))
{
int next = aDigit*bDigit + store;
subresult.Add(next%10);
store = next/10;
}
if (store != 0) subresult.Add(store);
subresult.Reverse();
for (int i = 0; i < shift; ++i) subresult.Add(0);
subresult.Reverse();
int newResult = new List<int>();
store = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < subresult.Count; ++i)
{
if (result.Count >= i + 1)
{
int next = subresult[i] + result[i] + store;
if (next >= 10)
newResult.Add(next % 10);
else newResult.Add(next);
store = next / 10;
}
else
{
int next = subresult[i] + store;
newResult.Add(next % 10);
store = next / 10;
}
}
if (store != 0) newResult.Add(store);
result = newResult;
++shift;
}
result.Reverse();
return string.Join("", result);
}
static int FactorialSum(int n)
{
string result = "1";
for (int i = 2; i <= n; i++)
result = Mult(i.ToString(), result);
return result.Sum(r => int.Parse(r.ToString()));
}
Code Testing
Assuming the code snippet above is in the same class as your Main method, call it thusly.
Input
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Console.WriteLine(FactorialSum(1500));
}
Output
16749
Here's a port of the C++ code you reference in one of your comments. One thing to realize when porting from C++ to C# is that integers that are zero evaluate to false and integers that are non-zero evaluate to true when used in a Boolean comparison.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
namespace ArbitraryFactorial
{
class Program
{
const int max = 5000;
static void display(int[] arr)
{
int ctr = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < max; i++)
{
if (ctr == 0 && arr[i] != 0) ctr = 1;
if (ctr != 0)
Console.Write(arr[i]);
}
}
static void factorial(int[] arr, int n)
{
if (n == 0) return;
int carry = 0;
for (int i = max - 1; i >= 0; --i)
{
arr[i] = (arr[i] * n) + carry;
carry = arr[i] / 10;
arr[i] %= 10;
}
factorial(arr, n - 1);
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int[] arr = new int[max];
arr[max - 1] = 1;
int num;
Console.Write("Enter the number: ");
num = int.Parse(Console.ReadLine());
Console.Write("Factorial of " + num + " is: ");
factorial(arr, num);
display(arr);
}
}
}
you can find the source code at : http://codingloverlavi.blogspot.in/2013/03/here-is-one-more-interesting-program.html
#include<stdio.h>
#include<conio.h>
#include<iostream.h>
#include<time.h>
#define max 5000
void multiply(long int *,long int);
void factorial(long int *,long int);
int main()
{
clrscr();
cout<<"PROGRAM TO CALCULATE FACTORIAL OF A NUMBER";
cout<<"\nENTER THE NUMBER\n";
long int num;
cin>>num;
long int a[max];
for(long int i=0;i<max;i++)
a[i]=0;
factorial(a,num);
clrscr();
//PRINTING THE FINAL ARRAY...:):):)
cout<<"THE FACTORIAL OF "<<num<<" is "<<endl<<endl;
long int flag=0;
int ans=0;
for(i=0;i<max;i++)
{
if(flag||a[i]!=0)
{
flag=1;
cout<<a[i];
ans=ans+a[i];
}
}
cout<<endl<<endl<<"the sum of all digits is: "<<ans;
getch();
return 1;
}
void factorial(long int *a,long int n)
{
long int lavish;
long int num=n;
lavish=n;
for(long int i=max-1;i>=0&&n;i--)
{
a[i]=n%10;
n=n/10;
}
for(i=2;i<(lavish);i++)
{
multiply(a,num-1);
num=num-1;
}
}
void multiply(long int *a,long int n)
{
for(long int i=0;i<max;i++)
a[i]=a[i]*n;
for(i=max-1;i>0;i--)
{
a[i-1]=a[i-1]+(a[i]/10);
a[i]=a[i]%10;
}
}
You can't use these numbers at all without a BigInteger type.
No algorithm or procedure can squeeze numbers larger than 264 into a long.
You need to find a BigInteger implementation for .Net 3.5.
what is the fastest way to compute the greatest common divisor of n numbers?
Without recursion:
int result = numbers[0];
for(int i = 1; i < numbers.length; i++){
result = gcd(result, numbers[i]);
}
return result;
For very large arrays, it might be faster to use the fork-join pattern, where you split your array and calculate gcds in parallel. Here is some pseudocode:
int calculateGCD(int[] numbers){
if(numbers.length <= 2){
return gcd(numbers);
}
else {
INVOKE-IN-PARALLEL {
left = calculateGCD(extractLeftHalf(numbers));
right = calculateGCD(extractRightHalf(numbers));
}
return gcd(left,right);
}
}
You may want to sort the numbers first and compute the gcd recursively starting from the smallest two numbers.
C++17
I have written this function for calculating gcd of n numbers by using C++'s inbuilt __gcd(int a, int b) function.
int gcd(vector<int> vec, int vsize)
{
int gcd = vec[0];
for (int i = 1; i < vsize; i++)
{
gcd = __gcd(gcd, vec[i]);
}
return gcd;
}
To know more about this function visit this link .
Also refer to Dijkstra's GCD algorithm from the following link. It works without division. So it could be slightly faster (Please correct me if I am wrong.)
You should use Lehmer's GCD algorithm.
How about the following using Euclidean algorithm by subtraction:
function getGCD(arr){
let min = Math.min(...arr);
let max= Math.max(...arr);
if(min==max){
return min;
}else{
for(let i in arr){
if(arr[i]>min){
arr[i]=arr[i]-min;
}
}
return getGCD(arr);
}
}
console.log(getGCD([2,3,4,5,6]))
The above implementation takes O(n^2) time. There are improvements that can be implemented but I didn't get around trying these out for n numbers.
If you have a lot of small numbers, factorization may be actually faster.
//Java
int[] array = {60, 90, 45};
int gcd = 1;
outer: for (int d = 2; true; d += 1 + (d % 2)) {
boolean any = false;
do {
boolean all = true;
any = false;
boolean ready = true;
for (int i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
ready &= (array[i] == 1);
if (array[i] % d == 0) {
any = true;
array[i] /= d;
} else all = false;
}
if (all) gcd *= d;
if (ready) break outer;
} while (any);
}
System.out.println(gcd);
(works for some examples, but not really tested)
Use the Euclidean algorithm :
function gcd(a, b)
while b ≠ 0
t := b;
b := a mod b;
a := t;
return a;
You apply it for the first two numbers, then the result with the third number, etc... :
read(a);
read(b);
result := gcd(a, b);
i := 3;
while(i <= n){
read(a)
result := gcd(result, a);
}
print(result);
Here below is the source code of the C program to find HCF of N numbers using Arrays.
#include<stdio.h>
int main()
{
int n,i,gcd;
printf("Enter how many no.s u want to find gcd : ");
scanf("%d",&n);
int arr[n];
printf("\nEnter your numbers below :- \n ");
for(i=0;i<n;i++)
{
printf("\nEnter your %d number = ",i+1);
scanf("%d",&arr[i]);
}
gcd=arr[0];
int j=1;
while(j<n)
{
if(arr[j]%gcd==0)
{
j++;
}
else
{
gcd=arr[j]%gcd;
i++;
}
}
printf("\nGCD of k no.s = %d ",gcd);
return 0;
}
For more refer to this website for further clarification.......
You can use divide and conquer. To calculate gcdN([]), you divide the list into first half and second half. if it only has one num for each list. you calculate using gcd2(n1, n2).
I just wrote a quick sample code. (assuming all num in the list are positive Ints)
def gcdN(nums):
n = len(nums)
if n == 0: return "ERROR"
if n == 1: return nums[0]
if n >= 2: return gcd2(gcdN(nums[:n//2]), gcdN(nums[n//2:]))
def gcd2(n1, n2):
for num in xrange(min(n1, n2), 0, -1):
if n1 % num == 0 and n2 % num == 0:
return num
Here's a gcd method that uses the property that gcd(a, b, c) = gcd(a, gcd(b, c)).
It uses BigInteger's gcd method since it is already optimized.
public static BigInteger gcd(BigInteger[] parts){
BigInteger gcd = parts[0];
for(int i = 1; i < parts.length; i++)
gcd = parts[i].gcd(gcd);
return gcd;
}
//Recursive solution to get the GCD of Two Numbers
long long int gcd(long long int a,long long int b)<br>
{
return b==0 ? a : gcd(b,a%b);
}
int main(){
long long int a,b;
cin>>a>>b;
if(a>b) cout<<gcd(a,b);
else cout<<gcd(b,a);
return 0;
}
import java.io.*;
import java.util.*;
import java.text.*;
import java.math.*;
import java.util.regex.*;
class GCDArray{
public static int [] extractLeftHalf(int [] numbers)
{
int l =numbers.length/2;
int arr[] = Arrays.copyOf(numbers, l+1);
return arr;
}
public static int [] extractRightHalf(int [] numbers)
{
int l =numbers.length/2;
int arr[] = Arrays.copyOfRange(numbers,l+1, numbers.length);
return arr;
}
public static int gcd(int[] numbers)
{
if(numbers.length==1)
return numbers[0];
else {
int x = numbers[0];
int y = numbers[1];
while(y%x!=0)
{
int rem = y%x;
y = x;
x = rem;
}
return x;
}
}
public static int gcd(int x,int y)
{
while(y%x!=0)
{
int rem = y%x;
y = x;
x = rem;
}
return x;
}
public static int calculateGCD(int[] numbers){
if(numbers.length <= 2){
return gcd(numbers);
}
else {
int left = calculateGCD(extractLeftHalf(numbers));
int right = calculateGCD(extractRightHalf(numbers));
return gcd(left,right);
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Scanner sc = new Scanner(System.in);
int n = sc.nextInt();
int arr[] = new int[n];
for(int i=0;i<n;i++){
arr[i]=sc.nextInt();
}
System.out.println(calculateGCD(arr));
}
}
**
Above is the java working code ..... the pseudo code of which is
already mention by https://stackoverflow.com/users/7412/dogbane
**
A recursive JavaScript (ES6) one-liner for any number of digits.
const gcd = (a, b, ...c) => b ? gcd(b, a % b, ...c) : c.length ? gcd(a, ...c) : Math.abs(a);
This is what comes off the top of my head in Javascript.
function calculateGCD(arrSize, arr) {
if(!arrSize)
return 0;
var n = Math.min(...arr);
for (let i = n; i > 0; i--) {
let j = 0;
while(j < arrSize) {
if(arr[j] % i === 0) {
j++;
}else {
break;
}
if(j === arrSize) {
return i;
}
}
}
}
console.log(generalizedGCD(4, [2, 6, 4, 8]));
// Output => 2
Here was the answer I was looking for.
The best way to find the gcd of n numbers is indeed using recursion.ie gcd(a,b,c)=gcd(gcd(a,b),c). But I was getting timeouts in certain programs when I did this.
The optimization that was needed here was that the recursion should be solved using fast matrix multiplication algorithm.
Given array of n integers and given a number X, find all the unique pairs of elements (a,b), whose summation is equal to X.
The following is my solution, it is O(nLog(n)+n), but I am not sure whether or not it is optimal.
int main(void)
{
int arr [10] = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0};
findpair(arr, 10, 7);
}
void findpair(int arr[], int len, int sum)
{
std::sort(arr, arr+len);
int i = 0;
int j = len -1;
while( i < j){
while((arr[i] + arr[j]) <= sum && i < j)
{
if((arr[i] + arr[j]) == sum)
cout << "(" << arr[i] << "," << arr[j] << ")" << endl;
i++;
}
j--;
while((arr[i] + arr[j]) >= sum && i < j)
{
if((arr[i] + arr[j]) == sum)
cout << "(" << arr[i] << "," << arr[j] << ")" << endl;
j--;
}
}
}
There are 3 approaches to this solution:
Let the sum be T and n be the size of array
Approach 1:
The naive way to do this would be to check all combinations (n choose 2). This exhaustive search is O(n2).
Approach 2:
A better way would be to sort the array. This takes O(n log n)
Then for each x in array A,
use binary search to look for T-x. This will take O(nlogn).
So, overall search is O(n log n)
Approach 3 :
The best way
would be to insert every element into a hash table (without sorting). This takes O(n) as constant time insertion.
Then for every x,
we can just look up its complement, T-x, which is O(1).
Overall the run time of this approach is O(n).
You can refer more here.Thanks.
# Let arr be the given array.
# And K be the give sum
for i=0 to arr.length - 1 do
# key is the element and value is its index.
hash(arr[i]) = i
end-for
for i=0 to arr.length - 1 do
# if K-th element exists and it's different then we found a pair
if hash(K - arr[i]) != i
print "pair i , hash(K - arr[i]) has sum K"
end-if
end-for
Implementation in Java : Using codaddict's algorithm (Maybe slightly different)
import java.util.HashMap;
public class ArrayPairSum {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int []a = {2,45,7,3,5,1,8,9};
printSumPairs(a,10);
}
public static void printSumPairs(int []input, int k){
Map<Integer, Integer> pairs = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
for(int i=0;i<input.length;i++){
if(pairs.containsKey(input[i]))
System.out.println(input[i] +", "+ pairs.get(input[i]));
else
pairs.put(k-input[i], input[i]);
}
}
}
For input = {2,45,7,3,5,1,8,9} and if Sum is 10
Output pairs:
3,7
8,2
9,1
Some notes about the solution :
We iterate only once through the array --> O(n) time
Insertion and lookup time in Hash is O(1).
Overall time is O(n), although it uses extra space in terms of hash.
Solution in java. You can add all the String elements to an ArrayList of strings and return the list. Here I am just printing it out.
void numberPairsForSum(int[] array, int sum) {
HashSet<Integer> set = new HashSet<Integer>();
for (int num : array) {
if (set.contains(sum - num)) {
String s = num + ", " + (sum - num) + " add up to " + sum;
System.out.println(s);
}
set.add(num);
}
}
Python Implementation:
import itertools
list = [1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,]
uniquelist = set(list)
targetsum = 5
for n in itertools.combinations(uniquelist, 2):
if n[0] + n[1] == targetsum:
print str(n[0]) + " + " + str(n[1])
Output:
1 + 4
2 + 3
C++11, run time complexity O(n):
#include <vector>
#include <unordered_map>
#include <utility>
std::vector<std::pair<int, int>> FindPairsForSum(
const std::vector<int>& data, const int& sum)
{
std::unordered_map<int, size_t> umap;
std::vector<std::pair<int, int>> result;
for (size_t i = 0; i < data.size(); ++i)
{
if (0 < umap.count(sum - data[i]))
{
size_t j = umap[sum - data[i]];
result.push_back({data[i], data[j]});
}
else
{
umap[data[i]] = i;
}
}
return result;
}
Here is a solution witch takes into account duplicate entries. It is written in javascript and assumes array is sorted. The solution runs in O(n) time and does not use any extra memory aside from variable.
var count_pairs = function(_arr,x) {
if(!x) x = 0;
var pairs = 0;
var i = 0;
var k = _arr.length-1;
if((k+1)<2) return pairs;
var halfX = x/2;
while(i<k) {
var curK = _arr[k];
var curI = _arr[i];
var pairsThisLoop = 0;
if(curK+curI==x) {
// if midpoint and equal find combinations
if(curK==curI) {
var comb = 1;
while(--k>=i) pairs+=(comb++);
break;
}
// count pair and k duplicates
pairsThisLoop++;
while(_arr[--k]==curK) pairsThisLoop++;
// add k side pairs to running total for every i side pair found
pairs+=pairsThisLoop;
while(_arr[++i]==curI) pairs+=pairsThisLoop;
} else {
// if we are at a mid point
if(curK==curI) break;
var distK = Math.abs(halfX-curK);
var distI = Math.abs(halfX-curI);
if(distI > distK) while(_arr[++i]==curI);
else while(_arr[--k]==curK);
}
}
return pairs;
}
I solved this during an interview for a large corporation. They took it but not me.
So here it is for everyone.
Start at both side of the array and slowly work your way inwards making sure to count duplicates if they exist.
It only counts pairs but can be reworked to
find the pairs
find pairs < x
find pairs > x
Enjoy!
O(n)
def find_pairs(L,sum):
s = set(L)
edgeCase = sum/2
if L.count(edgeCase) ==2:
print edgeCase, edgeCase
s.remove(edgeCase)
for i in s:
diff = sum-i
if diff in s:
print i, diff
L = [2,45,7,3,5,1,8,9]
sum = 10
find_pairs(L,sum)
Methodology: a + b = c, so instead of looking for (a,b) we look for a = c -
b
Implementation in Java : Using codaddict's algorithm:
import java.util.Hashtable;
public class Range {
public static void main(String[] args) {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
Hashtable mapping = new Hashtable();
int a[]= {80,79,82,81,84,83,85};
int k = 160;
for (int i=0; i < a.length; i++){
mapping.put(a[i], i);
}
for (int i=0; i < a.length; i++){
if (mapping.containsKey(k - a[i]) && (Integer)mapping.get(k-a[i]) != i){
System.out.println(k-a[i]+", "+ a[i]);
}
}
}
}
Output:
81, 79
79, 81
If you want duplicate pairs (eg: 80,80) also then just remove && (Integer)mapping.get(k-a[i]) != i from the if condition and you are good to go.
Just attended this question on HackerRank and here's my 'Objective C' Solution:
-(NSNumber*)sum:(NSArray*) a andK:(NSNumber*)k {
NSMutableDictionary *dict = [NSMutableDictionary dictionary];
long long count = 0;
for(long i=0;i<a.count;i++){
if(dict[a[i]]) {
count++;
NSLog(#"a[i]: %#, dict[array[i]]: %#", a[i], dict[a[i]]);
}
else{
NSNumber *calcNum = #(k.longLongValue-((NSNumber*)a[i]).longLongValue);
dict[calcNum] = a[i];
}
}
return #(count);
}
Hope it helps someone.
this is the implementation of O(n*lg n) using binary search implementation inside a loop.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
bool *inMemory;
int pairSum(int arr[], int n, int k)
{
int count = 0;
if(n==0)
return count;
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
int start = 0;
int end = n-1;
while(start <= end)
{
int mid = start + (end-start)/2;
if(i == mid)
break;
else if((arr[i] + arr[mid]) == k && !inMemory[i] && !inMemory[mid])
{
count++;
inMemory[i] = true;
inMemory[mid] = true;
}
else if(arr[i] + arr[mid] >= k)
{
end = mid-1;
}
else
start = mid+1;
}
}
return count;
}
int main()
{
int arr[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10};
inMemory = new bool[10];
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
{
inMemory[i] = false;
}
cout << pairSum(arr, 10, 11) << endl;
return 0;
}
In python
arr = [1, 2, 4, 6, 10]
diff_hash = {}
expected_sum = 3
for i in arr:
if diff_hash.has_key(i):
print i, diff_hash[i]
key = expected_sum - i
diff_hash[key] = i
Nice solution from Codeaddict. I took the liberty of implementing a version of it in Ruby:
def find_sum(arr,sum)
result ={}
h = Hash[arr.map {|i| [i,i]}]
arr.each { |l| result[l] = sum-l if h[sum-l] && !result[sum-l] }
result
end
To allow duplicate pairs (1,5), (5,1) we just have to remove the && !result[sum-l] instruction
Here is Java code for three approaches:
1. Using Map O(n), HashSet can also be used here.
2. Sort array and then use BinarySearch to look for complement O(nLog(n))
3. Traditional BruteForce two loops O(n^2)
public class PairsEqualToSum {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int a[] = {1,10,5,8,2,12,6,4};
findPairs1(a,10);
findPairs2(a,10);
findPairs3(a,10);
}
//Method1 - O(N) use a Map to insert values as keys & check for number's complement in map
static void findPairs1(int[]a, int sum){
Map<Integer, Integer> pairs = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
for(int i=0; i<a.length; i++){
if(pairs.containsKey(sum-a[i]))
System.out.println("("+a[i]+","+(sum-a[i])+")");
else
pairs.put(a[i], 0);
}
}
//Method2 - O(nlog(n)) using Sort
static void findPairs2(int[]a, int sum){
Arrays.sort(a);
for(int i=0; i<a.length/2; i++){
int complement = sum - a[i];
int foundAtIndex = Arrays.binarySearch(a,complement);
if(foundAtIndex >0 && foundAtIndex != i) //to avoid situation where binarySearch would find the original and not the complement like "5"
System.out.println("("+a[i]+","+(sum-a[i])+")");
}
}
//Method 3 - Brute Force O(n^2)
static void findPairs3(int[]a, int sum){
for(int i=0; i<a.length; i++){
for(int j=i; j<a.length;j++){
if(a[i]+a[j] == sum)
System.out.println("("+a[i]+","+a[j]+")");
}
}
}
}
A Simple program in java for arrays having unique elements:
import java.util.*;
public class ArrayPairSum {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int []a = {2,4,7,3,5,1,8,9,5};
sumPairs(a,10);
}
public static void sumPairs(int []input, int k){
Set<Integer> set = new HashSet<Integer>();
for(int i=0;i<input.length;i++){
if(set.contains(input[i]))
System.out.println(input[i] +", "+(k-input[i]));
else
set.add(k-input[i]);
}
}
}
A simple Java code snippet for printing the pairs below:
public static void count_all_pairs_with_given_sum(int arr[], int S){
if(arr.length < 2){
return;
}
HashSet values = new HashSet(arr.length);
for(int value : arr)values.add(value);
for(int value : arr){
int difference = S - value;
if(values.contains(difference) && value<difference){
System.out.printf("(%d, %d) %n", value, difference);
}
}
}
Another solution in Swift: the idea is to create an hash that store values of (sum - currentValue) and compare this to the current value of the loop. The complexity is O(n).
func findPair(list: [Int], _ sum: Int) -> [(Int, Int)]? {
var hash = Set<Int>() //save list of value of sum - item.
var dictCount = [Int: Int]() //to avoid the case A*2 = sum where we have only one A in the array
var foundKeys = Set<Int>() //to avoid duplicated pair in the result.
var result = [(Int, Int)]() //this is for the result.
for item in list {
//keep track of count of each element to avoid problem: [2, 3, 5], 10 -> result = (5,5)
if (!dictCount.keys.contains(item)) {
dictCount[item] = 1
} else {
dictCount[item] = dictCount[item]! + 1
}
//if my hash does not contain the (sum - item) value -> insert to hash.
if !hash.contains(sum-item) {
hash.insert(sum-item)
}
//check if current item is the same as another hash value or not, if yes, return the tuple.
if hash.contains(item) &&
(dictCount[item] > 1 || sum != item*2) // check if we have item*2 = sum or not.
{
if !foundKeys.contains(item) && !foundKeys.contains(sum-item) {
foundKeys.insert(item) //add to found items in order to not to add duplicated pair.
result.append((item, sum-item))
}
}
}
return result
}
//test:
let a = findPair([2,3,5,4,1,7,6,8,9,5,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3], 14) //will return (8,6) and (9,5)
My Solution - Java - Without duplicates
public static void printAllPairSum(int[] a, int x){
System.out.printf("printAllPairSum(%s,%d)\n", Arrays.toString(a),x);
if(a==null||a.length==0){
return;
}
int length = a.length;
Map<Integer,Integer> reverseMapOfArray = new HashMap<>(length,1.0f);
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) {
reverseMapOfArray.put(a[i], i);
}
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++) {
Integer j = reverseMapOfArray.get(x - a[i]);
if(j!=null && i<j){
System.out.printf("a[%d] + a[%d] = %d + %d = %d\n",i,j,a[i],a[j],x);
}
}
System.out.println("------------------------------");
}
This prints the pairs and avoids duplicates using bitwise manipulation.
public static void findSumHashMap(int[] arr, int key) {
Map<Integer, Integer> valMap = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
for(int i=0;i<arr.length;i++)
valMap.put(arr[i], i);
int indicesVisited = 0;
for(int i=0;i<arr.length;i++) {
if(valMap.containsKey(key - arr[i]) && valMap.get(key - arr[i]) != i) {
if(!((indicesVisited & ((1<<i) | (1<<valMap.get(key - arr[i])))) > 0)) {
int diff = key-arr[i];
System.out.println(arr[i] + " " +diff);
indicesVisited = indicesVisited | (1<<i) | (1<<valMap.get(key - arr[i]));
}
}
}
}
I bypassed the bit manuplation and just compared the index values. This is less than the loop iteration value (i in this case). This will not print the duplicate pairs and duplicate array elements also.
public static void findSumHashMap(int[] arr, int key) {
Map<Integer, Integer> valMap = new HashMap<Integer, Integer>();
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
valMap.put(arr[i], i);
}
for (int i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
if (valMap.containsKey(key - arr[i])
&& valMap.get(key - arr[i]) != i) {
if (valMap.get(key - arr[i]) < i) {
int diff = key - arr[i];
System.out.println(arr[i] + " " + diff);
}
}
}
}
in C#:
int[] array = new int[] { 1, 5, 7, 2, 9, 8, 4, 3, 6 }; // given array
int sum = 10; // given sum
for (int i = 0; i <= array.Count() - 1; i++)
if (array.Contains(sum - array[i]))
Console.WriteLine("{0}, {1}", array[i], sum - array[i]);
One Solution can be this, but not optimul (The complexity of this code is O(n^2)):
public class FindPairsEqualToSum {
private static int inputSum = 0;
public static List<String> findPairsForSum(int[] inputArray, int sum) {
List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>();
List<Integer> inputList = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (int i : inputArray) {
inputList.add(i);
}
for (int i : inputArray) {
int tempInt = sum - i;
if (inputList.contains(tempInt)) {
String pair = String.valueOf(i + ", " + tempInt);
list.add(pair);
}
}
return list;
}
}
A simple python version of the code that find a pair sum of zero and can be modify to find k:
def sumToK(lst):
k = 0 # <- define the k here
d = {} # build a dictionary
# build the hashmap key = val of lst, value = i
for index, val in enumerate(lst):
d[val] = index
# find the key; if a key is in the dict, and not the same index as the current key
for i, val in enumerate(lst):
if (k-val) in d and d[k-val] != i:
return True
return False
The run time complexity of the function is O(n) and Space: O(n) as well.
public static int[] f (final int[] nums, int target) {
int[] r = new int[2];
r[0] = -1;
r[1] = -1;
int[] vIndex = new int[0Xfff];
for (int i = 0; i < nums.length; i++) {
int delta = 0Xff;
int gapIndex = target - nums[i] + delta;
if (vIndex[gapIndex] != 0) {
r[0] = vIndex[gapIndex];
r[1] = i + 1;
return r;
} else {
vIndex[nums[i] + delta] = i + 1;
}
}
return r;
}
less than o(n) solution will be=>
function(array,k)
var map = {};
for element in array
map(element) = true;
if(map(k-element))
return {k,element}
Solution in Python using list comprehension
f= [[i,j] for i in list for j in list if j+i==X];
O(N2)
also gives two ordered pairs- (a,b) and (b,a) as well
I can do it in O(n). Let me know when you want the answer. Note it involves simply traversing the array once with no sorting, etc... I should mention too that it exploits commutativity of addition and doesn't use hashes but wastes memory.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
/*
An O(n) approach exists by using a lookup table. The approach is to store the value in a "bin" that can easily be looked up(e.g., O(1)) if it is a candidate for an appropriate sum.
e.g.,
for each a[k] in the array we simply put the it in another array at the location x - a[k].
Suppose we have [0, 1, 5, 3, 6, 9, 8, 7] and x = 9
We create a new array,
indexes value
9 - 0 = 9 0
9 - 1 = 8 1
9 - 5 = 4 5
9 - 3 = 6 3
9 - 6 = 3 6
9 - 9 = 0 9
9 - 8 = 1 8
9 - 7 = 2 7
THEN the only values that matter are the ones who have an index into the new table.
So, say when we reach 9 or equal we see if our new array has the index 9 - 9 = 0. Since it does we know that all the values it contains will add to 9. (note in this cause it's obvious there is only 1 possible one but it might have multiple index values in it which we need to store).
So effectively what we end up doing is only having to move through the array once. Because addition is commutative we will end up with all the possible results.
For example, when we get to 6 we get the index into our new table as 9 - 6 = 3. Since the table contains that index value we know the values.
This is essentially trading off speed for memory.
*/
namespace sum
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int num = 25;
int X = 10;
var arr = new List<int>();
for(int i = 0; i <= num; i++) arr.Add((new Random((int)(DateTime.Now.Ticks + i*num))).Next(0, num*2));
Console.Write("["); for (int i = 0; i < num - 1; i++) Console.Write(arr[i] + ", "); Console.WriteLine(arr[arr.Count-1] + "] - " + X);
var arrbrute = new List<Tuple<int,int>>();
var arrfast = new List<Tuple<int,int>>();
for(int i = 0; i < num; i++)
for(int j = i+1; j < num; j++)
if (arr[i] + arr[j] == X)
arrbrute.Add(new Tuple<int, int>(arr[i], arr[j]));
int M = 500;
var lookup = new List<List<int>>();
for(int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) lookup.Add(new List<int>());
for(int i = 0; i < num; i++)
{
// Check and see if we have any "matches"
if (lookup[M + X - arr[i]].Count != 0)
{
foreach(var j in lookup[M + X - arr[i]])
arrfast.Add(new Tuple<int, int>(arr[i], arr[j]));
}
lookup[M + arr[i]].Add(i);
}
for(int i = 0; i < arrbrute.Count; i++)
Console.WriteLine(arrbrute[i].Item1 + " + " + arrbrute[i].Item2 + " = " + X);
Console.WriteLine("---------");
for(int i = 0; i < arrfast.Count; i++)
Console.WriteLine(arrfast[i].Item1 + " + " + arrfast[i].Item2 + " = " + X);
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
}
I implemented logic in Scala with out a Map. It gives duplicate pairs since the counter loops thru entire elements of the array. If duplicate pairs are needed, you can simply return the value pc
val arr = Array[Int](8, 7, 2, 5, 3, 1, 5)
val num = 10
var pc = 0
for(i <- arr.indices) {
if(arr.contains(Math.abs(arr(i) - num))) pc += 1
}
println(s"Pairs: ${pc/2}")
It is working with duplicates values in the array as well.
GOLANG Implementation
func findPairs(slice1 []int, sum int) [][]int {
pairMap := make(map[int]int)
var SliceOfPairs [][]int
for i, v := range slice1 {
if valuei, ok := pairMap[v]; ok {
//fmt.Println("Pair Found", i, valuei)
SliceOfPairs = append(SliceOfPairs, []int{i, valuei})
} else {
pairMap[sum-v] = i
}
}
return SliceOfPairs
}
function findPairOfNumbers(arr, targetSum) {
arr = arr.sort();
var low = 0, high = arr.length - 1, sum, result = [];
while(low < high) {
sum = arr[low] + arr[high];
if(sum < targetSum)
low++;
else if(sum > targetSum)
high--;
else if(sum === targetSum) {
result.push({val1: arr[low], val2: arr[high]});
high--;
}
}
return (result || false);
}
var pairs = findPairOfNumbers([1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0], 7);
if(pairs.length) {
console.log(pairs);
} else {
console.log("No pair of numbers found that sums to " + 7);
}