Related
I am trying to get a set of elements from a list in prolog, such that a query:
get_elems([1, 2, 4, 10], [a, b, c, d, e], X).
yields:
X = [a, b, d]
I would like to implement it without using the built in predicate nth.
I have tried using the following, but it does not work:
minus_one([], []).
minus_one([X|Xs], [Y|Ys]) :- minus_one(Xs, Ys), Y is X-1.
get_elems([], _, []).
get_elems(_, [], []).
get_elems([1|Ns], [A|As], Z) :- get_elems(Ns, As, B), [A|B] = Z.
get_elems(Ns, [_|As], Z) :- minus_one(Ns, Bs), get_elems(Bs, As, Z).
Edit: The list of indices is guaranteed to be ascending, also I want to avoid implementing my own version of nth.
Give this a go:
get_elems(Xs,Ys,Zs) :- get_elems(Xs,1,Ys,Zs).
get_elems(Xs,_,Ys,[]) :- Xs = []; Ys = [].
get_elems([N|Xs],N,[H|Ys],[H|Zs]) :- !, N1 is N + 1, get_elems(Xs,N1,Ys,Zs).
get_elems(Xs,N,[_|Ys],Zs) :- N1 is N + 1, get_elems(Xs,N1,Ys,Zs).
This just keeps counting up and when the head of the second term is equal to the current index it peels off the head and makes it the head of the current output term. If it doesn't match it just discards the head and keeps going.
I am writing a predicate in prolog that will break a list with an even number of variables into two halves and swap them. For example [a,b,c,d] --> [c,d,a,b].
append([], List, List).
append([Head|Tail], List, [Head|Rest]) :-
append(Tail, List, Rest).
divide(L, X, Y) :-
append(X, Y, L),
length(X, N),
length(Y, N).
swap([], []).
swap([A], D) :-
divide(A, B, C),
append(C, B, D).
I would expect this to work by dividing [A] into two smaller equal sized lists, then appending them together in the reverse order, and then assigning the variable "D" to the list.
What I am getting is "false", why does this not work?
I'm very new to prolog so this might be a silly/simple question, thanks!
Your question is why swap([a,b,c,d],[c,d,a,b]) fails. And here is the actual reason:
?- swap([_/*a*/,_/*b*/|_/*,c,d*/],_/*[c,d,a,b]*/).
:- op(950, fy, *).
*(_).
swap([], _/*[]*/).
swap([A], D) :-
* divide(A, B, C),
* append(C, B, D).
So, not only does your original query fail, but even this generalization fails as well. Even if you ask
?- swap([_,_|_],_).
false.
you just get failure. See it?
And you can ask it also the other way round. With above generalization, we can ask:
?- swap(Xs, Ys).
Xs = []
; Xs = [_A].
So your first argument must be the empty list or a one-element list only. You certainly want to describe also longer lists.
Maybe this helps
:- use_module(library(lists), []).
divide(L, X, Y) :-
append(X, Y, L),
length(X, N),
length(Y, N).
swap([], []).
swap(L, D) :-
divide(L, B, C),
append(C, B, D).
I'm trying to make a prolog predicate "comprueba(A,B,C,D,E)" that do the next statements:
All arguments are lists.
List D contains only the elements that are on A and B at the same time.
List D elements number of ocurrences must be the same ocurrences in A.
List E contains only the elements of A that are not on C and not on D.
List E elements number of ocurrences must be three times the occurrences in A.
There are no more elements than these in D or E.
The predicate must be true even if the order of D or E differs from A.
So here is my code:
comprueba(A,B,C,D,E) :- lista([A]),
lista([B]),
lista([C]),
lista([D]),
lista([E]),
inter(A,B,D),
checko(D,D,A,1).
%checke2(A,C,D,E),
%checko(E,E,A,3).
lista([]).
lista([_|T]) :-lista(T).
inter([], _, []).
inter([H1|T1], L2, [H1|Res]) :- memberof(H1, L2), inter(T1, L2, Res).
inter([_|T1], L2, Res) :- inter(T1, L2, Res).
checke2([],_,_,_).
checke2(A,C,D,E) :- subtract(A,D,X), subtract(A,C,Y), inter(X,Y,E).
count(_, [], N) :- N is 0.
count(X, [X|T], N1) :- count(X, T, N2), N1 is N2 + 1.
count(X, [Y|T], N) :- X \= Y, count(X, T, N).
memberof(X, [X|_]).
memberof(X, [_|T]) :- memberof(X,T).
checko([],_,_,_).
checko([H|T],L1,L2,N) :- count(H,L1,N1), count(H,L2,N2), N3 is N * N2, N1 = N3, checko(T,L1,L2,N).
After doing some testing I'm stucked, because I cannot get it true, if the list are not on the same order, e.g:
17 ?- comprueba([1,2,3,4,2,5,8,9],[2,3,4,7],[1,2,3,8],[2,2,3,4],[5,5,5,9,9,9]).
false.
18 ?- comprueba([1,2,3,4,2,5,8,9],[2,3,4,7],[1,2,3,8],[2,3,4,2],[5,5,5,9,9,9]).
true
So I really ask you for help to try to solve it, and continue with the next part, with E list.
Thanks you in advance.
PD:
sorry if the format is not the properly, it's my first post here :)
You could add a goal that describes D as any permutation of the 4th list (in the below example D2).
comprueba(A,B,C,D,E) :- lista([A]),
lista([B]),
lista([C]),
lista([D2]),
lista([E]),
inter(A,B,D2),
checko(D2,D2,A,1),
permutation(D2,D).
If you are not allowed to use permutation/2 from library(lists) permutation could look something like this:
% permutation(List1,List2)
% List2 is a permutation of List1
permutation([],[]).
permutation(Xs,[Z|Zs]) :-
element(Z,Xs,Ys),
permutation(Ys,Zs).
% element(X,List1,List2)
% X is element of List1, List2 = List1 without X
element(X,[X|Xs],Xs).
element(X,[Y|Ys],[Y|Zs]) :-
element(X,Ys,Zs).
With this additional goal your predicate comprueba/5 works with both of your queries.
?- comprueba([1,2,3,4,2,5,8,9],[2,3,4,7],[1,2,3,8],[2,2,3,4],[5,5,5,9,9,9]).
yes
?- comprueba([1,2,3,4,2,5,8,9],[2,3,4,7],[1,2,3,8],[2,3,4,2],[5,5,5,9,9,9]).
yes
In Python you can do
>>> import from collections counter
>>> Counter(['a','b','b','c'])
>>> Counter({'b': 2, 'a': 1, 'c': 1})
Is there something similar in Prolog? Like so:
counter([a,b,b,c],S).
S=[a/1,b/2,c/1].
This is my implementation:
counter([],List,Counts,Counts).
counter([H|T],List,Counts0,[H/N|Counts]):-
findall(H, member(H,List), S),
length(S,N),
counter(T,List,Counts0,Counts).
counter(List,Counts):-
list_to_set(List,Set),
counter(Set,List,[],Counts).
It's rather verbose, so I wondered if there was a builtin predicate or a more terse implementation.
There is no builtin predicate, here is another way to do that :
counter([X], [X/1]).
counter([H | T], R) :-
counter(T, R1),
( select(H/V, R1, R2)
-> V1 is V+1,
R = [H/V1 | R2]
; R = [H/1 | R1]).
I like #joel76's solution. I will add a few more variations on the theme.
VARIATION I
Here's another simple approach, which sorts the list first:
counter(L, C) :-
msort(L, S), % Use 'msort' instead of 'sort' to preserve dups
counter(S, 1, C).
counter([X], A, [X-A]).
counter([X,X|T], A, C) :-
A1 is A + 1,
counter([X|T], A1, C).
counter([X,Y|T], A, [X-A|C]) :-
X \= Y,
counter([Y|T], 1, C).
Quick trial:
| ?- counter([a,b,b,c], S).
S = [a-1,b-2,c-1] ?
yes
This will fail on counter([], C). but you can simply include the clause counter([], []). if you want it to succeed. It doesn't maintain the initial order of appearance of the elements (it's unclear whether this is a requirement). This implementation is fairly efficient and is tail recursive, and it will work as long as the first argument is instantiated.
VARIATION II
This version will maintain order of appearance of elements, and it succeeds on counter([], []).. It's also tail recursive:
counter(L, C) :-
length(L, N),
counter(L, N, C).
counter([H|T], L, [H-C|CT]) :-
delete(T, H, T1), % Remove all the H's
length(T1, L1), % Length of list without the H's
C is L - L1, % Count is the difference in lengths
counter(T1, L1, CT). % Recursively do the sublist
counter([], _, []).
With some results:
| ?- counter([a,b,a,a,b,c], L).
L = [a-3,b-2,c-1]
yes
| ?- counter([], L).
L = []
yes
VARIATION III
This one uses a helper which isn't tail recursive, but it preserves the original order of elements, is fairly concise, and I think more efficient.
counter([X|T], [X-C|CT]) :-
remove_and_count(X, [X|T], C, L), % Remove and count X from the list
counter(L, CT). % Count remaining elements
counter([], []).
% Remove all (C) instances of X from L leaving R
remove_and_count(X, L, C, R) :-
select(X, L, L1), !, % Cut to prevent backtrack to other clause
remove_and_count(X, L1, C1, R),
C is C1 + 1.
remove_and_count(_, L, 0, L).
This implementation will work as long as the first argument to counter is instantiated.
SIDEBAR
In the above predicates, I used the Element-Count pattern rather than Element/Count since some Prolog interpreters, SWI in particular, offer a number of predicates that know how to operate on associative lists of Key-Value pairs (see SWI library(pairs) and ISO predicate keysort/2).
I also like #joel76 solution (and #mbratch suggestions, also). Here I'm just to note that library(aggregate), if available, has a count aggregate operation, that can be used with the ISO builtin setof/3:
counter(L, Cs) :-
setof(K-N, (member(K, L), aggregate(count, member(K, L), N)), Cs).
yields
?- counter([a,b,b,c], L).
L = [a-1, b-2, c-1].
If the selection operation was more complex, a nice way to avoid textually repeating the code could be
counter(L, Cs) :-
P = member(K, L),
setof(K-N, (P, aggregate(count, P, N)), Cs).
edit
Since I'm assuming library(aggregate) available, could be better to task it the set construction also:
counter(L, Cs) :-
P = member(E,L), aggregate(set(E-C), (P, aggregate(count,P,C)), Cs).
Hey I'm trying to append two list with no "double" members
for example
A = [a, b, c]
B = [x, c, q]
then ->
append2(A,B,P)
P= [a,b,c,x,q]
I write this code, but it doesn't work...
not_member(_, []).
not_member(X, [Y|Ys]) :- X \= Y, not_member(X, Ys).
append2(A, [], A).
append2([], A, A).
append2([h1|ls], B, [h1|P]) :- not_member(h1, B), !, append2(ls, B, P).
append2([h1|ls], B, P) :- member(h1, P), append2(ls, B, P).
Thanks for helping :)
Assuming there are no variables in your input lists, but allowing duplicates in each list you may write:
append2(A,B,C):-
findall(Item, append2_item(A,B,Item), C).
append2_item(A,_,ItemA):-
append(HeadA, [ItemA|_], A),
\+ member(ItemA, HeadA).
append2_item(A,B,ItemB):-
append(HeadB, [ItemB|_], B),
\+ member(ItemB, HeadB),
\+ member(ItemB, A).
First clause of append2_item/3 selects (ordered) distinct items from the first list. Second clause of append2_item/3 selects (ordered) distinct items from the second list which are not present in the first list.
append2/3 just collects those elements.
Test case:
?- append2([a,b,c,a],[x,c,q,x],C).
C = [a, b, c, x, q].
Check out the pure code in my answer
to the related question "intersection and union of 2 lists"!
Telling from your requirements, predicate list_list_union/3 is just what you are looking for:
?- list_list_union([a,b,c],[x,c,q],Ls).
Ls = [a,b,c,x,q]. % succeeds deterministically
list_list_union/3 is monotone, so we get sound answers
even when using non-ground terms:
?- As = [_,_,_], Bs = [_,_,_], list_list_union(As,Bs,Ls), As = [a,b,c], Bs = [x,c,q].
As = [a,b,c], Bs = [x,c,q], Ls = [a,b,c,x,q] ; % logically sound result
false.