We can prove that set of all one argument functions cannot be countable using the cantor's diagonal.
for example
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ......
f1 10 12 23 1 3 12 3 ......
f2 15 6 7 8 9 11 4 ......
f3 14 2 4 3 3 4 5 ......
f4 12 2 3 5 1 20 56 .....
.
.
.
for all functions f1 to fn we can pass all the arguments and 1 to n for some n. then by taking the diagonal values and add 1 to diagonal values and we can prove that we can't count all the one argument functions.(since change the diagonal values will produce a row unique which haven't listed)
Wonder is there a particular method to count two argument functions also??..
Thanks..
Wonder is there a particular method to count two argument functions also??..
You mean Wonder is there a particular method to count two argument functions? ("also" would imply that one exists for one-argument functions).
If a subset of a non-countable set is always also noncountable then you could just use the subset of the set of all two-argument functions where you fix the second parameter to a constant (making it essentially equal to a one-argument-function). However I doubt that this assumption is true.
I think you left out some important prerequisites about the diagram (how the fn are constructed as they are not chosen arbitrarily). Maybe examining them will lead you to the clue? I guess this is a homework question? Is it allowed on stackoverflow to post homework questions and in your university to have them let solved by someone else?
I think I've found an answer. I'm writing the answer in case anyone is interested.
we can prove than all the pairs of positive integers can be countable. see below
(1,1) (1,2) (1,3) (1,4) (1,5) (1,6).....
(2,1) (2,2) (2,3) (2,4) (2,5) (2,6).....
(3,1) (3,2) (3,3) (3,4) (3,5) (3,6).....
(4,1) (4,2) (4,3) (4,4) (4,5) (4,6).....
.
.
.
so from the cantor's zig zag we can prove that they can be countable.. see page 8 on this book http://www.scribd.com/doc/51068193/3/Enumerable-Sets
(1,1) (1,2) (2,1) (1,3) (2,2) (3,1) ....
so we can write our problem as below.
(1,1) (1,2) (2,1) (1,3) (2,2) (3,1)
f1 10 12 23 1 3 12 ......
f2 15 6 7 8 9 11 ......
f3 14 2 4 3 3 4 ......
f4 12 2 3 5 1 20 ......
.
.
.
Now by the knowledge of cantor's diagonal.. we can argue that all the two argument functions can't be countable.
Related
Let's say we have an array of size N with values from 1 to N inside it. We want to check if this array has any duplicates. My friend suggested two ways that I showed him were wrong:
Take the sum of the array and check it against the sum 1+2+3+...+N. I gave the example 1,1,4,4 which proves that this way is wrong since 1+1+4+4 = 1+2+3+4 despite there being duplicates in the array.
Next he suggested the same thing but with multiplication. i.e. check if the product of the elements in the array is equal to N!, but again this fails with an array like 2,2,3,2, where 2x2x3x2 = 1x2x3x4.
Finally, he suggested doing both checks, and if one of them fails, then there is a duplicate in the array. I can't help but feel that this is still incorrect, but I can't prove it to him by giving him an example of an array with duplicates that passes both checks. I understand that the burden of proof lies with him, not me, but I can't help but want to find an example where this doesn't work.
P.S. I understand there are many more efficient ways to solve such a problem, but we are trying to discuss this particular approach.
Is there a way to prove that doing both checks doesn't necessarily mean there are no duplicates?
Here's a counterexample: 1,3,3,3,4,6,7,8,10,10
Found by looking for a pair of composite numbers with factorizations that change the sum & count by the same amount.
I.e., 9 -> 3, 3 reduces the sum by 3 and increases the count by 1, and 10 -> 2, 5 does the same. So by converting 2,5 to 10 and 9 to 3,3, I leave both the sum and count unchanged. Also of course the product, since I'm replacing numbers with their factors & vice versa.
Here's a much longer one.
24 -> 2*3*4 increases the count by 2 and decreases the sum by 15
2*11 -> 22 decreases the count by 1 and increases the sum by 9
2*8 -> 16 decreases the count by 1 and increases the sum by 6.
We have a second 2 available because of the factorization of 24.
This gives us:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24
Has the same sum, product, and count of elements as
1,3,3,4,4,5,6,7,9,10,12,13,14,15,16,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,22,23
In general you can find these by finding all factorizations of composite numbers, seeing how they change the sum & count (as above), and choosing changes in both directions (composite <-> factors) that cancel out.
I've just wrote a simple not very effective brute-force function. And it shows that there is for example
1 2 4 4 4 5 7 9 9
sequence that has the same sum and product as
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
For n = 10 there are more such sequences:
1 2 3 4 6 6 6 7 10 10
1 2 4 4 4 5 7 9 9 10
1 3 3 3 4 6 7 8 10 10
1 3 3 4 4 4 7 9 10 10
2 2 2 3 4 6 7 9 10 10
My write-only c++ code is here: https://ideone.com/2oRCbh
Can somebody please explain this heuristic function, for example for the following arrangement of 4x4 puzzle, whats the X-Y heuristic cost?
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12
0 13 14 15
(0 indicates blank space)
As from here and here the X-Y heuristic is computed by the sum of the minimum number of column-adjacent blank swaps to get all tiles in their destination column and the minimum number of row adjacent blank swaps to get all tiles in their destination row.
So in this situation:
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12
0 13 14 15
the only misplaced tiles are 13 , 14 and 15, assuming the goal state is
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12
13 14 15 0
So in this case the we have to compute at first the number of column swaps the blank has to do to get all the tiles in the correct position. This is equivalent to 3, since the blank has to move three times to the the right column to be in the right position (and to have all the tiles in the right position)
Then we have to compute the number of row swaps the blank has to do. This is 0 thanks to the fact that all the tiles are already on the correct row.
Finally h(n) = 3 + 0 = 3 .
The problem statement:
Give n variables and k pairs. The variables can be distinct by assigning a value from 1 to n to each variable. Each pair p contain 2 variables and let the absolute difference between 2 variables in p is abs(p). Define the upper bound of difference is U=max(Abs(p)|every p).
Find an assignment that minimize U.
Limit:
n<=100
k<=1000
Each variable appear at least 2 times in list of pairs.
A problem instance:
Input
n=9, k=12
1 2 (meaning pair x1 x2)
1 3
1 4
1 5
2 3
2 6
3 5
3 7
3 8
3 9
6 9
8 9
Output:
1 2 5 4 3 6 7 8 9
(meaning x1=1,x2=2,x3=5,...)
Explaination: An assignment of x1=1,x2=2,x3=3,... will result in U=6 (3 9 has greastest abs value). The output assignment will get U=4, the minimum value (changed pair: 3 7 => 5 7, 3 8 => 5 8, etc. and 3 5 isn't changed. In this case, abs(p)<=4 for every pair).
There is an important point: To achieve the best assignments, the variables in the pairs that have greatest abs must be change.
Base on this, I have thought of a greedy algorithm:
1)Assign every x to default assignment (x(i)=i)
2)Locate pairs that have largest abs and x(i)'s contained in them.
3)For every i,j: Calculate U. Swap value of x(i),x(j). Calculate U'. If U'<U, stop and repeat step 3. If U'>=U for every i,j, end and output the assignment.
However, this method has a major pitfall, if we need an assignment like this:
x(a)<<x(b), x(b)<<x(c), x(c)<<x(a)
, we have to swap in 2 steps, like: x(a)<=>x(b), then x(b)<=>x(c), then there is a possibility that x(b)<<x(a) in first step has its abs become larger than U and the swap failed.
Is there any efficient algorithm to solve this problem?
This looks like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_bandwidth (NP complete, even for special cases). It looks like people run http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuthill-McKee_algorithm when they need to do this to try and turn a sparse matrix into a banded diagonal matrix.
Alice invents a key (s1, s2, s3, ... , sk). Bob makes a guess (g1, g2, g3, ... , gk).He is awarded one point for each si = gi.
Each s1 is an integer with the range of 0<=si<=11.
Given a q guesses with their scores bi
(g1, g2, g3, ... , gk) b1
(g1, g2, g3, ... , gk) b2
.
.
.
(g1, g2, g3, ... , gk) bq
Can you state if there is a key possible. Given 0<=si<=11, 1<=k<=11, 1<=q<=8.
For Example
2 2 1 1 2
1 1 2 2 1
For the guess 2 2 1 1 the score is 2
For the guess 1 1 2 2 the score is 1
Because there is a key possible let's say 2 1 1 3 which gives the desired scores.Hence the answer is yes
Another Example
1 2 3 4 4
4 3 2 1 1
For the guess 1 2 3 4 the score is 4
For the guess 4 3 2 1 the score is 1
This has no key which gives the desired scores hence answer is NO
I tried the brute force approach generating n^k such keys where n is the range of si.But it gave Time Limit exceeding error.
Its an interview puzzle. I have seen variants of this question but was not able to solve them.Can you tell me what should I read for such type of questions.
I don't know the best solution to this problem, but if you did a recursive search of the possible solution space, pruning branches which could not possibly lead to a solution, it would be much faster than trying all (n^k) keys.
Take your example:
1 2 3 4 4 -> 4
4 3 2 1 1 -> 1
The 3 possible values for g1 which could be significant are: 1, 4, and "neither 1 nor 4". Choose one of them, and then recursively look at the possible values for g2. Choose one, and recursively look at the possible values for g3, etc.
As you search, keep track of a cumulative score for each of the guesses from b1 to bq. Whenever you choose a value for a digit, increment the cumulative scores for all the guesses which have the same number in that position. Keep these cumulative scores on a stack (so you can back up).
When you reach a point where no solution is possible, back up and continue searching a different path. If you back all the way up to g1 and no more paths are left to search, then the answer is NO. If you find a solution, then the answer is YES.
When to stop searching a path and back up:
If the cumulative score of one of the guesses exceeds the given score
If the cumulative score of one of the guesses is less than the given score minus the number of levels left in the search tree (before you hit the bottom)
This approach could still be very slow, especially if "k" was large. But again, it will be far faster than generating (n^k) keys.
a grid of NxN is given. each point is assigned a value say num
starting from 1,1 we have to traverse to N,N.
if i,j is current position we can go right or down.
How to find the min sum of digits by traversing from 1,1 to n,n along any path
any two points can have same number
ex
1 2 3
4 5 6
7 8 9
1+2+3+6+9 = 21
n <=10000000000
Output 21
Can someone explain how to approach the problem?
This is a dynamic programming problem. The subproblem here is the minimum cost/path to get to any given square. Because you can only move down and to the right, there are only two squares that can let you enter a given square, the one above and the one to the left. Therefore the cost of getting to a square (i,i) is min(cost[i-1][i], cost[i][i-1]) + num. If this would put you out of bounds, only consider the option that is inside the grid. Calculate each row from left to right, doing the top row first and working your way down. The cost you get at (N,N) will be the minimal cost.
Here is my solution with dynamic - programming in O(n^2)
you start with (1,1) so you can find say a = (1,2) and b = (2,1) by a = value(1,1) + value(1,2). Then, to find (2,2) select the minimum (a+ value(2,2)) and (b + value(2,2)) and continue with this logic. You can find any minimum sum among (1,1) and (i,j) with that algorithm. Let me explain,
Given Matrix
1 2 3
4 5 6
7 8 9
Shortest path :
1 3 .
5 . .
. . .
so to find (2,2) take the original value(2,2)=5 from Given Matrix and select min(5 + 5), 3 + 5) = 8. so
Shortest path :
1 3 6
5 8 .
12 . .
so to find (3,2) select min (12 + 8, 8 + 8) = 16 and (2,3) = min(8 + 6, 6 + 6) = 12
Shortest path :
1 3 6
5 8 12
12 16 .
so the last one (3,3) = min (12 + 9, 16 + 9) = 21
Shortest path :
from (1,1) to any point (i, j)
1 3 6
5 8 12
12 16 21
You can convert the grid into a graph. The edges get the weights of the values from your grid elements. Then you can find the solution with the shortest path problem.
start--1--+--2--+--3--+
| | |
4 5 6
| | |
+--5--+--6--+
| | |
7 8 9
| | |
+--8--+--9--end
Can someone explain how to approach the problem?
Read about dynamic programming and go from there.
Attempt:
Start with the first row and calculate the cumulative values and store them.
Proceed to the second row, now the values could have only come from the left or top (since you can only go left or down), calculate the smallest of the cumulative values for this row.
Iterate down the rows until the last and you'll be able to get the smallest value when you reach the last node.
I claim this algorithm is O(n) since if you use a 2 dimensional array you only need to access all fields at most twice (read from top, left) for read and once for write.
If you want to go really fancy or have to operate on massive matrices, A* could also be an option.