problem statement
I am having trouble understanding what is wrong with my code and understanding the constraint below.
My pseudocode:
Traverse the tree Level Order and construct the array representation (input is actually given as a single root, but they use array representation to show the full tree)
iterate over this array representation, skipping null nodes
for each node, let's call it X, iterate upwards until we reach the root checking to see if at any point in the path, parentNode > nodeX, meaning, nodeX is not a good node.
increment counter if the node is good
Constraints:
The number of nodes in the binary tree is in the range [1, 10^5].
Each node's value is between [-10^4, 10^4]
First of all:
My confusion on the constraint is that, the automated tests are giving input such as [2,4,4,4,null,1,3,null,null,5,null,null,null,null,5,4,4] and if we follow the rules that childs are at c1 = 2k+1 and c2 = 2k+2 and parent = (k-1)//2 then this means that there are nodes with value null
Secondly:
For the input above, my code outputs 8, the expected value is 6, but when I draw the tree from the array, I also think the answer should be 8!
tree of input
# Definition for a binary tree node.
# class TreeNode:
# def __init__(self, val=0, left=None, right=None):
# self.val = val
# self.left = left
# self.right = right
class Solution:
def goodNodes(self, root: TreeNode) -> int:
arrRepresentation = []
queue = []
queue.append(root)
# while queue not empty
while queue:
# remove node
node = queue.pop(0)
if node is None:
arrRepresentation.append(None)
else:
arrRepresentation.append(node.val)
if node is not None:
# add left to queue
queue.append(node.left)
# add right to queue
queue.append(node.right)
print(arrRepresentation)
goodNodeCounter = 1
# iterate over array representation of binary tree
for k in range(len(arrRepresentation)-1, 0, -1):
child = arrRepresentation[k]
if child is None:
continue
isGoodNode = self._isGoodNode(k, arrRepresentation)
print('is good: ' + str(isGoodNode))
if isGoodNode:
goodNodeCounter += 1
return goodNodeCounter
def _isGoodNode(self, k, arrRepresentation):
child = arrRepresentation[k]
print('child: '+str(child))
# calculate index of parent
parentIndex = (k-1)//2
isGood = True
# if we have not reached root node
while parentIndex >= 0:
parent = arrRepresentation[parentIndex]
print('parent: '+ str(parent))
# calculate index of parent
parentIndex = (parentIndex-1)//2
if parent is None:
continue
if parent > child:
isGood = False
break
return isGood
Recursion might be easier:
class Node:
def __init__(self, val=0, left=None, right=None):
self.val = val
self.left = left
self.right = right
def good_nodes(root, maximum=float('-inf')):
if not root: # null-root
return 0
is_this_good = maximum <= root.val # is this root a good node?
maximum = max(maximum, root.val) # update max
good_from_left = good_nodes(root.left, maximum) if root.left else 0
good_from_right = good_nodes(root.right, maximum) if root.right else 0
return is_this_good + good_from_left + good_from_right
tree = Node(2, Node(4, Node(4)), Node(4, Node(1, Node(5, None, Node(5, Node(4), Node(4)))), Node(3)))
print(good_nodes(tree)) # 6
Basically, recursion traverses the tree while updating the maximum number seen so far. At each iteration, the value of a root is compared with the maximum, incrementing the counter if necessary.
Since you wanted to solve with breadth first search:
from collections import deque
class Solution:
def goodNodes(self,root:TreeNode)->int:
if not root:
return 0
queue=deque()
# run bfs with track of max_val till its parent node
queue.append((root,-inf))
res=0
while queue:
current,max_val=queue.popleft()
if current.val>=max_val:
res+=1
if current.left:
queue.append((current.left,max(max_val,current.val)))
if current.right:
queue.append((current.right,max(max_val,current.val)))
return res
I added the node and its max_value till its parent node. I could not add a global max_value, because look at this tree:
For the first 3 nodes, you would have this [3,1,4] and if you were keeping the max_val globally, max_val would be 4.
Now next node would be 3, leaf node on the left. Since max_node is 4, 3<4 would be incorrect so 3 would not be considered as good node. So instead, I keep track of max_val of each node till its parent node
The binary heap you provided corresponds to the folloring hierarchy:
tree = [2,4,4,4,None,1,3,None,None,5,None,None,None,None,5,4,4]
printHeapTree(tree)
2
/ \
4 4
/ / \
4 1 3
\
5
In that tree, only item value 1 has an ancestor that is greater than itself. The 6 other nodes are good, because they have no ancestor that are greater than themselves (counting the root as good).
Note that there are values in the list that are unreachable because their parent is null (None) so they are not part of the tree (this could be a copy/paste mistake though). If we replace these None values by something else to make them part of the tree, we can see where the unreachable nodes are located in the hierarchy:
t = [2,4,4,4,'*', 1,3,'*',None, 5,None, None,None,None,5,4,4]
printHeapTree(t)
2
__/ \_
4 4
/ \ / \
4 * 1 3
/ / \
* 5 5
/ \
4 4
This is likely where the difference between a result of 8 (not counting root as good) vs 6 (counting root as good) comes from.
You can find the printHeapTree() function here.
Related
Based on a DFS traversal, I want to classify edges (u, v) in a directed graph as:
Tree edge: when v is visited for the first time as we traverse the edge
Back edge: when v is an ancestor of u in the traversal tree
Forward edge: when v is a descendant of u in the traversal tree
Cross edge: when v is neither an ancestor or descendant of u in the traversal tree
I was following a GeeksForGeeks tutorial to write this code:
class Graph:
def __init__(self, v):
self.time = 0
self.traversal_array = []
self.v = v
self.graph_list = [[] for _ in range(v)]
def dfs(self):
self.visited = [False]*self.v
self.start_time = [0]*self.v
self.end_time = [0]*self.v
self.ff = 0
self.fc = 0
for node in range(self.v):
if not self.visited[node]:
self.traverse_dfs(node)
def traverse_dfs(self, node):
# mark the node visited
self.visited[node] = True
# add the node to traversal
self.traversal_array.append(node)
# get the starting time
self.start_time[node] = self.time
# increment the time by 1
self.time += 1
# traverse through the neighbours
for neighbour in self.graph_list[node]:
# if a node is not visited
if not self.visited[neighbour]:
# marks the edge as tree edge
print('Tree Edge:', str(node)+'-->'+str(neighbour))
# dfs from that node
self.traverse_dfs(neighbour)
else:
# when the parent node is traversed after the neighbour node
if self.start_time[node] > self.start_time[neighbour] and self.end_time[node] < self.end_time[neighbour]:
print('Back Edge:', str(node)+'-->'+str(neighbour))
# when the neighbour node is a descendant but not a part of tree
elif self.start_time[node] < self.start_time[neighbour] and self.end_time[node] > self.end_time[neighbour]:
print('Forward Edge:', str(node)+'-->'+str(neighbour))
# when parent and neighbour node do not have any ancestor and a descendant relationship between them
elif self.start_time[node] > self.start_time[neighbour] and self.end_time[node] > self.end_time[neighbour]:
print('Cross Edge:', str(node)+'-->'+str(neighbour))
self.end_time[node] = self.time
self.time += 1
But it does not output the desired results for the following graph:
which is represented with:
self.v = 3
self.graph_list = [[1, 2], [], [1]]
The above code is not identifying the edge (2, 1) as a cross edge, but as a back edge.
I have no clue what to adapt in my code in order to detect cross edges correctly.
In a discussion someone gave this information, but I couldn't make work:
The checking condition is wrong when the node has not been completely visited when the edge is classified. This is because in the initial state the start & end times are set to 0.
if the graph looks like this:
0 --> 1
1 --> 2
2 --> 3
3 --> 1
When checking the 3 --> 1 edge: the answer should be a back edge.
But now the start/end [3] = 4/0 ; start/end [1] = 1/0
and the condition end[3] < end[1] is false because of the intialization problem.
I see two solutions,
traverse the graph first and determine the correct start/end [i] values, but it needs more time complexity, or
use black/gray/white and discover the order to classify the edges
Here are some issues:
By initialising start_time and end_time to 0 for each node, you cannot make the difference with a real time of 0, which is assigned to the very first node's start time. You should initialise these lists with a value that indicates there was no start/end at all. You could use the value -1 for this purpose.
The following statements should not be inside the loop:
self.end_time[node] = self.time
self.time += 1
They should be executed after the loop has completed. Only at that point you can "end" the visit of the current node. So the indentation of these two statements should be less.
There are several places where the value of self.end_time[node] is compared in a condition, but that time has not been set yet (apart from its default value), so this condition makes little sense.
The last elif should really be an else because there are no other possibilities to cover. If ever the execution gets there, it means no other possibility remains, so no condition should be checked.
The condition self.start_time[node] > self.start_time[neighbour] is not strong enough for identifying a back edge, and as already said, the second part of that if condition makes no sense, since self.end_time[node] has not been given a non-default value yet. And so this if block is entered also when it is not a back edge. What you really want to test here, is that the visit of neighbor has not been closed yet. In other words, you should check that self.start_time[neighbor] is still at its default value (and I propose to use -1 for that).
Not a problem, but there are also these remarks to make:
when you keep track of start_time and end_time, there is no need to have visited. Whether a node is visited follows from the value of start_time: if it still has its default value (-1), then the node has not yet been visited.
Don't use code comments to state the obvious. For instance the comment "increment the time by 1" really isn't explaining anything that cannot be seen directly from the code.
Attribute v could use a better name. Although V is often used to denote the set of nodes of a graph, it is not intuitive to see v as the number of nodes in the graph. I would suggest using num_nodes instead. It makes the code more readable.
Here is a correction of your code:
class Graph:
def __init__(self, num_nodes):
self.time = 0
self.traversal_array = []
self.num_nodes = num_nodes # Use more descriptive name
self.graph_list = [[] for _ in range(num_nodes)]
def dfs(self):
self.start_time = [-1]*self.num_nodes
self.end_time = [-1]*self.num_nodes
for node in range(self.num_nodes):
if self.start_time[node] == -1: # No need for self.visited
self.traverse_dfs(node)
def traverse_dfs(self, node):
self.traversal_array.append(node)
self.start_time[node] = self.time
self.time += 1
for neighbour in self.graph_list[node]:
# when the neighbor was not yet visited
if self.start_time[neighbour] == -1:
print(f"Tree Edge: {node}-->{neighbour}")
self.traverse_dfs(neighbour)
# otherwise when the neighbour's visit is still ongoing:
elif self.end_time[neighbour] == -1:
print(f"Back Edge: {node}-->{neighbour}")
# otherwise when the neighbour's visit started before the current node's visit:
elif self.start_time[node] < self.start_time[neighbour]:
print(f"Forward Edge: {node}-->{neighbour}")
else: # No condition here: there are no other options
print(f"Cross Edge: {node}-->{neighbour}")
# Indentation corrected:
self.end_time[node] = self.time
self.time += 1
I tried making a Tree as a part of my Data Structures course. The code works but is extremely slow, almost double the time that is accepted for the course. I do not have experience with Data Structures and Algorithms but I need to optimize the program. If anyone has any tips, advices, criticism I would greatly appreciate it.
The tree is not necessarily a binary tree.
Here is the code:
import sys
import threading
class Node:
def __init__(self,value):
self.value = value
self.children = []
self.parent = None
def add_child(self,child):
child.parent = self
self.children.append(child)
def compute_height(n, parents):
found = False
indices = []
for i in range(n):
indices.append(i)
for i in range(len(parents)):
currentItem = parents[i]
if currentItem == -1:
root = Node(parents[i])
startingIndex = i
found = True
break
if found == False:
root = Node(parents[0])
startingIndex = 0
return recursion(startingIndex,root,indices,parents)
def recursion(index,toWhomAdd,indexes,values):
children = []
for i in range(len(values)):
if index == values[i]:
children.append(indexes[i])
newNode = Node(indexes[i])
toWhomAdd.add_child(newNode)
recursion(i, newNode, indexes, values)
return toWhomAdd
def checkHeight(node):
if node == '' or node == None or node == []:
return 0
counter = []
for i in node.children:
counter.append(checkHeight(i))
if node.children != []:
mostChildren = max(counter)
else:
mostChildren = 0
return(1 + mostChildren)
def main():
n = int(int(input()))
parents = list(map(int, input().split()))
root = compute_height(n, parents)
print(checkHeight(root))
sys.setrecursionlimit(10**7) # max depth of recursion
threading.stack_size(2**27) # new thread will get stack of such size
threading.Thread(target=main).start()
Edit:
For this input(first number being number of nodes and other numbers the node's values)
5
4 -1 4 1 1
We expect this output(height of the tree)
3
Another example:
Input:
5
-1 0 4 0 3
Output:
4
It looks like the value that is given for a node, is a reference by index of another node (its parent). This is nowhere stated in the question, but if that assumption is right, you don't really need to create the tree with Node instances. Just read the input into a list (which you already do), and you actually have the tree encoded in it.
So for example, the list [4, -1, 4, 1, 1] represents this tree, where the labels are the indices in this list:
1
/ \
4 3
/ \
0 2
The height of this tree — according to the definition given in Wikipedia — would be 2. But apparently the expected result is 3, which is the number of nodes (not edges) on the longest path from the root to a leaf, or — otherwise put — the number of levels in the tree.
The idea to use recursion is correct, but you can do it bottom up (starting at any node), getting the result of the parent recursively, and adding one to 1. Use the principle of dynamic programming by storing the result for each node in a separate list, which I called levels:
def get_num_levels(parents):
levels = [0] * len(parents)
def recur(node):
if levels[node] == 0: # this node's level hasn't been determined yet
parent = parents[node]
levels[node] = 1 if parent == -1 else recur(parent) + 1
return levels[node]
for node in range(len(parents)):
recur(node)
return max(levels)
And the main code could be as you had it:
def main():
n = int(int(input()))
parents = list(map(int, input().split()))
print(get_num_levels(parents))
I generated perfectly balanced binary tree and I want to print it. In the output there are only 0s instead of the data I generated. I think it's because of the line in function printtree that says print(tree.elem), cause in the class self.elem = 0.
How can I connect these two functions generate and printtree?
class BinTree:
def __init__(self):
self.elem = 0
self.left = None
self.right = None
def generate(pbt, N):
if N == 0:
pbt = None
else:
pbt = BinTree()
x = input()
pbt.elem = int(x)
generate(pbt.left, N // 2)
generate(pbt.right, N - N // 2 - 1)
def printtree(tree, h):
if tree is not None:
tree = BinTree()
printtree(tree.right, h+1)
for i in range(1, h):
print(end = "......")
print(tree.elem)
printtree(tree.left, h+1)
Hope somebody can help me. I am a beginner in coding.
For example:
N=6, pbt=pbt, tree=pbt, h=0
input:
1
2
3
4
5
6
and the output:
......5
............6
1
............4
......2
............3
I'd suggest reading up on: https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/tree-traversals-inorder-preorder-and-postorder/
Basically, there are three ways to traverse a binary tree; in-order, post-order and pre-order.
The issue with your print statement is that, you're reassigning the tree that is being passed in, to an empty tree.
if tree is not None:
tree = BinTree()
Right? If tree is not none and has something, lets reassign that to an empty tree.
Traversing a tree is actually a lot more simpler than you'd imagine. I think the complexity comes in just trying to imagine in your head how it all works out, but the truth is that traversing a tree can be done in 3 - 4 lines.
Introduction
So I'm doing a course on edX and have been working on this practice assignment for
the better part of 3 hours, yet I still can't find a way to implement this method
without it taking to long and timing out the automatic grader.
I've tried 3 different methods all of which did the same thing.
Including 2 recursive approaches and 1 non-recursive approach (my latest).
The problem I think I'm having with my code is that the method to find children just takes way to long because it has to iterate over the entire list of nodes.
Input and output format
Input includes N on the first line which is the size of the list which is given on line 2.
Example:
5
-1 0 4 0 3
To build a tree from this:
Each of the values in the array are a pointer to another index in the array such that in the example above 0 is a child node of -1 (index 0). Since -1 points to no other index it is the root node.
The tree in the example has the root node -1, which has two children 0 (index 1) and 0 (index 3). The 0 with index 1 has no children and the 0 with index 3 has 1 child: 3 (index 4) which in turn has only one child which is 4 (index 2).
The output resulting from the above input is 4. This is because the max height of the branch which included -1 (the root node), 0, 3, and 4 was of height 4 compared to the height of the other branch (-1, and 0) which was height 2.
If you need more elaborate explanation then I can give another example in the comments!
The output is the max height of the tree. The size of the input goes up to 100,000 which was where I was having trouble as it has to do that it in exactly 3 seconds or under.
My code
Here's my latest non-recursive method which I think is the fastest I've made (still not fast enough). I used the starter from the website which I will also include beneath my code. Anyways, thanks for the help!
My code:
# python3
import sys, threading
sys.setrecursionlimit(10**7) # max depth of recursion
threading.stack_size(2**27) # new thread will get stack of such size
def height(node, parent_list):
h = 0
while not node == -1:
h = h + 1
node = parent_list[node]
return h + 1
def search_bottom_nodes(parent_list):
bottom_nodes = []
for index, value in enumerate(parent_list):
children = [i for i, x in enumerate(parent_list) if x == index]
if len(children) == 0:
bottom_nodes.append(value)
return bottom_nodes
class TreeHeight:
def read(self):
self.n = int(sys.stdin.readline())
self.parent = list(map(int, sys.stdin.readline().split()))
def compute_height(self):
# Replace this code with a faster implementation
bottom_nodes = search_bottom_nodes(self.parent)
h = 0
for index, value in enumerate(bottom_nodes):
h = max(height(value, self.parent), h)
return h
def main():
tree = TreeHeight()
tree.read()
print(tree.compute_height())
threading.Thread(target=main).start()
edX starter:
# python3
import sys, threading
sys.setrecursionlimit(10**7) # max depth of recursion
threading.stack_size(2**27) # new thread will get stack of such size
class TreeHeight:
def read(self):
self.n = int(sys.stdin.readline())
self.parent = list(map(int, sys.stdin.readline().split()))
def compute_height(self):
# Replace this code with a faster implementation
maxHeight = 0
for vertex in range(self.n):
height = 0
i = vertex
while i != -1:
height += 1
i = self.parent[i]
maxHeight = max(maxHeight, height);
return maxHeight;
def main():
tree = TreeHeight()
tree.read()
print(tree.compute_height())
threading.Thread(target=main).start()
Simply cache the previously computed heights of the nodes you've traversed through in a dict and reuse them when they are referenced as parents.
import sys, threading
sys.setrecursionlimit(10**7) # max depth of recursion
threading.stack_size(2**27) # new thread will get stack of such size
class TreeHeight:
def height(self, node):
if node == -1:
return 0
if self.parent[node] in self.heights:
self.heights[node] = self.heights[self.parent[node]] + 1
else:
self.heights[node] = self.height(self.parent[node]) + 1
return self.heights[node]
def read(self):
self.n = int(sys.stdin.readline())
self.parent = list(map(int, sys.stdin.readline().split()))
self.heights = {}
def compute_height(self):
maxHeight = 0
for vertex in range(self.n):
maxHeight = max(maxHeight, self.height(vertex))
return maxHeight;
def main():
tree = TreeHeight()
tree.read()
print(tree.compute_height())
threading.Thread(target=main).start()
Given the same input from your question, this (and your original code) outputs:
4
I created a tuple from a binary tree and it looks like this:
tuple = (1,(2,(4,5,6),(7,None,8)),(3,9,(10,11,12)))
The tree structure becomes more clear by applying indentation:
(1,
(2,
(4,
5,
6
),
(7,
None,
8
)
),
(3,
9,
(10,
11,
12
)
)
)
I know how to find the maximum depth of the binary tree using recursive method, but I am trying to find the maximum depth using the tuple I created. Can anyone help me with how to do it?
Recursive method:
a = (1,(2,(4,5,6),(7,None,8)),(3,9,(10,11,12)));
def depth(x):
if(isinstance(x, int) or x == None):
return 1;
else:
dL = depth(x[1]);
dR = depth(x[2]);
return max(dL, dR) + 1;
print(depth(a));
The idea is to determine the depth of a tree by looking at its left and right subtree. If the node does not have subtrees, a depth of 1 is returned. Else it returns max(depth of right, depth of left) + 1
Here is a tricky but rather efficient solution, that will work, provided no elements of your data structure is a string containing '(' or ')'.
I would convert the tuple to a string, and parse it so as to count the depth of the parentheses.
string = str(myTuple)
currentDepth = 0
maxDepth = 0
for c in string:
if c == '(':
currentDepth += 1
elif c == ')':
currentDepth -= 1
maxDepth = max(maxDepth, currentDepth)
It gives the depth in a linear time with regards to the number of characters in the string into which the tuple was converted.
That number should be more or less proportional to the number of elements plus the depth, so you'd have a complexity somewhat equal to O(n + d).
I solve this with level order traversal. If you know level order traversal, this question and https://leetcode.com/problems/binary-tree-right-side-view/ question can be solved with same technique:
from collections import deque
class Solution:
def max_depth(self,root):
if not root:
return 0
level=0
q=deque([root])
while q:
# once we exhaust the for loop, that means we traverse all the nodes in the same level
# so after for loop increase level+=1
for i in range(len(q)):
node=q.popleft()
if node.left:
q.append(node.left)
if node.right:
q.append(node.right)
level+=1
return level
class Node(object):
def __init__(self, x):
self.val = x
self.left = None
self.right = None
class Solution(object):
def maxDepth(self, root):
if not root:
return 0
ldepth = self.maxDepth(root.left)
rdepth = self.maxDepth(root.right)
return max(ldepth, rdepth) + 1