Given a list of numbers and a number k, return whether any two numbers from the list add up to k.
For example, given [10, 15, 3, 7] and k of 17, return true since 10 + 7 is 17.
Bonus: Can you do this in one pass?
I wrote my code like this and i got right answer for the above input
x=[10,15,3,7]
y=17
for i in x:
if (y-i) in x:
print(True)
break
And checked others code too to know that i was right or wrong and many used sets in their code as
def sum_exists(l,k):
s = set()
for x in l:
if k-x in s:
return True
s.add(x)
return False
I still don't understand the difference between their code and mine.Am i wrong?
What is the use of sets differ from my code?
Your code iterates the list once and checks the list with in - in total you do lots of runs through the list.
You can do it in one pass with the additional space of a set:
x = [10,15,3,7]
y = 17
s = set()
for i in x: # go throug the list once
if y-i in s:
return True
s.add(i)
return False
Checking if something is in a set is O(1) (constant time) checking in in list is O(n) (linear time). If you have a list of 1 million uniqe numbers that do not add up to y your code iterates the list of 1 million times 1000001 times - once to go through and 1000000 times to check. Total time is O(1000001*1000000)
If you use a set it is O(1000000)+1000000*O(1) which is "better" but it takes some additional space/memory.
Related
I am trying to solve this problem on HackerRank and I am having a issue with my logic. I am confused and not able to think what I'm doing wrong, feels like I'm stuck in logic.
Question link: https://www.hackerrank.com/challenges/game-of-thrones/
I created a dictionary of alphabets with value 0. And then counting number of times the alphabet appears in the string. If there are more than 1 alphabet characters occurring 1 times in string, then obviously that string cannot become a palindrome. That's my logic, however it only pass 10/21 test cases.
Here's my code:
def gameOfThrones(s):
alpha_dict = {chr(x): 0 for x in range(97,123)}
counter = 0
for i in s:
if i in alpha_dict:
alpha_dict[i] += 1
for key in alpha_dict.values():
if key == 1:
counter += 1
if counter <= 1:
return 'YES'
else:
return 'NO'
Any idea where I'm going wrong?
Explanation
The issue is that the code doesn't really look for palindromes. Let's step through it with a sample text based on a valid one that they gave: aaabbbbb (the only difference between this and their example is that there is an extra b).
Your first for loop counts how many times the letters appear in the string. In this case, 3 a and 5 b with all the other characters showing up 0 times (quick aside, the end of the range function is exclusive so this would not count any z characters that might show up).
The next for loop counts how many character there are that show up only once in the string. This string is made up of multiple a and b characters, more than the check that you have for if key == 1 so it doesn't trigger it. Since the count is less than 1, it returns YES and exits. However aaabbbbb is not a palindrome unscrambled.
Suggestion
To fix it, I would suggest having more than just one function so you can break down exactly what you need. For example, you can have a function that would return a list of all the unscrambled possibilities.
def allUnscrambled(string)->list:
# find all possible iterations of the string
# if given 'aabb', return 'aabb', 'abab', 'abba', 'bbaa', 'baba', 'baab'
return lstOfStrings
After this, create a palindrome checker. You can use the one shown by Dmitriy or create your own.
def checkIfPalindrome(string)->bool:
# determine if the given string is a palindrome
return isOrNotPalindrome
Put the two together to get a function that will, given a list of strings, determine if at least one of them is a palindrome. If it is, that means the original string is an anagrammed palindrome.
def palindromeInList(lst)->bool:
# given the list of strings from allUnscrambled(str), is any of them a palindrome?
return isPalindromeInList
Your function gameOfThrones(s) can then call this palindromeInList( allUnscrambled(s) ) and then return YES or NO depending on the result. Breaking it up into smaller pieces and delegating tasks is usually a good way to handle these problems.
Corrected the logic in my solution. I was just comparing key == 1 and not with every odd element.
So the corrected code looks like:
for key in alpha_dict.values():
if key % 2 == 1:
counter += 1
It passes all the testcases on HackerRank website.
The property that you have to check on the input string is that the number of characters with odd repetitions must be less than 1. So, the main ingredients to cook you recipe are:
a counter for each character
an hash map to store the counters, having the characters as keys
iterate over the input string
A plain implementation could be:
def gameOfThrones(s):
counters = {}
for c in s:
counters[c] = counters.get(c, 0) + 1
n_odd_characters = sum(v % 2 for v in counters.values())
Using a functional approach, based on reduce from functools:
from functools import reduce
def gamesOfThrones(s):
return ['NO', 'YES'][len(reduce(
lambda x, y: (x | {y: 1}) if y not in x else (x.pop(y) and x),
s,
{}
)) <= 1]
If you want, you can use the Counter class from collections to make your code more concise:
def gamesOfThrones(s):
return ['NO', 'YES'][sum([v % 2 for v in Counter(s).values() ]) <= 1]
I have a list:
l = [1,3,4,6,7,8,9,11,13,...]
and a number n.
How do I efficiently check if the number n can be expressed as the sum of two numbers (repeats are allowed) within the list l.
If the number is in the list, it does not count unless it can be expressed as two numbers (e.g for l = [2,3,4] 3 would not count, but 4 would.
This, embarrassingly, is what I've tried:
def is_sum_of_2num_inlist(n, num_list):
num_list = filter(lambda x: x < n, num_list)
for num1 in num_list:
for num2 in num_list:
if num1+num2 == n:
return True
return False
Thanks
def summable(n, l):
for v in l:
l_no_v = l[:]
l_no_v.remove(v)
if n - v in l_no_v:
return True
return False
EDIT: Explanation...
The itertools.cominations is a nice way to get all possible answers, but it's ~4x slower than this version since this is a single loop that bails out once it gets to a possible solution.
This loops over the values in l, makes a copy of l removing v so that we don't add v to itself (i.e. no false positive if n = 4; l = [2, 1]). Then subtract v from n and if that value is in l then there are two numbers that sum up to n. If you want to return those numbers instead of returning True just return n, n - v.
Although you can check this by running through the list twice, I would recommend for performance converting the list to a set, since x in set() searches in linear time.
Since n can be the sum of the same number, all you have to do is iterate through the set once and check if n - i occurs elsewhere in the set.
Something like the following should work.
>>> def is_sum_of_numbers(n, numbers):
... for i in numbers:
... if n - i in numbers:
... return True
... return False
...
>>>
>>>
>>> numbers = {2,7,8,9}
>>> is_sum_of_numbers(9, numbers) # 2 + 7
True
>>> is_sum_of_numbers(5, numbers)
False
>>> is_sum_of_numbers(18, numbers) # 9 + 9
True
If the list is ordered you could use two variables to go through the list, one starting at the beginning of the list and one at the end, if the sum of the two variables is greater than N you assign to the variable at the end the values that precedes it, if the sum is less than N you assign to the variable at the beginning the following value in the list. If the sum is N you've found the two values. You can stop when the two variables meet eachother.
If the list is not ordered you start from the beginning of the list and use a variable x to go through the list. You'll need another structure like an hashset or another structure. At every step you'll look up in the second hashset if the value N-x is in there. If there is, you've found the two numbers that add up to N. If there isn't you'll add N-x in the hashset and assign to x the following value. I recommend using an hashset because both the operations of looking up and inserting are O(1).
Both algorithms are linear
I'm sorry I couldn't write directly the code in python because I don't use it.
As I said in the comment HERE there's a video in wich your problem is solved
If I got the OP's concern then-
As the question says repeats are allowed within the list l this process i think is good though a bit slower.So if you need to count the occurances along with the existence of a condition then go with this answer but if you want a bolean esixtence check the go with the others for the mere performance issue nothing else.
You can use itertools.combinations. It will give you all the combinations, not permutations. Now you can just use the sum function to get the sum.
from itertools import combinations
l = [1,3,4,6,7,8,9,11,13]
checks = [4,6] #these are the numbers to check
for chk in checks:
for sm in combinations(l,2):
if chk == sum(sm): #sum(sm) means sum(1,3) for the first pass of the loop
#Do something
So my code is as shown below. Input is a list with exactly one duplicate item and one missing item.The answer is a list of two elements long ,first of which is the duplicate element in the list and second the missing element in the list in the range 1 to n.
Example =[1,4,2,5,1] answer=[1,3]
The code below works.
Am , I wrong about the complexity being O(n) and is there any faster way of achieving this in Python?
Also, is there any way I can do this without using extra space.
Note:The elements may be of the order 10^5 or larger
n = max(A)
answer = []
seen = set()
for i in A:
if i in seen:
answer.append(i)
else:
seen.add(i)
for i in xrange(1,n):
if i not in A:
answer.append(i)
print ans
You are indeed correct the complexity of this algorithm is O(n), which is the best you can achieve. You can try to optimize it by aborting the search as soon as you finish the duplicate value. But worst case your duplicate is at the back of the list and you still need to traverse it completely.
The use of hashing (your use of a set) is a good solution. There are a lot other approaches, for instance the use of Counters. But this won't change the assymptotic complexity of the algorithm.
As #Emisor advices, you can leverage the information that you have a list with 1 duplicate and 1 missing value. As you might know if you would have a list with no duplicate and no missing value, summing up all elements of the list would result in 1+2+3+..+n, which can be rewritten in the mathematical equivalent (n*n+1)/2
When you've discovered the duplicate value, you can calculate the missing value, without having to perform:
for i in xrange(1,n):
if i not in A:
answer.append(i)
Since you know the sum if all values would be present: total = (n*n+1)/2) = 15, and you know which value is duplicated. By taking the sum of the array A = [1,4,2,5,1] which is 13 and removing the duplicated value 1, results in 12.
Taking the calculated total and subtracting the calculated 12from it results in 3.
This all can be written in a single line:
(((len(A)+1)*(len(A)+2))/2)-sum(A)-duplicate
Slight optimization (i think)
def lalala2(A):
_max = 0
_sum = 0
seen = set()
duplicate = None
for i in A:
_sum += i
if _max < i:
_max = i
if i in seen:
duplicate = i
elif duplicate is None:
seen.add(i)
missing = -_sum + duplicate + (_max*(_max + 1)/2) # This last term means the sum of every number from 1 to N
return [duplicate , missing]
Looks a bit uglier, and i'm doing stuff like sum() and max() on my own instead of relying on Python's tools. But with this way, we only check every element once. Also, It'll stop adding stuff to the set once it's found the duplicate since it can calculate the missing element from it, once it knows the max
Right now I'm trying to get my program to take a two dimensional list as an input and return either true or false depending on whether or not it is "rectangular" (eg. [[2,3],[1,5],[6,9]] is rectangular whereas [[2,3],[1,8,6]] is not.) So far I've come up with this:
def rectangular(List):
n = List
for i in n:
if len(i) != len(n[0]):
return False
elif len(i) == len(n[0]):
i
I can't seem to figure out how to create a "true" case. Using the elif above I'm able to cycle through the list but if i were to add a return true portion it stops as soon as that is the case. Would a while loop work better in this case? All help is appreciated! Thanks.
If you get to the end without finding a false case, then you know it's true, right? There aren't any other possibilities.
So, you can just remove the elif entirely, and just add a return True at the end:
def rectangular(List):
n = List
for i in n:
if len(i) != len(n[0]):
return False
return True
As a side note, your elif that has exactly the opposite condition as the if is better written as just else:. That way, there's no chance of you getting the opposite condition wrong, no need for your readers to figure out that it's the opposite, etc.
Also, there's no reason to take the argument as List, then bind the same value to n and use that. Why not just take n in the first place?
def rectangular(n):
for i in n:
if len(i) != len(n[0]):
return False
return True
You can make this more concise, and maybe more Pythonic, by replacing the for statement with a generator expression and the all function:
def rectangular(n):
return all(len(i) == len(n[0]) for i in n)
But really, this isn't much different from what you already have. You should learn how this works, but if you don't understand it yet, there's no problem doing it the more verbose way.
If you want to get clever:
def rectangular(n):
lengths = {len(i) for i in n}
return len(lengths) == 1
We're making a set of all of the lengths. Sets don't have duplicates, so this is a set of all of the distinct lengths. If there's only 1 distinct length, that means all of the lengths are the same.
However, note that for an empty list, this will return False (because there are 0 lengths, not 1), while the other two will return True (because a condition is vacuously true for all values if there are no values to test). I'm not sure which one you want, but it should be relatively easy to figure out how to change whichever one you choose to do the opposite.
Try using the all function with a generator:
def rectangular(lst):
first_len = len(lst[0])
# I used lst[1:] to skip the 0th element
return all(len(x) == first_len for x in lst[1:])
The all function returns True if all elements of an iterable are True, and False otherwise.
It's good that you didn't call your variable list, but capitalized names usually represent a class in Python, so lst is a better choice than List.
NOTE: I made the assumption that "rectangular" means each sublist is the same length. If in reality each sublist should be (say) 2 elements long, just replace first_len with the literal 2 and remove the [1:] on lst[1:]. You may also want to add some exception handling in case you pass a list with only one element.
You can make sure that the lengths of all elements of the list are the same length. Or in Python:
all(map(lambda m: len(m) == len(x[0]), x))
Where x is what you want to check.
The only problem with this solution is that the if the list looks like [ [1,2], [1,[1,2]], 'ab' ], it is still going to return True. So you additionally need to do some type checking.
I'm asked to create a method that returns the number of occurrences of a given item in a list. I know how to write code to find a specific item, but how can I code it to where it counts the number of occurrences of a random item.
For example if I have a list [4, 6 4, 3, 6, 4, 9] and I type something like
s1.count(4), it should return 3 or s1.count(6) should return 2.
I'm not allowed to use and built-in functions though.
In a recent assignment, I was asked to count the number of occurrences that sub string "ou" appeared in a given string, and I coded it
if len(astr) < 2:
return 0
else:
return (astr[:2] == "ou")+ count_pattern(astr[1:])
Would something like this work??
def count(self, item):
num=0
for i in self.s_list:
if i in self.s_list:
num[i] +=1
def __str__(self):
return str(self.s_list)
If this list is already sorted, the "most efficient" method -- in terms of Big-O -- would be to perform a binary search with a count-forward/count-backward if the value was found.
However, for an unsorted list as in the example, then the only way to count the occurrences is to go through each item in turn (or sort it first ;-). Here is some pseudo-code, note that it is simpler than the code presented in the original post (there is no if x in list or count[x]):
set count to 0
for each element in the list:
if the element is what we are looking for:
add one to count
Happy coding.
If I told you to count the number of fours in the following list, how would you do it?
1 4 2 4 3 8 2 1 4 2 4 9 7 4
You would start by remembering no fours yet, and add 1 for each element that equals 4. To traverse a list, you can use a for statement. Given an element of the list el, you can check whether it is four like this:
if el == 4:
# TODO: Add 1 to the counter here
In response to your edit:
You're currently testing if i in self.s_list:, which doesn't make any sense since i is an element of the list and therefore always present in it.
When adding to a number, you simply write num += 1. Brackets are only necessary if you want to access the values of a list or dictionary.
Also, don't forget to return num at the end of the function so that somebody calling it gets the result back.
Actually the most efficient method in terms of Big-O would be O(log n). #pst's method would result in O(log n + s) which could become linear if the array is made up of equal elements.
The way to achieve O(log n) would be to use 2 binary searches (which gives O(2log n), but we discard constants, so it is still O(log n)) that are modified to not have an equality test, therefore making all searches unsuccessful. However, on an unsuccessful search (low > high) we return low.
In the first search, if the middle is greater than your search term, recurse into the higher part of the array, else recurse into the lower part. In the second search, reverse the binary comparison.
The first search yields the right boundary of the equal element and the second search yields the left boundary. Simply subtract to get the amount of occurrences.
Based on algorithm described in Skiena.
This seems like a homework... anyways. Try list.count(item). That should do the job.
Third or fourth element here:
http://docs.python.org/tutorial/datastructures.html
Edit:
try something else like:
bukket = dict()
for elem in astr:
if elem not in bukket.keys():
bukket[elem] = 1
else:
bukket[elem] += 1
You can now get all the elements in the list with dict.keys() as list and the corresponding occurences with dict[key].
So you can test it:
import random
l = []
for i in range(0,200):
l.append(random.randint(0,20))
print l
l.sort()
print l
bukket = dict()
for elem in l:
if elem not in bukket.keys():
bukket[elem] = 1
else:
bukket[elem] += 1
print bukket