I have a structure with letters A, Z, F, G.
A have a pair with Z, and F with G.
I have for example AAAFFZZGGFFGGAAAAZZZZ. And I need to "curve" structure and that fold will make a pairs
A A A F F Z Z G G F F -
* * * * * * |
Z Z Z Z A A A A G G -
6 pairs in upper example.
But we can create structure like this:
A A A F F Z Z G G -
* * * |
Z Z Z Z A A A A G G F F -
And head is a fragment of structure where pairs cannot exists. For example head 2:
rozmiar. Na przykład head = 2:
F F
A A A F F Z Z G G / \
* * * * |
Z Z Z Z A A A A \ /
G G
I don't know how to find maximal number of pairs that can be created in this structure
To make the matching go faster you can prepare a second string (R) with the letters flipped to their corresponding values. This will allow direct comparisons of paired positions instead of going through an indirection n^2 times:
S = "AAAFFZZGGFFGGAAAAZZZZ"
match = str.maketrans("AZFG","ZAGF")
R = S.translate(match) # flipped matching letters
mid = len(S)//2
maxCount,maxPos = 0,0
for d in range(mid+1): # moving away from middle
for p in {mid+d,mid-d}: # right them left
pairs = sum(a==b for a,b in zip(S[p-1::-1],R[p:])) # match fold
if pairs>maxCount:
maxCount,maxPos = pairs,p # track best so far and fold position
if p <= maxCount: break # stop when impossible to improve
print(maxCount) # 6 matches
print(maxPos) # folding at 11
print(S[:maxPos].rjust(len(S))) # AAAFFZZGGFF
print(S[maxPos:][::-1].rjust(len(S))) # ZZZZAAAAGG
# ** ** **
You could start with testing the folding point in the center, and then fan out (in zig-zag manner) putting the folding point further from the center.
Then for a given folding point, count the allowed pairs. You can use slicing to create the two strips, one in reversed order, and then zip those to get the pairs.
The outer iteration (determining the folding point) can stop when the size of the shortest strip is shorter than the size of the best answer found so far.
Here is a solution, which also returns the actual fold, so it can be printed for verification:
def best_fold(chain):
allowed = set(("AZ","ZA","FG","GF"))
revchain = chain[::-1]
maxnumpairs = 0
fold = chain # This represents "no solution"
n = len(chain)
head = n // 2
for diff in range(n):
head += diff if diff % 2 else -diff
if head - 2 < maxnumpairs or n - head - 2 < maxnumpairs:
break
numpairs = sum(a+b in allowed
for a, b in zip(revchain[-head+2:], chain[head+2:])
)
if numpairs > maxnumpairs:
maxnumpairs = numpairs
fold = chain[:head].rjust(n) + "\n" + revchain[:-head].rjust(n)
return maxnumpairs, fold
Here is how to run it on the example string:
numpairs, fold = best_fold("AAAFFZZGGFFGGAAAAZZZZ")
print(numpairs) # 5
print(fold) # AAAFFZZGGF
# ZZZZAAAAGGF
I would first start with a suitable data type to implement your creasable string. Now first things first, as you mention in your comment we can use list of characters which is better than a string. Then perhaps a tuple of arrays like [[Char],[Char]] would be sufficient.
Also creasing from left or right shouldn't matter so for simplicity we start with;
[ ["A","A","F","F","Z","Z","G","G","F","F","G","G","A","A","A","A","Z","Z","Z","Z"]
, ["A"]
]
then in every step;
Then in every step we can map our list of characters into a a tuple of creases like
chars.map((_,i,a) => [a.slice(i+1),a.slice(0,i+1).reverse()]
Compare and count for pairs.
In order to make an efficient comparison of corresponding items being a valid pair, a simple look up table as below can be used
{ "A": "Z"
, "Z": "A"
, "G": "F"
, "F": "G"
}
Finally we can filter the longest one(s)
An implementation of creases could be like;
function pairs(cs){
var lut = { "A": "Z"
, "Z": "A"
, "G": "F"
, "F": "G"
};
return cs.map(function(_,i,a){
var crs = [a.slice(i+1),a.slice(0,i+1).reverse()]; // console.log(crs) to see all creases)
return crs[0].reduce( (ps,c,j) => lut[c] === crs[1][j] ? ( ps.res.push([c,crs[1][j],j])
, ps.crs ??= crs.concat(i+1)
, ps
)
: ps
, { res: []
, crs: null
}
);
})
.reduce( (r,d) => r.length ? r[r.length-1].res.length > d.res.length ? r :
r[r.length-1].res.length < d.res.length ? [d] : r.concat(d)
: [d]
, []
);
}
var chars = ["A","A","A","F","F","Z","Z","G","G","F","F","G","G","A","A","A","A","Z","Z","Z","Z"],
result = pairs(chars);
console.log(result);
.as-console-wrapper{
max-height: 100% !important;
}
Now this is a straightforward algorithm and possibly not the most efficient one. It can be made more faster by using complex modular arithmetic on testing pairs without using any additional arrays however i believe it would be an overkill and very hard to explain.
I got the following problem for the Google Coding Challenge which happened on 16th August 2020. I tried to solve it but couldn't.
There are N words in a dictionary such that each word is of fixed
length and M consists only of lowercase English letters, that is
('a', 'b', ...,'z') A query word is denoted by Q. The length
of query word is M. These words contain lowercase English letters
but at some places instead of a letter between 'a', 'b', ...,'z'
there is '?'. Refer to the Sample input section to understand this
case. A match count of Q, denoted by match_count(Q) is the
count of words that are in the dictionary and contain the same English
letters(excluding a letter that can be in the position of ?) in the
same position as the letters are there in the query word Q. In other
words, a word in the dictionary can contain any letters at the
position of '?' but the remaining alphabets must match with the
query word.
You are given a query word Q and you are required to compute
match_count.
Input Format
The first line contains two space-separated integers N and M denoting the number of words in the dictionary and length of each word
respectively.
The next N lines contain one word each from the dictionary.
The next line contains an integer Q denoting the number of query words for which you have to compute match_count.
The next Q lines contain one query word each.
Output Format For each query word, print match_count for a specific word in a new line.
Constraints
1 <= N <= 5X10^4
1 <= M <= 7
1 <= Q <= 10^5
So, I got 30 minutes for this question and I could write the following code which is incorrect and hence didn't give the expected output.
def Solve(N, M, Words, Q, Query):
output = []
count = 0
for i in range(Q):
x = Query[i].split('?')
for k in range(N):
if x in Words:
count += 1
else:
pass
output.append(count)
return output
N, M = map(int , input().split())
Words = []
for _ in range(N):
Words.append(input())
Q = int(input())
Query = []
for _ in range(Q):
Query.append(input())
out = Solve(N, M, Words, Q, Query)
for x in out_:
print(x)
Can somebody help me with some pseudocode or algorithm which can solve this problem, please?
I guess my first try would have been to replace the ? with a . in the query, i.e. change ?at to .at, and then use those as regular expressions and match them against all the words in the dictionary, something as simple as this:
import re
for q in queries:
p = re.compile(q.replace("?", "."))
print(sum(1 for w in words if p.match(w)))
However, seeing the input sizes as N up to 5x104 and Q up to 105, this might be too slow, just as any other algorithm comparing all pairs of words and queries.
On the other hand, note that M, the number of letters per word, is constant and rather low. So instead, you could create Mx26 sets of words for all letters in all positions and then get the intersection of those sets.
from collections import defaultdict
from functools import reduce
M = 3
words = ["cat", "map", "bat", "man", "pen"]
queries = ["?at", "ma?", "?a?", "??n"]
sets = defaultdict(set)
for word in words:
for i, c in enumerate(word):
sets[i,c].add(word)
all_words = set(words)
for q in queries:
possible_words = (sets[i,c] for i, c in enumerate(q) if c != "?")
w = reduce(set.intersection, possible_words, all_words)
print(q, len(w), w)
In the worst case (a query that has a non-? letter that is common to most or all words in the dictionary) this may still be slow, but should be much faster in filtering down the words than iterating all the words for each query. (Assuming random letters in both words and queries, the set of words for the first letter will contain N/26 words, the intersection for the first two has N/26² words, etc.)
This could probably be improved a bit by taking the different cases into account, e.g. (a) if the query does not contain any ?, just check whether it is in the set (!) of words without creating all those intersections; (b) if the query is all-?, just return the set of all words; and (c) sort the possible-words-sets by size and start the intersection with the smallest sets first to reduce the size of temporarily created sets.
About time complexity: To be honest, I am not sure what time complexity this algorithm has. With N, Q, and M being the number of words, number of queries, and length of words and queries, respectively, creating the initial sets will have complexity O(N*M). After that, the complexity of the queries obviously depends on the number of non-? in the queries (and thus the number of set intersections to create), and the average size of the sets. For queries with zero, one, or M non-? characters, the query will execute in O(M) (evaluating the situation and then a single set/dict lookup), but for queries with two or more non-?-characters, the first set intersections will have on average complexity O(N/26), which strictly speaking is still O(N). (All following intersections will only have to consider N/26², N/26³ etc. elements and are thus negligible.) I don't know how this compares to The Trie Approach and would be very interested if any of the other answers could elaborate on that.
This question can be done by the help of Trie Data Structures.
First add all words to trie ds.
Then you have to see if the word is present in trie or not, there's a special condition of ' ?' So you have to take care for that condition also, like if the character is ? then simply go to next character of the word.
I think this approach will work, there's a similar Question in Leetcode.
Link : https://leetcode.com/problems/design-add-and-search-words-data-structure/
It should be O(N) time and space approach given M is small and can be considered constant. You might want to look at implementation of Trie here.
Perform the first pass and store the words in Trie DS.
Next for your query, you perform a combination of DFS and BFS in the following order.
If you receive a ?, Perform BFS and add all the children.
For non ?, Perform a DFS and that should point to the existence of a word.
For further optimization, a suffix tree may also be used for storage DS.
You can use a simplified version of trie as the query string has pre-defined length. No need of ends variable in the Trie node
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
typedef struct TrieNode_ {
struct TrieNode_* nxt[26];
} TrieNode;
void addWord(TrieNode* root, string s) {
TrieNode* node = root;
for(int i = 0; i < s.size(); ++i) {
if(node->nxt[s[i] - 'a'] == NULL) {
node->nxt[s[i] - 'a'] = new TrieNode;
}
node = node->nxt[s[i] - 'a'];
}
}
void matchCount(TrieNode* root, string s, int& cnt) {
if(root == NULL) {
return;
}
if(s.empty()) {
++cnt;
return;
}
TrieNode* node = root;
if(s[0] == '?') {
for(int i = 0; i < 26; ++i) {
matchCount(node->nxt[i], s.substr(1), cnt);
}
}
else {
matchCount(node->nxt[s[0] - 'a'], s.substr(1), cnt);
}
}
int main() {
int N, M;
cin >> N >> M;
vector<string> s(N);
TrieNode *root = new TrieNode;
for (int i = 0; i < N; ++i) {
cin >> s[i];
addWord(root, s[i]);
}
int Q;
cin >> Q;
for(int i = 0; i < Q; ++i) {
string queryString;
int cnt = 0;
cin >> queryString;
matchCount(root, queryString, cnt);
cout << cnt << endl;
}
}
Notes: 1. This code doesn't read the input but instead takes params from main method.
2. For large inputs, we could use java 8 streams to parallelize the search process and improve the performance.
import java.util.regex.Matcher;
import java.util.regex.Pattern;
public class WordSearch {
private void matchCount(int N, int M, int Q, String[] words, String[] queries) {
Pattern p = null;
Matcher m = null;
int count = 0;
for (int i=0; i<Q; i++) {
p = Pattern.compile(queries[i].replace('?','.'));
for (int j=0; j<N; j++) {
m = p.matcher(words[j]);
if (m.find()) {
count++;
}
}
System.out.println("For query word '"+ queries[i] + "', the count is: " + count) ;
count=0;
}
System.out.println("\n");
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
WordSearch ws = new WordSearch();
int N = 5; int M=3; int Q=4;
String[] w = new String[] {"cat", "map", "bat", "man", "pen"};
String[] q = new String[] {"?at", "ma?", "?a?", "??n" };
ws.matchCount(N, M, Q, w, q);
w = new String[] {"uqqur", "1xzev", "ydfgz"};
q = new String[] {"?z???", "???i?", "???e?", "???f?", "?z???"};
N=3; M=5; Q=5;
ws.matchCount(N, M, Q, w, q);
}
}
I can think of kind of trie with bfs for lookup approach
class Node:
def __init__(self, letter):
self.letter = letter
self.chidren = {}
#classmethod
def construct(cls):
return cls(letter=None)
def add_word(self, word):
current = self
for letter in word:
if letter not in current.chidren:
node = Node(letter)
current.chidren[letter] = node
else:
node = current.chidren[letter]
current = node
def lookup_word(self, word, m):
def _lookup_next_letter(_letter, _node):
if _letter == '?':
for node in _node.chidren.values():
q.put((node, i))
elif _letter in _node.chidren:
q.put((_node.chidren[_letter], i))
q = SimpleQueue()
count = 0
i = 0
current = self
letter = word[i]
i += 1
_lookup_next_letter(letter, current)
while not q.empty():
current, i = q.get()
if i == m:
count += 1
continue
letter = word[i]
i += 1
_lookup_next_letter(letter, current)
return count
def __eq__(self, other):
return self.letter == other.letter if isinstance(other, Node) else other
def __hash__(self):
return hash(self.letter)
I would create a lookup table for each letter of each word, and then use that table to iterate with. While the lookup table will cost O(NM) memory (or 15 entries in the situation shown), it will allow an easy O(NM) time complexity to be implemented, with a best case O(log N * log M).
The lookup table can be stored in the form of a coordinate plane. Each letter will have an "x" position (the letters index) as well as a "y" position (the words index in the dictionary). This will allow a quick cross reference from the query to look up a letter's position for existence and the word's position for eligibility.
Worst case, this approach has a time complexity O(NM) whereby there must be N iterations, one for each dictionary entry, times M iterations, one for each letter in each entry. In many cases it will skip the lookups though.
A coordinate system is also created, which also has O(NM) spacial complexity.
Unfamiliar with python, so this is written in JavaScript which was as close as I could come language wise. Hopefully this at least serves as an example of a possible solution.
In addition, as an added section, I included a heavily loaded section to use for performance comparisons. This takes about 5 seconds to complete a set with 2000 words, 5000 querys, each at a length of 200.
// Main function running the analysis
function run(dict, qs) {
// Use a coordinate system for tracking the letter and position
var coordinates = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'.split('').reduce((p, c) => (p[c] = {}, p), {});
// Populate the system
for (var i = 0; i < dict.length; i++) {
// Current word in the given dictionary
var dword = dict[i];
// Iterate the letters for tracking
for (var j = 0; j < dword.length; j++) {
// Current letter in our current word
var letter = dword[j];
// Make sure that there is object existence for assignment
coordinates[letter][j] = coordinates[letter][j] || {};
// Note the letter's coordinate by storing its array
// position (i) as well as its letter position (j)
coordinates[letter][j][i] = 1;
}
}
// Lookup the word letter by letter in our coordinate system
function match_count(Q) {
// Create an array which maps from the dictionary indices
// to a truthy value of 1 for tracking successful matches
var availLookup = dict.reduce((p,_,i) => (p[i]=1,p),{});
// Iterate the letters of Q to check against the coordinate system
for (var i = 0; i < Q.length; i++) {
// Current letter in Q
var letter = Q[i];
// Skip '?' characters
if (letter == '?') continue;
// Look up the existence of "points" in our coordinate system for
// the current letter
var points = coordinates[letter];
// If nothing from the dictionary matches in this position,
// then there are no matches anywhere and we return a 0
if (!points || !points[i]) return 0;
// Iterate the availability truth table made earlier
// and look up whether any points in our coordinate system
// are present for the current letter. If they are, then the word
// remains, if not, it is removed from consideration.
for(var n in availLookup){
if(!points[i][n]) delete availLookup[n];
}
}
// Sum the "truthy" 1 values we used earlier to determine the count of
// matched words
return Object.values(availLookup).reduce((x, y) => x + y, 0);
}
var matches = [];
for (var i = 0; i < qs.length; i++) {
matches.push(match_count(qs[i]));
}
return matches;
}
document.querySelector('button').onclick=_=>{
console.clear();
var d1 = [
'cat',
'map',
'bat',
'man',
'pen'
];
var q1 = [
'?at',
'ma?',
'?a?',
'??n'
];
console.log('running...');
console.log(run(d1, q1));
var d2 = [
'uqqur',
'lxzev',
'ydfgz'
];
var q2 = [
'?z???',
'???i?',
'???e?',
'???f?',
'?z???'
];
console.log('running...');
console.log(run(d2, q2));
// Load it up (try this with other versions to compare with efficiency)
var d3 = [];
var q3 = [];
var wordcount = 2000;
var querycount = 5000;
var len = 200;
var alphabet = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'.split('');
for(var i = 0; i < wordcount; i++){
var word = "";
for(var n = 0; n < len; n++){
var rand = (Math.random()*25)|0;
word += alphabet[rand];
}
d3.push(word);
}
for(var i = 0; i < querycount; i++){
var qword = d3[(Math.random()*(wordcount-1))|0];
var query = "";
for(var n = 0; n < len; n++){
var rand = (Math.random()*100)|0;
if(rand > 98){ word += alphabet[(Math.random()*25)|0]; }
else{ query += rand > 75 ? qword[n] : '?'; }
}
q3.push(query);
}
if(document.querySelector('input').checked){
//console.log(d3,q3);
console.log('running...');
console.log(run(d3, q3).reduce((x, y) => x + y, 0) + ' matches');
}
};
<input type=checkbox>Include the ~5 second larger version<br>
<button type=button>run</button>
I don't know Python, but the gist of the naive algorithm looks like this:
#count how many words in Words list match a single query
def DoQuery(Words, OneQuery):
count = 0
#for each word in the Words list
for i in range(Words.size()):
word = Words.at(i)
#compare each letter to the query
match = true
for j in range(word.size()):
wordLetter = word.at(j)
queryLetter = OneQuery.at(j)
#if the letters do not match and are not ?, then skip to next word
if queryLetter != '?' and queryLetter != wordLetter:
match = false
break
#if we did not skip, the words match. Increase the count
if match == true
count = count + 1
#we have now checked all the words, return the count
return count
Of course, this executes the innermost loop around 3.5x10^10 times, which might be too slow. So one would need to read in the dictionary, precompute some short of shortcut data structure, then use the shortcut to find the answers faster.
One shortcut data structure would be to make a map of possible queries to answers, making the query O(1). There are only 4.47*10^9 possible queries, so this is possibly faster.
A similar shortcut data structure would be to make a trie of possible queries to answers, making the query O(M). There are only 4.47*10^9 possible queries, so this is possibly faster. This is more complex code, but may also be easier to understand for some people.
Another shortcut would be to "assume" each query has exactly one non-question-mark, and make a map of possible queries to subset dictionaries. This would mean you'd still have to run the naive query on the subset dictionary, but it would be ~26x smaller, and thus ~26x faster. You'd also have to convert the real query into only having one non-question-mark to lookup the subset dictionary in the map, but that should be easy.
I think we can use trie to solve this problem.
Initially, we will just add all the strings to the trie, and later when we get each query we can just check whether it exists in trie or not.
The only thing different here is the '?' but we can use it as an all char match, so whenever we will detect the '?' in our search string we will look what are all possible words possible from here and then simply do a dfs by searching the word in all possible paths.
Below is the C++ code
class Trie {
public:
bool isEnd;
vector<Trie*> children;
Trie() {
this->isEnd = false;
this->children = vector<Trie*>(26, nullptr);
}
};
Trie* root;
void insert(string& str) {
int n = str.size(), idx, i = 0;
Trie* node = root;
while(i < n) {
idx = str[i++] - 'a';
if (node->children[idx] == nullptr) {
node->children[idx] = new Trie();
}
node = node->children[idx];
}
node->isEnd = true;
}
int getMatches(int i, string& str, Trie* node) {
int idx, n = str.size();
while(i < n) {
if (str[i] >= 'a' && str[i] <='z')
idx = str[i] - 'a';
else {
int res = 0;
for(int j = 0;j<26;j++) {
if (node->children[j] != nullptr)
res += getMatches(i+1, str, node->children[j]);
}
return res;
}
if (node->children[idx] == nullptr) return 0;
node = node->children[idx];
++i;
}
return node->isEnd ? 1 : 0;
}
int main() {
int n, m;
cin>>n>>m;
string str;
root = new Trie();
while(n--) {
cin>>str;
insert(str);
}
int q;
cin>>q;
while(q--) {
cin>>str;
cout<<(str.size() == m ? getMatches(0, str, root) : 0)<<"\n";
}
}
Can I do it with ascii values like:
for charcters in queryword calculate the ascii values sum.
for words in dictionary, calculate ascii of words character wise and check it with ascii sum of query word, like for bat, if ascii of b matches ascii sum of queryword then increment count else calculate ascii of a and check with query ascii if not then add it to ascii of b then check and hence atlast return the count.
How's this approach?
Java Implementation using Trie
import java.util.*;
import java.io.*;
import java.lang.*;
public class Main {
static class TrieNode
{
TrieNode []children = new TrieNode[26];
boolean endOfWord;
TrieNode()
{
this.endOfWord = false;
for (int i = 0; i < 26; i++) {
this.children[i] = null;
}
}
void addWord(String word)
{
// Crawl pointer points the object
// in reference
TrieNode pCrawl = this;
// Traverse the given array of words
for (int i = 0; i < word.length(); i++) {
int index = word.charAt(i) - 'a';
if (pCrawl.children[index]==null)
pCrawl.children[index]
= new TrieNode();
pCrawl = pCrawl.children[index];
}
pCrawl.endOfWord = true;
}
public static int ans2 = 0;
void search(String word, boolean found, String curr_found, int pos)
{
TrieNode pCrawl = this;
if (pos == word.length()) {
if (pCrawl.endOfWord) {
found = true;
ans2++;
}
return;
}
if (word.charAt(pos) == '?') {
// Iterate over every letter and
// proceed further by replacing
// the character in place of '.'
for (int i = 0; i < 26; i++) {
if (pCrawl.children[i] != null) {
pCrawl.children[i].search(word,found,curr_found + (char)('a' + i),pos + 1);
}
}
}
else { // Check if pointer at character
// position is available,
// then proceed
if (pCrawl.children[word.charAt(pos) - 'a'] != null) {
pCrawl.children[word.charAt(pos) - 'a']
.search(word,found,curr_found + word.charAt(pos),pos + 1);
}
}
return;
}
// Utility function for search operation
int searchUtil(String word)
{
TrieNode pCrawl = this;
boolean found = false;
ans2 = 0;
pCrawl.search(word, found,"",0);
return ans2;
}
}
static int searchPattern(String arr[], int N,String str)
{
// Object of the class Trie
TrieNode obj = new TrieNode();
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) {
obj.addWord(arr[i]);
}
// Search pattern
return obj.searchUtil(str);
}
public static void ans(String []arr , int n, int m,String [] query, int q){
for(int i=0;i<q;i++)
System.out.println(searchPattern(arr,n,query[i]));
}
public static void main(String args[]) {
Scanner scn = new Scanner();
int n = scn.nextInt();
int m = scn.nextInt();
String []arr = new String[n];
for(int i=0;i<n;i++){
arr[i] = scn.next();
}
int q = scn.nextInt();
String []query = new String[q];
for(int i=0;i<q;i++){
query[i] = scn.next();
}
ans(arr,n,m,query,q);
}
}
This is brute but Trie is a better implemntaion.
"""
Input: db whic is a list of words
chk : str to find
"""
def check(db,chk):
seen = collections.defaultdict(list)
for i in db:
for j in range(len(i)):
temp = i[:j] + "?" + i[j+1:]
seen[temp].append(i)
return len(seen[chk])
print check(["cat","bat"], "?at")
Sounds like it was a coding challenge about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space%E2%80%93time_tradeoff
Depending on parameters N,M,Q as well as data and query distribution, the "best" algorithm will be different. A simple example, given the query ??? you know the answer — the length of the dictionary — without any computation 😸
In the general case, most likely, it pays to create a search index in advance (that is while reading the dictionary, before any query is seen).
I'd go with this: number the input 0 cat; 1 map; ...
Then build a search index per letter position:
index = [
{"c": 0b00001, "m": 0b00010, ...} # first query letter
{"a": 0b01111, "e": 0x10000} # second query letter
]
Prepare all = 0x11111 (all bits set) as "matches everything".
Then query lookup: ?a? ⇒ all & index[1]["a"] & all. †
Afterwards you'll need to count number of bits set in the result.
The time complexity of single query is therefore O(N) * (M + O(1)) ‡, which is a decent trade-off.
The entire batch is O(N*M*Q).
Python (as well as es2020) supports native arbitrary precision integers, which can be elegantly used for bitmaps, as well as native dictionaries, use them :) However if the data is sparse, an adaptive or compressed bitmap such as https://pypi.org/project/roaringbitmap may perform better.
† In practice ... & index[1].get("a", 0) & ... in case you hit a blank.
‡ Python data structure time complexity is reported O(...) amortised worst case while in CS O(...) worst case is usually considered. While the difference is subtle, it can bite even experienced developers, see e.g. https://bugs.python.org/issue13703
One approach could be to use Python's fnmatch module (for every pattern sum the matches in words):
import fnmatch
names = ['uqqur', 'lxzev', 'ydfgs']
patterns = ['?z???', '???i?', '???e?', '???f?', '?z???']
[sum(fnmatch.fnmatch(name, pattern) for name in names) for pattern in patterns]
# [0, 0, 1, 0, 0]
I have been given a set S, of n integers, and have to print the size of a maximal subset S' of S where the sum of any 2 numbers in S' are not evenly divisible by k.
Input Format
The first line contains 2 space-separated integers, n and k, respectively.
The second line contains n space-separated integers describing the unique values of the set.
My Code :
import sys
n,k = raw_input().strip().split(' ')
n,k = [int(n),int(k)]
a = map(int,raw_input().strip().split(' '))
count = 0
for i in range(len(a)):
for j in range(len(a)):
if (a[i]+a[j])%k != 0:
count = count+1
print count
Input:
4 3
1 7 2 4
Expected Output:
3
My Output:
10
What am i doing wrong? Anyone?
You can solve it in O(n) time using the following approach:
L = [0]*k
for x in a:
L[x % k] += 1
res = 0
for i in range(k//2+1):
if i == 0 or k == i*2:
res += bool(L[i])
else:
res += max(L[i], L[k-i])
print(res)
Yes O(n) solution for this problem is very much possible. Like planetp rightly pointed out its pretty much the same solution I have coded in java. Added comments for better understanding.
import java.io.; import java.util.;
public class Solution {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Scanner in = new Scanner(System.in);
int n=in.nextInt();
int k=in.nextInt();
int [] arr = new int[k];
Arrays.fill(arr, 0);
Map<Integer,Integer> mp=new HashMap<>();
Storing the values in a map considering there are no duplicates. You can store them in array list if there are duplicates. Only then you have different results.
for(int i=0;i
int res=0;
for(int i=0;i<=(k/2);i++)
{
if(i==0 || k==i*2)
{
if(arr[i]!=0)
res+=1;
}
If the no. is divisible by k we can have only one and if the no is exactly half of k then we can have only 1. Rational if a & b are divisble by k then a+b is also divisible by k. Similarly if c%k=k/2 then if we have more than one such no. their combination is divisible by k. Hence we restrict them to 1 value each.
else
{
int p=arr[i];
int q=arr[k-i];
if(p>=q)
res+=p;
else
res+=q;
}
This is simple figure out which is more from a list of 0 to k/2 in the list if a[x]>a[k-x] get the values which is greater. i.e. if we have k=4 and we have no. 1,3,5,7,9,13,17. Then a[1]=4 and a[3]=2 thus pick a[1] because 1,5,13,17 can be kept together.
}
System.out.println(res);
}
}
# given k, n and a as per your input.
# Will return 0 directly if n == 1
def maxsize(k, n, a):
import itertools
while n > 1:
sets = itertools.combinations(a, n)
for set_ in sets:
if all((u+v) % k for (u, v) in itertools.combinations(set_, 2)):
return n
n -= 1
return 0
Java solution
public class Solution {
static PrintStream out = System.out;
public static void main(String[] args) {
/* Enter your code here. Read input from STDIN. Print output to STDOUT. Your class should be named Solution. */
Scanner in = new Scanner (System.in);
int n = in.nextInt();
int k = in.nextInt();
int[] A = new int[n];
for(int i=0;i<n;i++){
A[i]=in.nextInt();
}
int[] R = new int[k];
for(int i=0;i<n;i++)
R[A[i] % k]+=1;
int res=0;
for(int i=0;i<k/2+1;i++){
if(i==0 || k==i*2)
res+= (R[i]!=0)?1:0;
else
res+= Math.max(R[i], R[k-i]);
}
out.println(res);
}
}
Recently I'm doing a project which a function is heavily called, so I want to using C code in this part. I'm a newbie to ctypes, please forgive me if my question is very easy.
Here I have a 2d list in python:
L = [[1],[1,2],[1,2,3]]
I want call a function in C module with it as parameter. Since there is no 2d-list in C I want to convert it to an array of *int.
I don't want an normal 2D C array because each length of entry is different.
What I've done in python part is:
L = [[1],[1,2],[1,2,3]]
entrylist = []
for entry in L:
c_entry = (ctypes.c_int * len(entry))(*entry) # c_entry is the C array version of entry
entrylist.append(c_entry)
c_L = (ctypes.POINTER(ctypes.c_int) * len(entrylist))(*entrylist) # create an array of integer pointer, then initial it
c_L is an "LP_c_long_Array_14 object", when len(L) == 14.
also, I can print it out perfectly by using
for i in range(len(L)):
for j in range(len(L[i])):
print(L[i][j], end = ' ')
print()
On the other hand, in C code, I define my function as:
int fun(int** c_L)
int fun( (int * c_L)[])
neither works. ctypes throws a "Don't know how to convert parameter 1" Error.
So, please tell me how to make it work? Thank you very much.
You are almost there, you just need some tweaks.
import ctypes as C
lib = C.CDLL("libfoo.so")
l = [[1],[1,2],[1,2,3]]
entrylist = []
lengths = []
for sub_l in l:
entrylist.append((C.c_int*len(sub_l))(*sub_l))
lengths.append(C.c_int(len(sub_l)))
c_l = (C.POINTER(C.c_int) * len(entrylist))(*entrylist)
c_lengths = ( C.c_int * len(l))(*lengths)
lib.test(c_l, c_lengths, len(l)) #here we also pass the sizes of all the arrays
where the C side of things looks like:
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int test(int **ar,int *lens,int n_ar){
int ii,jj,kk;
for (ii=0;ii<n_ar;ii++){
for (jj=0;jj<lens[ii];jj++){
printf("%d\t",ar[ii][jj]);
}
printf("\n");
fflush(stdout);
}
return 0;
}
If this doesn't work, then it may be of use to explicitly cast all your arguments to the c library function.
I think you can avoid int** pointer by packing all you data into one list:
[1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3]
and pass another list that represents the start of every sub list such as:
[0, 1, 3, 6]
so the first sub list starts at 0, ends at 1, the second sub list starts at 1, ends at 3, and the third sub list starts at 3 ends at 6.
convert this two list to int array and pass it to the c function with the length of the second array.
Here is an example:
#include <stdio.h>
void sum_list(int * data, int * positions, int length)
{
int i, j, s;
for(i=0;i<length-1;i++)
{
s = 0;
for(j=positions[i];j<positions[i+1];j++)
{
s += data[j];
}
printf("%d\n", s);
}
}
and the python code:
L = [[1],[1,2],[1,2,3]]
data = []
positions = [0]
for sub in L:
data.extend(sub)
positions.append(len(data))
from ctypes import *
lib = CDLL("./sum_list.out")
c_data = (c_int * len(data))(*data)
c_positions = (c_int * len(positions))(*positions)
lib.sum_list(c_data, c_positions, len(c_positions))