Python 3: Lists and loops - python

I need help with my code when answering the following question.
An arithmetic progression is a sequence of numbers in which the distance (or difference) between any two successive numbers is the same. This in the sequence 1, 3, 5, 7, ..., the distance is 2 while in the sequence 6, 12, 18, 24, ..., the distance is 6.
Given the positive integer distance and the non-negative integer n, create a list consisting of the arithmetic progression between (and including) 1 and n with a distance of distance. For example, if distance is 2 and n is 8, the list would be [1, 3, 5, 7].
Associate the list with the variable arith_prog.
I updated my progress:
arith_prog = []
for i in range(1, n, distance):
arith_prog.append(n)
total = n + distance
While the suggestions made so far were helpful, I still haven't arrived at the correct solution turingscraft codelab is looking for.

The range function takes up to three arguments; start, stop and step. You want
list(range(1, n, distance))

I'm responding to this as a homework question, since you seem to be indicating that's what it is:
First of all, you never initialize n. What starting value should it
have?
Second, you don't need two loops here - all you need is one.
Third, why are you passing distance to range()? If you pass two
arguments to range() they're treated as a lower and upper bound,
respectively - and distance is probably not a bound.

The problem is where you have arith_prog.append(n). You need to replace the .append(n) with an .append(i) because we are adding the value in that range to list. I just did this homework for 15 minutes ago and that was one of the correct solutions. I made the same error you did.

do something like this
arith_prog = []
n = 5 #this is just for example, you can use anything you like or do an input
distance = 2 #this is also for example, change it to what ever you like
for i in range(1,n,distance):
arith_prog.append(i)
print(arith_prog) #for example this prints out [1,3]

I also encountered this exercise on myprogramminglab. You were very close. Try this:
arith_prog = []
for i in range(1, n + 1, distance):
arith_prog.append(i)
total = n + distance
Hope this helps.

Working through MPL and came across this problem, accepted answer below:
arith_prog=[]
for i in range(1,n+1,distance):
arith_prog.append(i)

Related

Divide and conquer algorith does not work

I am trying to resolve the average of numbers using a "divide and conquer" algorithm but the program that i have written only works when the number of elements is power of two (2,4,8,etc).
The code is written in python and it is as follows
def averageDyC(ini, end, notes):
if (ini == end):
return notes[ini]
mid = int((ini + end) / 2)
x = averageDyC(ini, mid, notes)
y = averageDyC(mid + 1, end, notes)
return float((x + y) / 2)
notes = [1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 2, 4]
average = averageDyC(0, len(notas) - 1, notes)
This code displays 3,75 but the correct average is 3,5
How can I chage this code to allow number of elements different of power of 2?
I don't actually think this technique can work for finding the average of a list.
Let's look at a list of three numbers: [1,2,3]
Clearly, the average is 2.
However, if we divide the list in two, we get [1,2] and [3]. Their respective averages are 1.5 and 3.
If we then add those two together then divide the result by two, we get 2.25.
That's because 1.5 is the average of two numbers, and 3 is the average of one number, so we should really be weighting the 1.5 with 2 and the 3 with 1.
So the correct sum would be (2(1.5) + 1(3)) / 3.
This same problem will occur whenever you try to divide an odd list into two halves and then give the two averages equal weighting.
For that reason, I don't think you can use this approach other than where you have a power of two length list.
EDIT: It's also worth noting that there are many good ways to get the average of a list (see this previous question). I haven't focussed on these as I believe your question is mainly asking about the specific algorithm you've used, not actually finding the average.

Difference between two solutions for a for loop problem?

I am trying to solve a problem in software called MyProgrammingLab that is used for teaching in my python class. The question is:
An arithmetic progression is a sequence of numbers in which the distance (or difference) between any two successive numbers if the same. This in the sequence 1, 3, 5, 7, ..., the distance is 2 while in the sequence 6, 12, 18, 24, ..., the distance is 6.
Given the positive integer distance and the positive integer n, associate the variable sum with the sum of the elements of the arithmetic progression from 1 to n with distance "distance". For example, if distance is 2 and n is 10, then sum would be associated with 25 because 1+3+5+7+9 = 25.
My solution was:
sum = 0
for n in range(1,n+1,distance):
sum += n
If I use 10 for example for n, I am getting the right answer 25 but this solution is not being accepted by the software. It saying that the value of n is being modified.
The accepted answer is:
sum = 0
for i in range(1,n+1,distance):
sum += i
Both solutions are giving the same answers if n = 10 but my first solution is giving an error that the value of n was modified.
My professor said that the mean of n, i, sum should be separate which is not in my solution. To demonstrate he said to print out value of n:
sum = 0
n = 10
distance = 2
for n in range(1,n+1,distance):
print(n)
The result is 1,3,5,7 and 9 (original n value of 10 is being changed)
Using the accepted solution:
sum = 0
n = 10
distance = 2
for i in range(1,n+1,distance):
print(n)
Answer is: 10,10,10,10 (the value of n is not change)
So my question is that if both solutions are getting the right answer, what's the significance of value of n changing or not changing ?
The issue here is that you generally want to avoid re-using variable names. There are a ton of caveats -- for example, in many cases its useful to have multiple functions that use the same name for the input arg to imply similarity on what the inputs across the functions should be -- but it's a good rule of thumb.
With that in mind, take a look at your solution:
sum = 0
for n in range(1,n+1,distance):
sum += n
While the number n has been set as 10 (I assume that it's set earlier in the program with a line of n=10? Or maybe it's already in the namespace because of the "MyProgrammingLab" software?), you are then going on to re-use the name n as the variable being incremented in the for-loop. The software is (sorta) correct in saying the value of n is being modified. With every step the for-loop goes, you are assigning a new value to n. The first run of loop, n is 1. The next run of the loop, n is (1+distance), etc. So n is being repeatedly re-assigned.
This causes confusion for what n represents: does it mean how many numbers are being added together? Or is it the current value in this run of the for-loop? To avoid that, it's better to just use an entirely different value for the variable being incremented as the for-loop processes. The official solution uses i, that's fine. You could also say something like current_value, or whatever you find makes it easier to remember what its meaning in that moment is.

Random contiguous slice of list in Python based on a single random integer

Using a single random number and a list, how would you return a random slice of that list?
For example, given the list [0,1,2] there are seven possibilities of random contiguous slices:
[ ]
[ 0 ]
[ 0, 1 ]
[ 0, 1, 2 ]
[ 1 ]
[ 1, 2]
[ 2 ]
Rather than getting a random starting index and a random end index, there must be a way to generate a single random number and use that one value to figure out both starting index and end/length.
I need it that way, to ensure these 7 possibilities have equal probability.
Simply fix one order in which you would sort all possible slices, then work out a way to turn an index in that list of all slices back into the slice endpoints. For example, the order you used could be described by
The empty slice is before all other slices
Non-empty slices are ordered by their starting point
Slices with the same starting point are ordered by their endpoint
So the index 0 should return the empty list. Indices 1 through n should return [0:1] through [0:n]. Indices n+1 through n+(n-1)=2n-1 would be [1:2] through [1:n]; 2n through n+(n-1)+(n-2)=3n-3 would be [2:3] through [2:n] and so on. You see a pattern here: the last index for a given starting point is of the form n+(n-1)+(n-2)+(n-3)+…+(n-k), where k is the starting index of the sequence. That's an arithmetic series, so that sum is (k+1)(2n-k)/2=(2n+(2n-1)k-k²)/2. If you set that term equal to a given index, and solve that for k, you get some formula involving square roots. You could then use the ceiling function to turn that into an integral value for k corresponding to the last index for that starting point. And once you know k, computing the end point is rather easy.
But the quadratic equation in the solution above makes things really ugly. So you might be better off using some other order. Right now I can't think of a way which would avoid such a quadratic term. The order Douglas used in his answer doesn't avoid square roots, but at least his square root is a bit simpler due to the fact that he sorts by end point first. The order in your question and my answer is called lexicographical order, his would be called reverse lexicographical and is often easier to handle since it doesn't depend on n. But since most people think about normal (forward) lexicographical order first, this answer might be more intuitive to many and might even be the required way for some applications.
Here is a bit of Python code which lists all sequence elements in order, and does the conversion from index i to endpoints [k:m] the way I described above:
from math import ceil, sqrt
n = 3
print("{:3} []".format(0))
for i in range(1, n*(n+1)//2 + 1):
b = 1 - 2*n
c = 2*(i - n) - 1
# solve k^2 + b*k + c = 0
k = int(ceil((- b - sqrt(b*b - 4*c))/2.))
m = k + i - k*(2*n-k+1)//2
print("{:3} [{}:{}]".format(i, k, m))
The - 1 term in c doesn't come from the mathematical formula I presented above. It's more like subtracting 0.5 from each value of i. This ensures that even if the result of sqrt is slightly too large, you won't end up with a k which is too large. So that term accounts for numeric imprecision and should make the whole thing pretty robust.
The term k*(2*n-k+1)//2 is the last index belonging to starting point k-1, so i minus that term is the length of the subsequence under consideration.
You can simplify things further. You can perform some computation outside the loop, which might be important if you have to choose random sequences repeatedly. You can divide b by a factor of 2 and then get rid of that factor in a number of other places. The result could look like this:
from math import ceil, sqrt
n = 3
b = n - 0.5
bbc = b*b + 2*n + 1
print("{:3} []".format(0))
for i in range(1, n*(n+1)//2 + 1):
k = int(ceil(b - sqrt(bbc - 2*i)))
m = k + i - k*(2*n-k+1)//2
print("{:3} [{}:{}]".format(i, k, m))
It is a little strange to give the empty list equal weight with the others. It is more natural for the empty list to be given weight 0 or n+1 times the others, if there are n elements on the list. But if you want it to have equal weight, you can do that.
There are n*(n+1)/2 nonempty contiguous sublists. You can specify these by the end point, from 0 to n-1, and the starting point, from 0 to the endpoint.
Generate a random integer x from 0 to n*(n+1)/2.
If x=0, return the empty list. Otherwise, x is unformly distributed from 1 through n(n+1)/2.
Compute e = floor(sqrt(2*x)-1/2). This takes the values 0, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, etc.
Compute s = (x-1) - e*(e+1)/2. This takes the values 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 2, 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
Return the interval starting at index s and ending at index e.
(s,e) takes the values (0,0),(0,1),(1,1),(0,2),(1,2),(2,2),...
import random
import math
n=10
x = random.randint(0,n*(n+1)/2)
if (x==0):
print(range(n)[0:0]) // empty set
exit()
e = int(math.floor(math.sqrt(2*x)-0.5))
s = int(x-1 - (e*(e+1)/2))
print(range(n)[s:e+1]) // starting at s, ending at e, inclusive
First create all possible slice indexes.
[0:0], [1:1], etc are equivalent, so we include only one of those.
Finally you pick a random index couple, and apply it.
import random
l = [0, 1, 2]
combination_couples = [(0, 0)]
length = len(l)
# Creates all index couples.
for j in range(1, length+1):
for i in range(j):
combination_couples.append((i, j))
print(combination_couples)
rand_tuple = random.sample(combination_couples, 1)[0]
final_slice = l[rand_tuple[0]:rand_tuple[1]]
print(final_slice)
To ensure we got them all:
for i in combination_couples:
print(l[i[0]:i[1]])
Alternatively, with some math...
For a length-3 list there are 0 to 3 possible index numbers, that is n=4. You have 2 of them, that is k=2. First index has to be smaller than second, therefor we need to calculate the combinations as described here.
from math import factorial as f
def total_combinations(n, k=2):
result = 1
for i in range(1, k+1):
result *= n - k + i
result /= f(k)
# We add plus 1 since we included [0:0] as well.
return result + 1
print(total_combinations(n=4)) # Prints 7 as expected.
there must be a way to generate a single random number and use that one value to figure out both starting index and end/length.
It is difficult to say what method is best but if you're only interested in binding single random number to your contiguous slice you can use modulo.
Given a list l and a single random nubmer r you can get your contiguous slice like that:
l[r % len(l) : some_sparkling_transformation(r) % len(l)]
where some_sparkling_transformation(r) is essential. It depents on your needs but since I don't see any special requirements in your question it could be for example:
l[r % len(l) : (2 * r) % len(l)]
The most important thing here is that both left and right edges of the slice are correlated to r. This makes a problem to define such contiguous slices that wont follow any observable pattern. Above example (with 2 * r) produces slices that are always empty lists or follow a pattern of [a : 2 * a].
Let's use some intuition. We know that we want to find a good random representation of the number r in a form of contiguous slice. It cames out that we need to find two numbers: a and b that are respectively left and right edges of the slice. Assuming that r is a good random number (we like it in some way) we can say that a = r % len(l) is a good approach.
Let's now try to find b. The best way to generate another nice random number will be to use random number generator (random or numpy) which supports seeding (both of them). Example with random module:
import random
def contiguous_slice(l, r):
random.seed(r)
a = int(random.uniform(0, len(l)+1))
b = int(random.uniform(0, len(l)+1))
a, b = sorted([a, b])
return l[a:b]
Good luck and have fun!

Rounding Numbers that fall within variable number of ranges in Python

I have an input list of numbers:
lst = [3.253, -11.348, 6.576, 2.145, -11.559, 7.733, 5.825]
I am trying to think of a way to replace each number in a list with a given number if it falls into a range. I want to create multiple ranges based on min and max of input list and a input number that will control how many ranges there is.
Example, if i said i want 3 ranges equally divided between min and max.
numRanges = 3
lstMin = min(lst)
lstMax = max(lst)
step = (lstMax - lstMin) / numRanges
range1 = range(lstMin, lstMin + step)
range2 = range(range1 + step)
range3 = range(range2 + step)
Right away here, is there a way to make the number of ranges be driven by the numRanges variable?
Later i want to take the input list and for example if:
for i in lst:
if i in range1:
finalLst.append(1) #1 comes from range1 and will be growing if more ranges
elif i in range2:
finalLst.append(2) #2 comes from range2 and will be growing if more ranges
else i in range3:
finalLst.append(3) #3 comes from range2 and will be growing if more ranges
The way i see this now it is all "manual" and I am not sure how to make it a little more flexible where i can just specify how many ranges and a list of numbers and let the code do the rest. Thank you for help in advance.
finalLst = [3, 1, 3, 3, 1, 3, 3]
This is easy to do with basic mathematical operations in a list comprehension:
numRanges = 3
lstMin = min(lst)
lstMax = max(lst) + 1e-12 # small value added to avoid floating point rounding issues
step = (lstMax - lstMin) / numRanges
range_numbers = [int((x-lstMin) / step) for x in lst]
This will give an integer for each value in the original list, with 0 indicating that the value falls in the first range, 1 being the second, and so on. It's almost the same as your code, but the numbers start at 0 rather than 1 (you could stick a + 1 in the calculation if you really want 1-indexing).
The small value I've added to lstMax is there for two reasons. The first is to make sure that floating point rounding issues don't make the largest value in the list yield numRange as its range index rather than numRange-1 (indicating the numRangeth range). The other reason is to avoid a division by zero error if the list only contains a single value (possibly repeated multiple times) such that min(lst) and max(lst) return the same thing.
Python has a very nice tool for doing exactly this kind of work called bisect. Lets say your range list is defined as such:
ranges = [-15, -10, -5, 5, 10, 15]
For your input list, you simply call bisect, like so:
lst = [3.253, -11.348, 6.576, 2.145, -11.559, 7.733, 5.825]
results = [ranges[bisect(ranges, element)] for element in lst]
Which results in
>>>[5, -10, 10, 5, -10, 10, 10]
You can then extend this to any arbitrary list of ranges using ranges = range(start,stop,step) in python 2.7 or ranges = list(range(start,stop,step)) in python 3.X
Update
Reread your question, and this is probably closer to what you're looking for (still using bisect):
from numpy import linspace
from bisect import bisect_left
def find_range(numbers, segments):
mx = max(numbers)
mn = mn(numbers)
ranges = linspace(mn, mx, segments)
return [bisect_left(ranges, element)+1 for element in numbers]
>>> find_range(lst, 3)
[3, 2, 3, 3, 1, 3, 3]

Sorting Technique Python

I'm trying to create a sorting technique that sorts a list of numbers. But what it does is that it compares two numbers, the first being the first number in the list, and the other number would be the index of 2k - 1.
2^k - 1 = [1,3,7, 15, 31, 63...]
For example, if I had a list [1, 4, 3, 6, 2, 10, 8, 19]
The length of this list is 8. So the program should find a number in the 2k - 1 list that is less than 8, in this case it will be 7.
So now it will compare the first number in the random list (1) with the 7th number in the same list (19). if it is greater than the second number, it will swap positions.
After this step, it will continue on to 4 and the 7th number after that, but that doesn't exist, so now it should compare with the 3rd number after 4 because 3 is the next number in 2k - 1.
So it should compare 4 with 2 and swap if they are not in the right place. So this should go on and on until I reach 1 in 2k - 1 in which the list will finally be sorted.
I need help getting started on this code.
So far, I've written a small code that makes the 2k - 1 list but thats as far as I've gotten.
a = []
for i in range(10):
a.append(2**(i+1) -1)
print(a)
EXAMPLE:
Consider sorting the sequence V = 17,4,8,2,11,5,14,9,18,12,7,1. The skipping
sequence 1, 3, 7, 15, … yields r=7 as the biggest value which fits, so looking at V, the first sparse subsequence =
17,9, so as we pass along V we produce 9,4,8,2,11,5,14,17,18,12,7,1 after the first swap, and
9,4,8,2,1,5,14,17,18,12,7,11 after using r=7 completely. Using a=3 (the next smaller term in the skipping
sequence), the first sparse subsequence = 9,2,14,12, which when applied to V gives 2,4,8,9,1,5,12,17,18,14,7,11, and the remaining a = 3 sorts give 2,1,8,9,4,5,12,7,18,14,17,11, and then 2,1,5,9,4,8,12,7,11,14,17,18. Finally, with a = 1, we get 1,2,4,5,7,8,9,11,12,14,17,18.
You might wonder, given that at the end we do a sort with no skips, why
this might be any faster than simply doing that final step as the only step at the beginning. Think of it as a comb
going through the sequence -- notice that in the earlier steps we’re using course combs to get distant things in the
right order, using progressively finer combs until at the end our fine-tuning is dealing with a nearly-sorted sequence
needing little adjustment.
p = 0
x = len(V) #finding out the length of V to find indexer in a
for j in a: #for every element in a (1,3,7....)
if x >= j: #if the length is greater than or equal to current checking value
p = j #sets j as p
So that finds what distance it should compare the first number in the list with but now i need to write something that keeps doing that until the distance is out of range so it switches from 3 to 1 and then just checks the smaller distances until the list is sorted.
The sorting algorithm you're describing actually is called Combsort. In fact, the simpler bubblesort is a special case of combsort where the gap is always 1 and doesn't change.
Since you're stuck on how to start this, here's what I recommend:
Implement the bubblesort algorithm first. The logic is simpler and makes it much easier to reason about as you write it.
Once you've done that you have the important algorithmic structure in place and from there it's just a matter of adding gap length calculation into the mix. This means, computing the gap length with your particular formula. You'll then modifying the loop control index and the inner comparison index to use the calculated gap length.
After each iteration of the loop you decrease the gap length(in effect making the comb shorter) by some scaling amount.
The last step would be to experiment with different gap lengths and formulas to see how it affects algorithm efficiency.

Categories

Resources