We Keep Coding

Average time to hit a given line on 2D random walk on a unit grid

I am trying to simulate the following problem:
Given a 2D random walk (in a lattice grid) starting from the origin what is the average waiting time to hit the line y=1-x
import numpy as np
from tqdm import tqdm
N=5*10**3
results=[]
for _ in tqdm(range(N)):
current = [0,0]
step=0
while (current[1]+current[0] != 1):
step += 1
a = np.random.randint(0,4)
if (a==0):
current[0] += 1
elif (a==1):
current[0] -= 1
elif (a==2):
current[1] += 1
elif (a==3):
current[1] -= 1
results.append(step)
This code is slow even for N<10**4 I am not sure how to optimize it or change it to properly simulate the problem.

Instead of simulating a bunch of random walks sequentially, lets try simulating multiple paths at the same time and tracking the probabilities of those happening, for instance we start at position 0 with probability 1:
states = {0+0j: 1}
and the possible moves along with their associated probabilities would be something like this:
moves = {1+0j: 0.25, 0+1j: 0.25, -1+0j: 0.25, 0-1j: 0.25}
# moves = {1: 0.5, -1:0.5} # this would basically be equivelent
With this construct we can update to new states by going over the combination of each state and each move and update probabilities accordingly
def simulate_one_step(current_states):
newStates = {}
for cur_pos, prob_of_being_here in current_states.items():
for movement_dist,prob_of_moving_this_way in moves.items():
newStates.setdefault(cur_pos+movement_dist, 0)
newStates[cur_pos+movement_dist] += prob_of_being_here*prob_of_moving_this_way
return newStates
Then we just iterate this popping out all winning states at each step:
for stepIdx in range(1, 100):
states = simulate_one_step(states)
winning_chances = 0
# use set(keys) to make copy so we can delete cases out of states as we go.
for pos, prob in set(states.items()):
# if y = 1-x
if pos.imag == 1 - pos.real:
winning_chances += prob
# we no longer consider this a state that propogated because the path stops here.
del states[pos]
print(f"probability of winning after {stepIdx} moves is: {winning_chances}")
you would also be able to look at states for an idea of the distribution of possible positions, although totalling it in terms of distance from the line simplifies the data. Anyway, the final step would be to average the steps taken by the probability of taking that many steps and see if it converges:
total_average_num_moves += stepIdx * winning_chances
But we might be able to gather more insight by using symbolic variables! (note I'm simplifying this to a 1D problem which I describe how at the bottom)
import sympy
x = sympy.Symbol("x") # will sub in 1/2 later
moves = {
1: x, # assume x is the chances for us to move towards the target
-1: 1-x # and therefore 1-x is the chance of moving away
}
This with the exact code as written above gives us this sequence:
probability of winning after 1 moves is: x
probability of winning after 2 moves is: 0
probability of winning after 3 moves is: x**2*(1 - x)
probability of winning after 4 moves is: 0
probability of winning after 5 moves is: 2*x**3*(1 - x)**2
probability of winning after 6 moves is: 0
probability of winning after 7 moves is: 5*x**4*(1 - x)**3
probability of winning after 8 moves is: 0
probability of winning after 9 moves is: 14*x**5*(1 - x)**4
probability of winning after 10 moves is: 0
probability of winning after 11 moves is: 42*x**6*(1 - x)**5
probability of winning after 12 moves is: 0
probability of winning after 13 moves is: 132*x**7*(1 - x)**6
And if we ask the OEIS what the sequence 1,2,5,14,42,132... means it tells us those are Catalan numbers with the formula of (2n)!/(n!(n+1)!) so we can write a function for the non-zero terms in that series as:
f(n,x) = (2n)! / (n! * (n+1)!) * x^(n+1) * (1-x)^n
or in actual code:
import math
def probability_of_winning_after_2n_plus_1_steps(n, prob_of_moving_forward = 0.5):
return (math.factorial(2*n)/math.factorial(n)/math.factorial(n+1)
* prob_of_moving_forward**(n+1) * (1-prob_of_moving_forward)**n)
which now gives us a relatively instant way of calculating relevant parameters for any length, or more usefully ask wolfram alpha what the average would be (it diverges)
Note that we can simplify this to a 1D problem by considering y-x as one variable: "we start at y-x = 0 and move such that y-x either increases or decreases by 1 each move with equal chance and we are interested when y-x = 1. This means we can consider the 1D case by subbing in z=y-x.

Vectorisation would result in much faster code, approximately ~90K times faster. Here is the function that would return step to hit y=1-x line starting from (0,0) and trajectory generation on the 2D grid with unit steps .
import numpy as np
def _random_walk_2D(sim_steps):
""" Walk on 2D unit steps
return x_sim, y_sim, trajectory, number_of_steps_first_hit to y=1-x """
random_moves_x = np.insert(np.random.choice([1,0,-1], sim_steps), 0, 0)
random_moves_y = np.insert(np.random.choice([1,0,-1], sim_steps), 0, 0)
x_sim = np.cumsum(random_moves_x)
y_sim = np.cumsum(random_moves_y)
trajectory = np.array((x_sim,y_sim)).T
y_hat = 1-x_sim # checking if hit y=1-x
y_hit = y_hat-y_sim
hit_steps = np.where(y_hit == 0)
number_of_steps_first_hit = -1
if hit_steps[0].shape[0] > 0:
number_of_steps_first_hit = hit_steps[0][0]
return x_sim, y_sim, trajectory, number_of_steps_first_hit
if number_of_steps_first_hit is -1 it means trajectory does not hit the line.
A longer simulation and repeating might give the average behaviour, but the following one tells if it does not escape to Infiniti it hits line on average ~84 steps.
sim_steps= 5*10**3 # 5K steps
#Repeat
nrepeat = 40000
hit_step = [_random_walk_2D(sim_steps)[3] for _ in range(nrepeat)]
hit_step = [h for h in hit_step if h > -1]
np.mean(hit_step) # ~84 step
Much longer sim_steps will change the result though.
PS:
Good exercise, hope that this wasn't a homework, if it was homework, please cite this answer if it is used.
Edit
As discussed in the comments current _random_walk_2D works for 8-directions. To restrict it to cardinal direction we could do the following filtering:
cardinal_x_y = [(t[0], t[1]) for t in zip(random_moves_x, random_moves_y)
if np.abs(t[0]) != np.abs(t[1])]
random_moves_x = [t[0] for t in cardinal_x_y]
random_moves_y = [t[1] for t in cardinal_x_y]
though this would slow it down the function a bit but still will be super fast compare to for loop solutions.

Google Kick Start 2020 Round C: Stable Wall. Always WA but can't find the problem

Problem Statement:
Problem
Apollo is playing a game involving polyominos. A polyomino is a shape made by joining together one or more squares edge to edge to form a single connected shape. The game involves combining N polyominos into a single rectangular shape without any holes. Each polyomino is labeled with a unique character from A to Z.
Apollo has finished the game and created a rectangular wall containing R rows and C columns. He took a picture and sent it to his friend Selene. Selene likes pictures of walls, but she likes them even more if they are stable walls. A wall is stable if it can be created by adding polyominos one at a time to the wall so that each polyomino is always supported. A polyomino is supported if each of its squares is either on the ground, or has another square below it.
Apollo would like to check if his wall is stable and if it is, prove that fact to Selene by telling her the order in which he added the polyominos.
Input
The first line of the input gives the number of test cases, T. T test cases follow. Each test case begins with a line containing the two integers R and C. Then, R lines follow, describing the wall from top to bottom. Each line contains a string of C uppercase characters from A to Z, describing that row of the wall.
Output
For each test case, output one line containing Case #x: y, where x is the test case number (starting from 1) and y is a string of N uppercase characters, describing the order in which he built them. If there is more than one such order, output any of them. If the wall is not stable, output -1 instead.
Limits
Time limit: 20 seconds per test set.
Memory limit: 1GB.
1 ≤ T ≤ 100.
1 ≤ R ≤ 30.
1 ≤ C ≤ 30.
No two polyominos will be labeled with the same letter.
The input is guaranteed to be valid according to the rules described in the statement.
Test set 1
1 ≤ N ≤ 5.
Test set 2
1 ≤ N ≤ 26.
Sample
Input
Output
4
4 6
ZOAAMM
ZOAOMM
ZOOOOM
ZZZZOM
4 4
XXOO
XFFO
XFXO
XXXO
5 3
XXX
XPX
XXX
XJX
XXX
3 10
AAABBCCDDE
AABBCCDDEE
AABBCCDDEE
Case #1: ZOAM
Case #2: -1
Case #3: -1
Case #4: EDCBA
In sample case #1, note that ZOMA is another possible answer.
In sample case #2 and sample case #3, the wall is not stable, so the answer is -1.
In sample case #4, the only possible answer is EDCBA.


Syntax pre-check
Show Test Input
My Code:
class Case:
def __init__(self, arr):
self.arr = arr
def solve(self):
n = len(self.arr)
if n == 1:
return ''.join(self.arr[0])
m = len(self.arr[0])
dep = {}
used = set() # to save letters already used
res = []
for i in range(n-1):
for j in range(m):
# each letter depends on the letter below it
if self.arr[i][j] not in dep:
dep[self.arr[i][j]] = set()
# only add dependency besides itself
if self.arr[i+1][j] != self.arr[i][j]:
dep[self.arr[i][j]].add(self.arr[i+1][j])
for j in range(m):
if self.arr[n-1][j] not in dep:
dep[self.arr[n-1][j]] = set()
# always find and desert the letters with all dependencies met
while len(dep) > 0:
# count how many letters are used in this round, if none is used, return -1
count = 0
next_dep = {}
for letter in dep:
if len(dep[letter]) == 0:
used.add(letter)
count += 1
res.append(letter)
else:
all_used = True
for neigh in dep[letter]:
if neigh not in used:
all_used = False
break
if all_used:
used.add(letter)
count += 1
res.append(letter)
else:
next_dep[letter] = dep[letter]
dep = next_dep
if count == 0:
return -1
if count == 0:
return -1
return ''.join(res)
t = int(input())
for i in range(1, t + 1):
R, C = [int(j) for j in input().split()]
arr = []
for j in range(R):
arr.append([c for c in input()])
case = Case(arr)
print("Case #{}: {}".format(i,case.solve()))
My code successfully passes all sample cases I can think of, but still keeps getting WA when submitted. Can anyone spot what is wrong with my solution? Thanks

Amortized O(1) rolling minimum implemented in Python Numba/NumPy

I am trying to implement a rolling minimum that has an amortized O(1) get_min(). The amortized O(1) algorithm comes from the accepted answer in this post
Original function:
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
from numba import njit, prange
def rolling_min_original(data, n):
return pd.Series(data).rolling(n).min().to_numpy()
My attempt to implement the amortized O(1) get_min() algorithm:(this function has decent performance for non-small n)
#njit
def rollin_min(data, n):
"""
brief explanations:
param: stk2: the stack2 in the algorithm, except here it only stores the min stack
param: stk2_top: it starts at n-1, and drops gradually until it hits -1 then it comes backup to n-1
if stk2_top= 0 in the current iteration(it will become -1 at the end):
that means stk2_top is pointing at the bottom element in stk2,
after it drops to -1 from 0, in the next iteration, stk2 will be reassigned to a new array data[i-n+1:i+1],
because we need to include the current index.
at each iteration:
if stk2_top <0: (i.e. we have 0 stuff in stk2(aka stk2_top <0)
- copy the past n items(including the current one) to stk2, so that stk2 has n items now
- pick the top min from stk2(stk2_top = n-1 momentarily)
- move down the pointer by 1 after the operation(n-1 becomes n-2)
else: (i.e. we have j(1<=j<= n-1) stuff in stk2)
- pick the top min from stk2(stk2_top is j-1 momentarily)
- move down the pointer by 1 after the operation(j-1 becomes j-2)
"""
if n >1:
def min_getter_rev(arr1):
arr = arr1[::-1]
result = np.empty(len(arr), dtype = arr1.dtype)
result[0]= local_min = arr[0]
for i in range(1,len(arr)):
if arr[i] < local_min:
local_min = arr[i]
result[i] = local_min
return result
result_min= np.empty(len(data), dtype= data.dtype)
for i in prange(n-1):
result_min[i] =np.nan
stk2 = min_getter_rev(data[:n])
stk2_top = n-2#it is n-2 because the loop starts at n(not n-1)which is the second non nan term
stk1_min = data[n-1]#stk1 needs to be the first item of the stk1
result_min[n-1]= min(stk1_min, stk2[-1])
for i in range(n,len(data)):
if stk2_top >= 0:
if data[i] < stk1_min:
stk1_min= min(data[i], stk1_min)#the stk1 min
result_min[i] = min(stk1_min, stk2[stk2_top])#min of the top element in stk2 and the current element
else:
stk2 = min_getter_rev(data[i-n+1:i+1])
stk2_top= n-1
stk1_min = data[i]
result_min[i]= min(stk1_min, stk2[n-1])
stk2_top -= 1
return result_min
else:
return data
A naive implementation when n is small:
#njit(parallel= True)
def rolling_min_smalln(data, n):
result= np.empty(len(data), dtype= data.dtype)
for i in prange(n-1):
result[i]= np.nan
for i in prange(n-1, len(data)):
result[i]= data[i-n+1: i+1].min()
return result
Some little code for testing
def remove_nan(arr):
return arr[~np.isnan(arr)]
if __name__ == '__main__':
np.random.seed(0)
data_size = 200000
data = np.random.uniform(0,1000, size = data_size)+29000
w_size = 37
r_min_original= rolling_min_original(data, w_size)
rmin1 = rollin_min(data, w_size)
r_min_original = remove_nan(r_min_original)
rmin1 = remove_nan(rmin1)
print(np.array_equal(r_min_original,rmin1))
The function rollin_min() has nearly constant runtime and lower runtime than rolling_min_original() when n is large, which is nice. But it has poor performance when n is low(around n < 37 in my pc, in this range rollin_min() can easily be beaten by a naive implementation rolling_min_smalln()).
I am struggling to find ways to improve rollin_min(), but so far I am stuck, which is why I am seeking for help here.
My questions are the following:
Is the algorithm I am implementing the best out there for rolling/sliding window min/max?
If not, what is the best/better algorithm? If so, how can I further improve the function from the algorithm's point of view?
Besides the algorithm itself, what other ways can further improve the performance of the function rollin_min()?
EDIT: Moved my latest answer to the answer section upon multiple requests

The primary cause of slowness in your code is probably the allocation of a new array in min_getter_rev. You should reuse the same storage throughout.
Then, because you don't really have to implement a queue, you can make more optimizations. For example the size of the two stacks is at most (and usually) n, so you you can keep them in the same array with size n. Grow one from the start and one from the end.
You would notice that there is a very regular pattern - fill the array from start to end in order, recalculate the minimums from the end, generate output as you refill the array, repeat...
This leads to an actually simpler algorithm with a simpler explanation that doesn't refer to stacks at all. Here is an implementation, with comments about how it works. Note that I didn't bother stuffing the start with NaNs:
def rollin_min(data, n):
#allocate the result. Note the number valid windows is len(data)-(n-1)
result = np.empty(len(data)-(n-1), data.dtype)
#every nth position is a "mark"
#every window therefore contains exactly 1 mark
#the minimum in the window is the minimum of:
# the minimum from the window start to the following mark; and
# the minimum from the window end the the preceding (same) mark
#calculate the minimum from every window start index to the next mark
for mark in range(n-1, len(data), n):
v = data[mark]
if (mark < len(result)):
result[mark] = v
for i in range(mark-1, mark-n, -1):
v = min(data[i],v)
if (i < len(result)):
result[i] = v
#for each window, calculate the running total from the preceding mark
# to its end. The first window ends at the first mark
#then combine it with the first distance to get the window minimum
nextMarkPos = 0
for i in range(0,len(result)):
if i == nextMarkPos:
v = data[i+n-1]
nextMarkPos += n
else:
v = min(data[i+n-1],v)
result[i] = min(result[i],v)
return result

Moved this from the Question EDIT section to here upon multiple requests.
Inspired by the simpler implementation given by Matt Timmermans in the answer, I have made a cpu-multicore version of the rolling min. The code is as follows:
#njit(parallel= True)
def rollin_min2(data, n):
"""
1) make a loop that iterates over K sections of n elements; each section is independent so that it can benefit from multicores cpu
2) for each iteration of sections, generate backward local minimum(sec_min2) and forward minimum(sec_min1)
say m=8, len(data)= 23, then we only need the idx= (reversed to 7,6,5,...,1,0 (0 means minimum up until idx= 0)),
1st iter
result[7]= min_until 0,
result[8]= min(min(data[7:9]) and min_until 1),
result[9]= min(min(data[7:10]) and m_til 2)
...
result[14]= min(min(data[7:15]) and m_til 7)
2nd iter
result[15]= min_until 8,
result[16]= min(min(data[15:17]) and m_til 9),
result[17]= min(min(data[15:18]) and m_til 10)
...
result[22]= min(min(data[15:23]) and m_til 15)
"""
ar_len= len(data)
sec_min1= np.empty(ar_len, dtype = data.dtype)
sec_min2= np.empty(ar_len, dtype = data.dtype)
for i in prange(n-1):
sec_min1[i]= np.nan
for sec in prange(ar_len//n):
s2_min= data[n*sec+ n-1]
s1_min= data[n*sec+ n]
for i in range(n-1,-1,-1):
if data[n*sec+i] < s2_min:
s2_min= data[n*sec+i]
sec_min2[n*sec+i]= s2_min
sec_min1[n*sec+ n-1]= sec_min2[n*sec]
for i in range(n-1):
if n*sec+n+i < ar_len:
if data[n*sec+n+i] < s1_min:
s1_min= data[n*sec+n+i]
sec_min1[n*sec+n+i]= min(s1_min, sec_min2[n*sec+i+1])
else:
break
return sec_min1
I have actually spent an hour testing various implementations of rolling min. In my 6C/12T laptop, this multi-core version works best when n is "medium size". When n is at least 30% of the length of the source data though, other implementation starts to outshine. There must be even better ways to improve this function, but at the time of this edit I am not aware of them just yet.

Q: Expected number of coin tosses to get N heads in a row, in Python. My code gives answers that don't match published correct ones, but unsure why

I'm trying to write Python code to see how many coin tosses, on average, are required to get a sequences of N heads in a row.
The thing that I'm puzzled by is that the answers produced by my code don't match ones that are given online, e.g. here (and many other places) https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/364038/expected-number-of-coin-tosses-to-get-five-consecutive-heads
According to that, the expected number of tosses that I should need to get various numbers of heads in a row are: E(1) = 2, E(2) = 6, E(3) = 14, E(4) = 30, E(5) = 62. But I don't get those answers! For example, I get E(3) = 8, instead of 14. The code below runs to give that answer, but you can change n to test for other target numbers of heads in a row.
What is going wrong? Presumably there is some error in the logic of my code, but I confess that I can't figure out what it is.
You can see, run and make modified copies of my code here: https://trinket.io/python/17154b2cbd
Below is the code itself, outside of that runnable trinket.io page. Any help figuring out what's wrong with it would be greatly appreciated!
Many thanks,
Raj
P.S. The closest related question that I could find was this one: Monte-Carlo Simulation of expected tosses for two consecutive heads in python
However, as far as I can see, the code in that question does not actually test for two consecutive heads, but instead tests for a sequence that starts with a head and then at some later, possibly non-consecutive, time gets another head.
# Click here to run and/or modify this code:
# https://trinket.io/python/17154b2cbd
import random
# n is the target number of heads in a row
# Change the value of n, for different target heads-sequences
n = 3
possible_tosses = [ 'h', 't' ]
num_trials = 1000
target_seq = ['h' for i in range(0,n)]
toss_sequence = []
seq_lengths_rec = []
for trial_num in range(0,num_trials):
if (trial_num % 100) == 0:
print 'Trial num', trial_num, 'out of', num_trials
# (The free version of trinket.io uses Python2)
target_reached = 0
toss_num = 0
while target_reached == 0:
toss_num += 1
random.shuffle(possible_tosses)
this_toss = possible_tosses[0]
#print([toss_num, this_toss])
toss_sequence.append(this_toss)
last_n_tosses = toss_sequence[-n:]
#print(last_n_tosses)
if last_n_tosses == target_seq:
#print('Reached target at toss', toss_num)
target_reached = 1
seq_lengths_rec.append(toss_num)
print 'Average', sum(seq_lengths_rec) / len(seq_lengths_rec)

You don't re-initialize toss_sequence for each experiment, so you start every experiment with a pre-existing sequence of heads, having a 1 in 2 chance of hitting the target sequence on the first try of each new experiment.
Initializing toss_sequence inside the outer loop will solve your problem:
import random
# n is the target number of heads in a row
# Change the value of n, for different target heads-sequences
n = 4
possible_tosses = [ 'h', 't' ]
num_trials = 1000
target_seq = ['h' for i in range(0,n)]
seq_lengths_rec = []
for trial_num in range(0,num_trials):
if (trial_num % 100) == 0:
print('Trial num {} out of {}'.format(trial_num, num_trials))
# (The free version of trinket.io uses Python2)
target_reached = 0
toss_num = 0
toss_sequence = []
while target_reached == 0:
toss_num += 1
random.shuffle(possible_tosses)
this_toss = possible_tosses[0]
#print([toss_num, this_toss])
toss_sequence.append(this_toss)
last_n_tosses = toss_sequence[-n:]
#print(last_n_tosses)
if last_n_tosses == target_seq:
#print('Reached target at toss', toss_num)
target_reached = 1
seq_lengths_rec.append(toss_num)
print(sum(seq_lengths_rec) / len(seq_lengths_rec))
You can simplify your code a bit, and make it less error-prone:
import random
# n is the target number of heads in a row
# Change the value of n, for different target heads-sequences
n = 3
possible_tosses = [ 'h', 't' ]
num_trials = 1000
seq_lengths_rec = []
for trial_num in range(0, num_trials):
if (trial_num % 100) == 0:
print('Trial num {} out of {}'.format(trial_num, num_trials))
# (The free version of trinket.io uses Python2)
heads_counter = 0
toss_counter = 0
while heads_counter < n:
toss_counter += 1
this_toss = random.choice(possible_tosses)
if this_toss == 'h':
heads_counter += 1
else:
heads_counter = 0
seq_lengths_rec.append(toss_counter)
print(sum(seq_lengths_rec) / len(seq_lengths_rec))

We cam eliminate one additional loop by running each experiment long enough (ideally infinite) number of times, e.g., each time toss a coin n=1000 times. Now, it is likely that the sequence of 5 heads will appear in each such trial. If it does appear, we can call the trial as an effective trial, otherwise we can reject the trial.
In the end, we can take an average of number of tosses needed w.r.t. the number of effective trials (by LLN it will approximate the expected number of tosses). Consider the following code:
N = 100000 # total number of trials
n = 1000 # long enough sequence of tosses
k = 5 # k heads in a row
ntosses = []
pat = ''.join(['1']*k)
effective_trials = 0
for i in range(N): # num of trials
seq = ''.join(map(str,random.choices(range(2),k=n))) # toss a coin n times (long enough times)
if pat in seq:
ntosses.append(seq.index(pat) + k)
effective_trials += 1
print(effective_trials, sum(ntosses) / effective_trials)
# 100000 62.19919
Notice that the result may not be correct if n is small, since it tries to approximate infinite number of coin tosses (to find expected number of tosses to obtain 5 heads in a row, n=1000 is okay since actual expected value is 62).

Changing this Python program to have function def()

The following Python program flips a coin several times, then reports the longest series of heads and tails. I am trying to convert this program into a program that uses functions so it uses basically less code. I am very new to programming and my teacher requested this of us, but I have no idea how to do it. I know I'm supposed to have the function accept 2 parameters: a string or list, and a character to search for. The function should return, as the value of the function, an integer which is the longest sequence of that character in that string. The function shouldn't accept input or output from the user.
import random
print("This program flips a coin several times, \nthen reports the longest
series of heads and tails")
cointoss = int(input("Number of times to flip the coin: "))
varlist = []
i = 0
varstring = ' '
while i < cointoss:
r = random.choice('HT')
varlist.append(r)
varstring = varstring + r
i += 1
print(varstring)
print(varlist)
print("There's this many heads: ",varstring.count("H"))
print("There's this many tails: ",varstring.count("T"))
print("Processing input...")
i = 0
longest_h = 0
longest_t = 0
inarow = 0
prevIn = 0
while i < cointoss:
print(varlist[i])
if varlist[i] == 'H':
prevIn += 1
if prevIn > longest_h:
longest_h = prevIn
print("",longest_h,"")
inarow = 0
if varlist[i] == 'T':
inarow += 1
if inarow > longest_t:
longest_t = inarow
print("",longest_t,"")
prevIn = 0
i += 1
print ("The longest series of heads is: ",longest_h)
print ("The longest series of tails is: ",longest_t)
If this is asking too much, any explanatory help would be really nice instead. All I've got so far is:
def flip (a, b):
flipValue = random.randint
but it's barely anything.

import random
def Main():
numOfFlips=getFlips()
outcome=flipping(numOfFlips)
print(outcome)
def getFlips():
Flips=int(input("Enter number if flips:\n"))
return Flips
def flipping(numOfFlips):
longHeads=[]
longTails=[]
Tails=0
Heads=0
for flips in range(0,numOfFlips):
flipValue=random.randint(1,2)
print(flipValue)
if flipValue==1:
Tails+=1
longHeads.append(Heads) #recording value of Heads before resetting it
Heads=0
else:
Heads+=1
longTails.append(Tails)
Tails=0
longestHeads=max(longHeads) #chooses the greatest length from both lists
longestTails=max(longTails)
return "Longest heads:\t"+str(longestHeads)+"\nLongest tails:\t"+str(longestTails)
Main()
I did not quite understand how your code worked, so I made the code in functions that works just as well, there will probably be ways of improving my code alone but I have moved the code over to functions

First, you need a function that flips a coin x times. This would be one possible implementation, favoring random.choice over random.randint:
def flip(x):
result = []
for _ in range(x):
result.append(random.choice(("h", "t")))
return result
Of course, you could also pass from what exactly we are supposed to take a choice as a parameter.
Next, you need a function that finds the longest sequence of some value in some list:
def longest_series(some_value, some_list):
current, longest = 0, 0
for r in some_list:
if r == some_value:
current += 1
longest = max(current, longest)
else:
current = 0
return longest
And now you can call these in the right order:
# initialize the random number generator, so we get the same result
random.seed(5)
# toss a coin a hundred times
series = flip(100)
# count heads/tails
headflips = longest_series('h', series)
tailflips = longest_series('t', series)
# print the results
print("The longest series of heads is: " + str(headflips))
print("The longest series of tails is: " + str(tailflips))
Output:
>> The longest series of heads is: 8
>> The longest series of heads is: 5
edit: removed the flip implementation with yield, it made the code weird.

Counting the longest run
Let see what you have asked for
I'm supposed to have the function accept 2 parameters: a string or list,
or, generalizing just a bit, a sequence
and a character
again, we'd speak, generically, of an item
to search for. The function should return, as the value of the
function, an integer which is the longest sequence of that character
in that string.
My implementation of the function you are asking for, complete of doc
string, is
def longest_run(i, s):
'Counts the longest run of item "i" in sequence "s".'
c, m = 0, 0
for el in s:
if el==i:
c += 1
elif c:
m = m if m >= c else c
c = 0
return m
We initialize c (current run) and m (maximum run so far) to zero,
then we loop, looking at every element el of the argument sequence s.
The logic is straightforward but for elif c: whose block is executed at the end of a run (because c is greater than zero and logically True) but not when the previous item (not the current one) was not equal to i. The savings are small but are savings...
Flipping coins (and more...)
How can we simulate flipping n coins? We abstract the problem and recognize that flipping n coins corresponds to choosing from a collection of possible outcomes (for a coin, either head or tail) for n times.
As it happens, the random module of the standard library has the exact answer to this problem
In [52]: random.choices?
Signature: choices(population, weights=None, *, cum_weights=None, k=1)
Docstring:
Return a k sized list of population elements chosen with replacement.
If the relative weights or cumulative weights are not specified,
the selections are made with equal probability.
File: ~/lib/miniconda3/lib/python3.6/random.py
Type: method
Our implementation, aimed at hiding details, could be
def roll(n, l):
'''Rolls "n" times a dice/coin whose face values are listed in "l".
E.g., roll(2, range(1,21)) -> [12, 4] simulates rolling 2 icosahedron dices.
'''
from random import choices
return choices(l, k=n)
Putting this together
def longest_run(i, s):
'Counts the longest run of item "i" in sequence "s".'
c, m = 0, 0
for el in s:
if el==i:
c += 1
elif c:
m = m if m >= c else c
c = 0
return m
def roll(n, l):
'''Rolls "n" times a dice/coin whose face values are listed in "l".
E.g., roll(2, range(1,21)) -> [12, 4] simulates rolling 2 icosahedron dices.
'''
from random import choices
return choices(l, k=n)
N = 100 # n. of flipped coins
h_or_t = ['h', 't']
random_seq_of_h_or_t = flip(N, h_or_t)
max_h = longest_run('h', random_seq_of_h_or_t)
max_t = longest_run('t', random_seq_of_h_or_t)