Related
I am trying to solve the usaco problem combination lock where you are given a two lock combinations. The locks have a margin of error of +- 2 so if you had a combination lock of 1-3-5, the combination 3-1-7 would still solve it.
You are also given a dial. For example, the dial starts at 1 and ends at the given number. So if the dial was 50, it would start at 1 and end at 50. Since the beginning of the dial is adjacent to the end of the dial, the combination 49-1-3 would also solve the combination lock of 1-3-5.
In this program, you have to output the number of distinct solutions to the two lock combinations. For the record, the combination 3-2-1 and 1-2-3 are considered distinct, but the combination 2-2-2 and 2-2-2 is not.
I have tried creating two functions, one to check whether three numbers match the constraints of the first combination lock and another to check whether three numbers match the constraints of the second combination lock.
a,b,c = 1,2,3
d,e,f = 5,6,7
dial = 50
def check(i,j,k):
i = (i+dial) % dial
j = (j+dial) % dial
k = (k+dial) % dial
if abs(a-i) <= 2 and abs(b-j) <= 2 and abs(c-k) <= 2:
return True
return False
def check1(i,j,k):
i = (i+dial) % dial
j = (j+dial) % dial
k = (k+dial) % dial
if abs(d-i) <= 2 and abs(e-j) <= 2 and abs(f-k) <= 2:
return True
return False
res = []
count = 0
for i in range(1,dial+1):
for j in range(1,dial+1):
for k in range(1,dial+1):
if check(i,j,k):
count += 1
res.append([i,j,k])
if check1(i,j,k):
count += 1
res.append([i,j,k])
print(sorted(res))
print(count)
The dial is 50 and the first combination is 1-2-3 and the second combination is 5-6-7.
The program should output 249 as the count, but it instead outputs 225. I am not really sure why this is happening. I have added the array for display purposes only. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
You're going to a lot of trouble to solve this by brute force.
First of all, your two check routines have identical functionality: just call the same routine for both combinations, giving the correct combination as a second set of parameters.
The critical logic problem is handling the dial wrap-around: you miss picking up the adjacent numbers. Run 49 through your check against a correct value of 1:
# using a=1, i=49
i = (1+50)%50 # i = 1
...
if abs(1-49) <= 2 ... # abs(1-49) is 48. You need it to show up as 2.
Instead, you can check each end of the dial:
a_diff = abs(i-a)
if a_diff <=2 or a_diff >= (dial-2) ...
Another way is to start by making a list of acceptable values:
a_vals = [(a-oops) % dial] for oops in range(-2, 3)]
... but note that you have to change the 0 value to dial. For instance, for a value of 1, you want a list of [49, 50, 1, 2, 3]
With this done, you can check like this:
if i in a_vals and j in b_vals and k in c_vals:
...
If you want to upgrade to the itertools package, you can simply generate all desired combinations:
combo = set(itertools.product(a_list, b_list_c_list) )
Do that for both given combinations and take the union of the two sets. The length of the union is the desired answer.
I see the follow-up isn't obvious -- at least, it's not appearing in the comments.
You have 5*5*5 solutions for each combination; start with 250 as your total.
Compute the sizes of the overlap sets: the numbers in each triple that can serve for each combination. For your given problem, those are [3],[4],[5]
The product of those set sizes is the quantity of overlap: 1*1*1 in this case.
The overlapping solutions got double-counted, so simply subtract the extra from 250, giving the answer of 249.
For example, given 1-2-3 and 49-6-6, you would get sets
{49, 50, 1}
{4}
{4, 5}
The sizes are 3, 1, 2; the product of those numbers is 6, so your answer is 250-6 = 244
Final note: If you're careful with your modular arithmetic, you can directly compute the set sizes without building the sets, making the program very short.
Here is one approach to a semi-brute-force solution:
import itertools
#The following code assumes 0-based combinations,
#represented as tuples of numbers in the range 0 to dial - 1.
#A simple wrapper function can be used to make the
#code apply to 1-based combos.
#The following function finds all combos which open lock with a given combo:
def combos(combo,tol,dial):
valids = []
for p in itertools.product(range(-tol,1+tol),repeat = 3):
valids.append(tuple((x+i)%dial for x,i in zip(combo,p)))
return valids
#The following finds all combos for a given iterable of target combos:
def all_combos(targets,tol,dial):
return set(combo for target in targets for combo in combos(target,tol,dial))
For example, len(all_combos([(0,1,2),(4,5,6)],2,50)) evaluate to 249.
The correct code for what you are trying to do is the following:
dial = 50
a = 1
b = 2
c = 3
d = 5
e = 6
f = 7
def check(i,j,k):
if (abs(a-i) <= 2 or (dial-abs(a-i)) <= 2) and \
(abs(b-j) <= 2 or (dial-abs(b-j)) <= 2) and \
(abs(c-k) <= 2 or (dial-abs(c-k)) <= 2):
return True
return False
def check1(i,j,k):
if (abs(d-i) <= 2 or (dial-abs(d-i)) <= 2) and \
(abs(e-j) <= 2 or (dial-abs(e-j)) <= 2) and \
(abs(f-k) <= 2 or (dial-abs(f-k)) <= 2):
return True
return False
res = []
count = 0
for i in range(1,dial+1):
for j in range(1,dial+1):
for k in range(1,dial+1):
if check(i,j,k):
count += 1
res.append([i,j,k])
elif check1(i,j,k):
count += 1
res.append([i,j,k])
print(sorted(res))
print(count)
And the result is 249, the total combinations are 2*(5**3) = 250, but we have the duplicates: [3, 4, 5]
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)
This is a two part question, I have to make a selection of 2 indexes via a random range of any number of integers in a list. Can't return both if they're both in the same range as well
Selection1 = random.randint(0,100)
Selection2 = random.randint(0,100)
For the sake of this argument, say:
Selection1 = 10
Selection2 = 17
And the list would be like so [25, 50, 75, 100]
Both would return the index of 0 because they fall between 0-25
So both would fall into the first index range, the problem is i'm having some issues trying to fit it into this range (IE: 0-25) which will return this first index (return list[0])
What is the syntax for this type of logic in python?
I'm sure I can figure out how to return different indexes if they fall in the same range, probably just loop reset to the loop but if I can get some advice on that it wouldn't hurt.
I'll give the code i'm working with right now as a guideline. Mostly at the bottom is where i'm struggling.
Code Here
def roulette_selection(decimal_list, chromosome_fitness, population):
percentages = []
for i in range(population):
result = decimal_list[i]/chromosome_fitness
result = result * 100
percentages.append(result)
print(percentages)
range_in_fitness = []
current_percent = 0
for i in range(population):
current_percent = percentages[i] + current_percent
range_in_fitness.append(current_percent)
parent1 = random.randint(0, 100)
parent2 = random.randint(0, 100)
for i in range(population):
if parent1 >= range_in_fitness[i] and parent1<=range_in_fitness[i+1]:
print(parent1, parent2)
print(range_in_fitness)
If your list of ranges is sorted, or it is acceptable to sort it, and is contiguous (no gaps), you can use Python's bisect module to do this in an efficient manner. Example:
>>> l = [25, 50, 75, 100]
>>> import bisect
>>> bisect.bisect(l, 10)
0
>>> bisect.bisect(l, 17)
0
>>> bisect.bisect(l, 55)
2
>>> bisect.bisect(l, 25)
1
Bisect returns the index of where the input number should fall into the list to maintain sort order. Note that this is a little confusing to think about at first; In the case of 55 above, it returns 2 because it should be inserted at index 2 as it falls between the current values at indices 1 and 2. If you give it a number exactly on a range boundary, it will 'fall to the right', as evidenced by the bisect(l,25) example.
The linked documentation includes a set of recipes for searching through sorted lists using bisect.
Given an input val and a list of range delimiters delims, here are two approaches:
# Both methods require range_delims to be sorted
range_delims = [25,50,75,100]
# Simple way
def find_range1(val, delims):
for i,d in enumerate(delims):
if val < d: return i
print find_range1(10, range_delims) # 0
print find_range1(17, range_delims) # 0
print find_range1(32, range_delims) # 1
print find_range1(64, range_delims) # 2
print find_range1(96, range_delims) # 3
print find_range1(101, range_delims) # None
# More explicit, possibly unnecessarily so
import math
def find_range2(val, delims):
lbl = [float('-inf')] + delims
ubl = delims + [float('inf')]
for (i,(lb,ub)) in enumerate(zip(lbl, ubl)):
if lb <= val < ub: return i
print find_range2(10, range_delims) # 0
print find_range2(17, range_delims) # 0
print find_range2(32, range_delims) # 1
print find_range2(64, range_delims) # 2
print find_range2(96, range_delims) # 3
print find_range2(101, range_delims) # 4
The first just compares val to the elements of delims and when it finds that val is less than the element, returns the index of that element.
The second is a little more verbose, generating both upper and lower bounds, and ensuring that val is between them. For interior elements of delims the bounds are list elements, for the 2 exterior elements of delims, the bounds are the element and either + or - infinity.
Note: Both approaches require the input list of delimiters to be sorted. There are ways to deal with different delimiter list formats, but it looks like you have a sorted list of delimiters (or could sort it without issue).
Say you have a defaultdict of usage counts like this:
usage_counts = collections.defaultdict(int)
usage_counts['foo1'] = 3
usage_counts['foo2'] = 3
usage_counts['foo3'] = 1
usage_counts['foo4'] = 1
usage_counts['foo5'] = 56
usage_counts['foo6'] = 65
And you have candidates foo1, foo3, foo4 and foo5 in some list:
candidates = ['foo1', 'foo3', 'foo4', 'foo5']
How can one pick randomly from the pool of least used candidates?
I came up with this function, but I am wondering if there is a better way.
def get_least_used(candidates, usage_counts):
candidate_counts = collections.defaultdict(int)
for candidate in candidates:
candidate_counts[candidate] = usage_counts[candidate]
lowest = min(v for v in candidate_counts.values())
return random.choice([c for c in candidates if candidate_counts[c] == lowest])
random.shuffle(candidates)
min_candidate = min(candidates, key=usage_counts.get)
returns the first "minimal" candidate from the shuffled list of candidates.
You could browse the list only once if you accept to do it explicitely, by generating a list for the canditates having lowest count. If current count if less than old min, you initialize a new list, if equal you add to the list :
def get_least_used(candidates, usage_counts):
mincount = sys.maxint
for c in candidates :
count = usage_counts[c]
if count < mincount:
leastc = [ c ]
mincount = count
elif count == mincount:
leastc.append(c)
return random.choice(leastc)
As you said you were using Python 2.6, I initialize mincount with sys.maxint. Under Python 3.x, you would have to choose a value reasonably great.
As an example my list is:
[25.75443, 26.7803, 25.79099, 24.17642, 24.3526, 22.79056, 20.84866,
19.49222, 18.38086, 18.0358, 16.57819, 15.71255, 14.79059, 13.64154,
13.09409, 12.18347, 11.33447, 10.32184, 9.544922, 8.813385, 8.181152,
6.983734, 6.048035, 5.505096, 4.65799]
and I'm looking for the index of the value closest to 11.5. I've tried other methods such as binary search and bisect_left but they don't work.
I cannot sort this array, because the index of the value will be used on a similar array to fetch the value at that index.
Try the following:
min(range(len(a)), key=lambda i: abs(a[i]-11.5))
For example:
>>> a = [25.75443, 26.7803, 25.79099, 24.17642, 24.3526, 22.79056, 20.84866, 19.49222, 18.38086, 18.0358, 16.57819, 15.71255, 14.79059, 13.64154, 13.09409, 12.18347, 11.33447, 10.32184, 9.544922, 8.813385, 8.181152, 6.983734, 6.048035, 5.505096, 4.65799]
>>> min(range(len(a)), key=lambda i: abs(a[i]-11.5))
16
Or to get the index and the value:
>>> min(enumerate(a), key=lambda x: abs(x[1]-11.5))
(16, 11.33447)
import numpy as np
a = [25.75443, 26.7803, 25.79099, 24.17642, 24.3526, 22.79056, 20.84866, 19.49222, 18.38086, 18.0358, 16.57819, 15.71255, 14.79059, 13.64154, 13.09409, 12.18347, 11.33447, 10.32184, 9.544922, 8.813385, 8.181152, 6.983734, 6.048035, 5.505096, 4.65799]
index = np.argmin(np.abs(np.array(a)-11.5))
a[index] # here is your result
In case a is already an array, the corresponding transformation can be ommitted.
How about: you zip the two lists, then sort the result?
If you can't sort the array, then there is no quick way to find the closest item - you have to iterate over all entries.
There is a workaround but it's quite a bit of work: Write a sort algorithm which sorts the array and (at the same time) updates a second array which tells you where this entry was before the array was sorted.
That way, you can use binary search to look up index of the closest entry and then use this index to look up the original index using the "index array".
[EDIT] Using zip(), this is pretty simple to achieve:
array_to_sort = zip( original_array, range(len(original_array)) )
array_to_sort.sort( key=i:i[0] )
Now you can binary search for the value (using item[0]). item[1] will give you the original index.
Going through all the items is only linear. If you would sort the array that would be worse.
I don't see a problem on keeping an additional deltax (the min difference so far) and idx (the index of that element) and just loop once trough the list.
Keep in mind that if space isn't important you can sort any list without moving the contents by creating a secondary list of the sorted indices.
Also bear in mind that if you are doing this look up just once, then you will just have to traverse every element in the list O(n). (If multiple times then you probably would want to sort for increase efficiency later)
If you are searching a long list a lot of times, then min scales very bad (O(n^2), if you append some of your searches to the search list, I think).
Bisect is your friend. Here's my solution. It scales O(n*log(n)):
class Closest:
"""Assumes *no* redundant entries - all inputs must be unique"""
def __init__(self, numlist=None, firstdistance=0):
if numlist == None:
numlist=[]
self.numindexes = dict((val, n) for n, val in enumerate(numlist))
self.nums = sorted(self.numindexes)
self.firstdistance = firstdistance
def append(self, num):
if num in self.numindexes:
raise ValueError("Cannot append '%s' it is already used" % str(num))
self.numindexes[num] = len(self.nums)
bisect.insort(self.nums, num)
def rank(self, target):
rank = bisect.bisect(self.nums, target)
if rank == 0:
pass
elif len(self.nums) == rank:
rank -= 1
else:
dist1 = target - self.nums[rank - 1]
dist2 = self.nums[rank] - target
if dist1 < dist2:
rank -= 1
return rank
def closest(self, target):
try:
return self.numindexes[self.nums[self.rank(target)]]
except IndexError:
return 0
def distance(self, target):
rank = self.rank(target)
try:
dist = abs(self.nums[rank] - target)
except IndexError:
dist = self.firstdistance
return dist
Use it like this:
a = [25.75443, 26.7803, 25.79099, 24.17642, 24.3526, 22.79056, 20.84866,
19.49222, 18.38086, 18.0358, 16.57819, 15.71255, 14.79059, 13.64154,
13.09409, 12.18347, 1.33447, 10.32184, 9.544922, 8.813385, 8.181152,
6.983734, 6.048035, 5.505096, 4.65799]
targets = [1.0, 100.0, 15.0, 15.6, 8.0]
cl = Closest(a)
for x in targets:
rank = cl.rank(x)
print("Closest to %5.1f : rank=%2i num=%8.5f index=%2i " % (x, rank,
cl.nums[rank], cl.closest(x)))
Will output:
Closest to 1.0 : rank= 0 num= 1.33447 index=16
Closest to 100.0 : rank=25 num=26.78030 index= 1
Closest to 15.0 : rank=12 num=14.79059 index=12
Closest to 15.6 : rank=13 num=15.71255 index=11
Closest to 8.0 : rank= 5 num= 8.18115 index=20
And:
cl.append(99.9)
x = 100.0
rank = cl.rank(x)
print("Closest to %5.1f : rank=%2i num=%8.5f index=%2i " % (x, rank,
cl.nums[rank], cl.closest(x)))
Output:
Closest to 100.0 : rank=25 num=99.90000 index=25