We Keep Coding

how to find 3 Numbers with Sum closest to a given number

I'm trying to write simple code for that problem. If I get an array and number I need to find the 3 numbers that their sum are close to the number that's given.
I've thought about first to pop out the last digit (the first number)
then I'll have a new array without this digit. So now I look for the second number who needs to be less the sum target. so I take only the small numbers that it's smaller them the second=sum-first number (but I don't know how to choose it.
The last number will be third=sum-first-second
I tried to write code but it's not working and it's very basic
def f(s,target):
s=sorted(s)
print(s)
print(s[0])
closest=s[0]+s[1]+s[2]
m=s[:-1]
print(m)
for i in range(len(s)):
for j in range(len(m)):
if (closest<=target-m[0]) and s[-1] + m[j] == target:
print (m[j])
n = m[:j] + nums[j+1:]
for z in range (len(z)):
if (closest<target-n[z]) and s[-1]+ m[j]+n[z] == target:
print (n[z])
s=[4,2,12,3,4,8,14]
target=20
f(s,target)
if you have idea what to change here. Please let me know
Thank you

Here is my solution I tried to maximize the performance of the code to not repeat any combinations. Let me know if you have any questions.
Good luck.
def find_3(s,target):
to_not_rep=[] #This list will store all combinations without repetation
close_to_0=abs(target - s[0]+s[1]+s[2]) #initile
There_is_one=False #False: don't have a combination equal to the target yet
for s1,first_n in enumerate(s):
for s2,second_n in enumerate(s):
if (s1==s2) : continue #to not take the same index
for s3,third_n in enumerate(s):
if (s1==s3) or (s2==s3) : continue #to not take the same index
val=sorted([first_n,second_n,third_n]) #sorting
if val in to_not_rep :continue #to not repeat the same combination with diffrent positions
to_not_rep.append(val)#adding all the combinations without repetation
sum_=sum(val) #the sum of the three numbers
# Good one
if sum_==target:
print(f"Found a possibility: {val[0]} + {val[1]} + {val[2]} = {target}")
There_is_one = True
if There_is_one is False: #No need if we found combination equal to the target
# close to the target
# We know that (target - sum) should equal to 0 otherwise :
# We are looking for the sum of closet combinations(in abs value) to 0
pos_n=abs(target-sum_)
if pos_n < close_to_0:
closet_one=f"The closet combination to the target is: {val[0]} + {val[1]} + {val[2]} = {sum_} almost {target} "
close_to_0=pos_n
# Print the closet combination to the target in case we did not find a combination equal to the target
if There_is_one is False: print(closet_one)
so we can test it :
s =[4,2,3,8,6,4,12,16,30,20,5]
target=20
find_3(s,target)
#Found a possibility: 4 + 4 + 12 = 20
#Found a possibility: 2 + 6 + 12 = 20
#Found a possibility: 3 + 5 + 12 = 20
another test :
s =[4,2,3,8,6,4,323,23,44]
find_3(s,target)
#The closet combination to the target is: 4 + 6 + 8 = 18 almost 20

This is a simple solution that returns all possibilites.
For your case it completed in 0.002019 secs
from itertools import combinations
import numpy as np
def f(s, target):
dic = {}
for tup in combinations(s, 3):
try:
dic[np.absolute(np.sum(tup) - target)].append(str(tup))
except KeyError:
dic[np.absolute(np.sum(tup) - target)] = [tup]
print(dic[min(dic.keys())])

Use itertools.combinations to get all combinations of your numbers without replacement of a certain length (three in your case). Then take the three-tuple for which the absolute value of the difference of the sum and target is minimal. min can take a key argument to specify the ordering of the iterable passed to the function.
from typing import Sequence, Tuple
def closest_to(seq: Sequence[float], target: float, length: int = 3) -> Tuple[float]:
from itertools import combinations
combs = combinations(seq, length)
diff = lambda x: abs(sum(x) - target)
return min(combs, key=diff)
closest_to([4,2,12,3,4,8,14], 20) # (4, 2, 14)
This is not the fastest or most efficient way to do it, but it's conceptionally simple and short.

Something like this?
import math
num_find = 1448
lst_Results = []
i_Number = num_find
while i_Number > 0:
num_Exp = math.floor(math.log(i_Number) / math.log(2))
lst_Results.append(dict({num_Exp: int(math.pow(2, num_Exp))}))
i_Number = i_Number - math.pow(2, num_Exp)
print(lst_Results)
In a sequence of numbers: for example 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, etc ...
The sum of the previous numbers is never greater than the next. This gives us the possibility of combinations, for example:
The number: 1448, there is no other combination than the sum of the previous numbers: 8 + 32 + 128 + 256 + 1024
Then you find the numbers whose sum is close to the number provided

How to get the correct number of distinct combination locks with a margin or error of +-2?

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]

How to append randomized float values into array within loop

I have a set of randomized float values that are to be arranged into an array at the end of each loop that produces 67 of them, however, there are 64 total loops.
As an example, if I had 4 values per loop and 3 total loops of integers, I would like it to be like this:
values = [[0, 4, 5, 1],[6, 6, 5, 3],[0,0,0,7]]
such that I could identify them as separate arrays, however, I am unsure of the best way to append the values after they are created, but am aware of how to return them. Forgive me as I am unskilled with the logic.
import math
import random
funcs = []
coord = []
pi = math.pi
funcAmt = 0
coordAmt = 0
repeatAmt = 0
coordPass = 0
while funcAmt < 64:
while coordAmt < 67:
coordAmt += 1
uniform = round(random.uniform(-pi, pi), 2)
print("Coord [",coordAmt,"] {",uniform,"} Func:", funcAmt + 1)
if uniform in coord:
repeatAmt += 1
print("Repeat Found!")
coordAmt -= 1
print("Repeat [",repeatAmt,"] Resolved")
pass
else:
coordPass += 1
coord.append(uniform)
#<<<Append Here>>>
funcAmt += 1
coord.clear()
coordAmt = 0
In my given code above, it would be similar to:
func = [
[<67 items>],
...63 more times
]

Your "append here" logic should append the coordinate list and then clear that list for the next iteration of the outer loop:
funcs.append(coord[:]) # The slice notation makes a copy of the list
coord.clear() # or simply coord = []
You should learn to use a for loop. This will simplify your looping: you don't have to maintain the counts yourself. For instance:
for funcAmt in range(64):
for coordAmt in range(67):
...
You might also look up how to make a "list comprehension", which can reduce your process to a single line of code -- a long, involved line, but readable with proper white space.
Does that get you moving?

There are a couple of ways around this. Instead of using while lists and counters, you could just use for loops. Or at least do that for the outer loop, since it looks like you still want to check for repeats. Here's an example using your original dimensions of 3 and 4:
from math import pi
import random
coord_sets = 3
coords = 4
biglist = []
for i in range(coord_sets):
coords_set = []
non_repeating_coords = 0
while non_repeating_coords < coords:
new_coord = round(random.uniform(-1.0*pi, pi), 2)
if new_coord not in coords_set:
coords_set.append(new_coord)
non_repeating_coords += 1
biglist.append(coords_set)
print(biglist)

You can use sets because they don't allow duplicate values:
from math import pi
import random
funcs = []
funcAmt = 0
while funcAmt < 64: # This is the number of loops
myset = set()
while len(myset) < 67: # This is the length of each set
uniform = round(random.uniform(-pi, pi), 2)
myset.add(uniform)
funcs.append(list(myset)) # Append randomly generated set as a list
funcAmt += 1
print(funcs)

maybe you can benefit from arrays in numpy:
import numpy as np
funcs = np.random.uniform(-np.pi, np.pi, [63, 67])
This creates an array of shape (63, 67) from uniform random between -pi to pi.

How to reduce a collection of ranges to a minimal set of ranges [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Union of multiple ranges
(5 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
I'm trying to remove overlapping values from a collection of ranges.
The ranges are represented by a string like this:
499-505 100-115 80-119 113-140 500-550
I want the above to be reduced to two ranges: 80-140 499-550. That covers all the values without overlap.
Currently I have the following code.
cr = "100-115 115-119 113-125 80-114 180-185 500-550 109-120 95-114 200-250".split(" ")
ar = []
br = []
for i in cr:
(left,right) = i.split("-")
ar.append(left);
br.append(right);
inc = 0
for f in br:
i = int(f)
vac = []
jnc = 0
for g in ar:
j = int(g)
if(i >= j):
vac.append(j)
del br[jnc]
jnc += jnc
print vac
inc += inc
I split the array by - and store the range limits in ar and br. I iterate over these limits pairwise and if the i is at least as great as the j, I want to delete the element. But the program doesn't work. I expect it to produce this result: 80-125 500-550 200-250 180-185

For a quick and short solution,
from operator import itemgetter
from itertools import groupby
cr = "499-505 100-115 80-119 113-140 500-550".split(" ")
fullNumbers = []
for i in cr:
a = int(i.split("-")[0])
b = int(i.split("-")[1])
fullNumbers+=range(a,b+1)
# Remove duplicates and sort it
fullNumbers = sorted(list(set(fullNumbers)))
# Taken From http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2154249
def convertToRanges(data):
result = []
for k, g in groupby(enumerate(data), lambda (i,x):i-x):
group = map(itemgetter(1), g)
result.append(str(group[0])+"-"+str(group[-1]))
return result
print convertToRanges(fullNumbers)
#Output: ['80-140', '499-550']
For the given set in your program, output is ['80-125', '180-185', '200-250', '500-550']
Main Possible drawback of this solution: This may not be scalable!

Let me offer another solution that doesn't take time linearly proportional to the sum of the range sizes. Its running time is linearly proportional to the number of ranges.
def reduce(range_text):
parts = range_text.split()
if parts == []:
return ''
ranges = [ tuple(map(int, part.split('-'))) for part in parts ]
ranges.sort()
new_ranges = []
left, right = ranges[0]
for range in ranges[1:]:
next_left, next_right = range
if right + 1 < next_left: # Is the next range to the right?
new_ranges.append((left, right)) # Close the current range.
left, right = range # Start a new range.
else:
right = max(right, next_right) # Extend the current range.
new_ranges.append((left, right)) # Close the last range.
return ' '.join([ '-'.join(map(str, range)) for range in new_ranges ]
This function works by sorting the ranges, then looking at them in order and merging consecutive ranges that intersect.
Examples:
print(reduce('499-505 100-115 80-119 113-140 500-550'))
# => 80-140 499-550
print(reduce('100-115 115-119 113-125 80-114 180-185 500-550 109-120 95-114 200-250'))
# => 80-125 180-185 200-250 500-550

Python interval interesction

My problem is as follows:
having file with list of intervals:
1 5
2 8
9 12
20 30
And a range of
0 200
I would like to do such an intersection that will report the positions [start end] between my intervals inside the given range.
For example:
8 9
12 20
30 200
Beside any ideas how to bite this, would be also nice to read some thoughts on optimization, since as always the input files are going to be huge.

this solution works as long the intervals are ordered by the start point and does not require to create a list as big as the total range.
code
with open("0.txt") as f:
t=[x.rstrip("\n").split("\t") for x in f.readlines()]
intervals=[(int(x[0]),int(x[1])) for x in t]
def find_ints(intervals, mn, mx):
next_start = mn
for x in intervals:
if next_start < x[0]:
yield next_start,x[0]
next_start = x[1]
elif next_start < x[1]:
next_start = x[1]
if next_start < mx:
yield next_start, mx
print list(find_ints(intervals, 0, 200))
output:
(in the case of the example you gave)
[(0, 1), (8, 9), (12, 20), (30, 200)]

Rough algorithm:
create an array of booleans, all set to false seen = [False]*200
Iterate over the input file, for each line start end set seen[start] .. seen[end] to be True
Once done, then you can trivially walk the array to find the unused intervals.
In terms of optimisations, if the list of input ranges is sorted on start number, then you can track the highest seen number and use that to filter ranges as they are processed -
e.g. something like
for (start,end) in input:
if end<=lowest_unseen:
next
if start<lowest_unseen:
start=lowest_unseen
...
which (ignoring the cost of the original sort) should make the whole thing O(n) - you go through the array once to tag seen/unseen and once to output unseens.
Seems I'm feeling nice. Here is the (unoptimised) code, assuming your input file is called input
seen = [False]*200
file = open('input','r')
rows = file.readlines()
for row in rows:
(start,end) = row.split(' ')
print "%s %s" % (start,end)
for x in range( int(start)-1, int(end)-1 ):
seen[x] = True
print seen[0:10]
in_unseen_block=False
start=1
for x in range(1,200):
val=seen[x-1]
if val and not in_unseen_block:
continue
if not val and in_unseen_block:
continue
# Must be at a change point.
if val:
# we have reached the end of the block
print "%s %s" % (start,x)
in_unseen_block = False
else:
# start of new block
start = x
in_unseen_block = True
# Handle end block
if in_unseen_block:
print "%s %s" % (start, 200)
I'm leaving the optimizations as an exercise for the reader.

If you make a note every time that one of your input intervals either opens or closes, you can do what you want by putting together the keys of opens and closes, sort into an ordered set, and you'll be able to essentially think, "okay, let's say that each adjacent pair of numbers forms an interval. Then I can focus all of my logic on these intervals as discrete chunks."
myRange = range(201)
intervals = [(1,5), (2,8), (9,12), (20,30)]
opens = {}
closes = {}
def open(index):
if index not in opens:
opens[index] = 0
opens[index] += 1
def close(index):
if index not in closes:
closes[index] = 0
closes[index] += 1
for start, end in intervals:
if end > start: # Making sure to exclude empty intervals, which can be problematic later
open(start)
close(end)
# Sort all the interval-endpoints that we really need to look at
oset = {0:None, 200:None}
for k in opens.keys():
oset[k] = None
for k in closes.keys():
oset[k] = None
relevant_indices = sorted(oset.keys())
# Find the clear ranges
state = 0
results = []
for i in range(len(relevant_indices) - 1):
start = relevant_indices[i]
end = relevant_indices[i+1]
start_state = state
if start in opens:
start_state += opens[start]
if start in closes:
start_state -= closes[start]
end_state = start_state
if end in opens:
end_state += opens[end]
if end in closes:
end_state -= closes[end]
state = end_state
if start_state == 0:
result_start = start
result_end = end
results.append((result_start, result_end))
for start, end in results:
print(str(start) + " " + str(end))
This outputs:
0 1
8 9
12 20
30 200
The intervals don't need to be sorted.

This question seems to be a duplicate of Merging intervals in Python.
If I understood well the problem, you have a list of intervals (1 5; 2 8; 9 12; 20 30) and a range (0 200), and you want to get the positions outside your intervals, but inside given range. Right?
There's a Python library that can help you on that: python-intervals (also available from PyPI using pip). Disclaimer: I'm the maintainer of that library.
Assuming you import this library as follows:
import intervals as I
It's quite easy to get your answer. Basically, you first want to create a disjunction of intervals based on the ones you provide:
inters = I.closed(1, 5) | I.closed(2, 8) | I.closed(9, 12) | I.closed(20, 30)
Then you compute the complement of these intervals, to get everything that is "outside":
compl = ~inters
Then you create the union with [0, 200], as you want to restrict the points to that interval:
print(compl & I.closed(0, 200))
This results in:
[0,1) | (8,9) | (12,20) | (30,200]