Why do these two implementations of expmod differ for large values? - python

I've written out a couple of functions for doing expmod, that is, (x ** y) % n. These are both standard functions, I've checked and re-checked both but can't find any silly errors.
Here's the recursive one:
def expmod(x,y,m):
if y == 0: return 1
if y % 2 == 0:
return square(expmod(x,y/2,m)) % m # def square(x): return x*x
else:
return (x * expmod(x,y-1,m)) % m
...and here's the non-recursive one:
def non_recursive_expmod(x,y,m):
x = x % m
y = y % m
result = 1
while y > 0:
if(y%2 == 1):
result = (result * x) % m
x = (x*x) % m
y = y/2
return result
They agree for small values:
>>> expmod(123,456,789) - non_recursive_expmod(123,456,789)
0
...but don't for larger ones:
>>> expmod(24354321,5735275,654) - non_recursive_expmod(24354321,5735275,654)
-396L
What's going on?

Your function non_recursive_expmod has some suspicious steps in it: Remove the %m for x and y at the beginning. Both are not needed.
Additionally make sure that the division of y is an integer division by using y = y // 2.
In total the function should look like this:
def non_recursive_expmod(x, y, m):
result = 1
while y > 0:
if y % 2 == 1:
result = (result * x) % m
x = (x * x) % m
y = y // 2
return result

Non recursive does not decrease y in case it is odd, and even part needs else in case y == 1

Related

What is meaning of (x,y//2) in python programming

Here is the code
def power(x, y):
if y == 0:
return 1
if y % 2 == 0:
return power(x, y // 2) * power(x, y // 2)
return x * power(x, y // 2) * power(x, y // 2)
def order(x):
# Variable to store of the number
n = 0
while (x != 0):
n = n + 1
x = x // 10
return n
def isArmstrong(x):
n = order(x)
temp = x
sum1 = 0
while (temp != 0):
r = temp % 10
sum1 = sum1 + power(r, n)
temp = temp // 10
return (sum1 == x)
x = 153
print(isArmstrong(x))
in function power(x,y) the return statement
return power(x, y // 2) * power(x, y // 2)
what does (x,y//2) mean in this code , I am not able to dry run it.
// means floor division, i.e. it rounds the result down to the nearest whole number
10 // 3 = 3
15 // 7 = 2
The statement will recursively call the power() function again. Here it will first pass x as first argument and y // 2 (// does floor division, it removes the fraction part of fractional/float numbers) as the second argument. Like 5 / 2 = 2.5 BUT 5 // 2 = 2.
// is the floor division operator. The floor division is a division in which only the whole part of the result is given and the fractional part is truncated.
Normal division-
5/2 = 2.5
Floor division-
5//2 = 2

Karatsuba Multiplication Implementation

I recently implemented Karatsuba Multiplication as a personal exercise. I wrote my implementation in Python following the pseudocode provided on wikipedia:
procedure karatsuba(num1, num2)
if (num1 < 10) or (num2 < 10)
return num1*num2
/* calculates the size of the numbers */
m = max(size_base10(num1), size_base10(num2))
m2 = m/2
/* split the digit sequences about the middle */
high1, low1 = split_at(num1, m2)
high2, low2 = split_at(num2, m2)
/* 3 calls made to numbers approximately half the size */
z0 = karatsuba(low1, low2)
z1 = karatsuba((low1+high1), (low2+high2))
z2 = karatsuba(high1, high2)
return (z2*10^(2*m2)) + ((z1-z2-z0)*10^(m2)) + (z0)
Here is my python implementation:
def karat(x,y):
if len(str(x)) == 1 or len(str(y)) == 1:
return x*y
else:
m = max(len(str(x)),len(str(y)))
m2 = m / 2
a = x / 10**(m2)
b = x % 10**(m2)
c = y / 10**(m2)
d = y % 10**(m2)
z0 = karat(b,d)
z1 = karat((a+b),(c+d))
z2 = karat(a,c)
return (z2 * 10**(2*m2)) + ((z1 - z2 - z0) * 10**(m2)) + (z0)
My question is about final merge of z0, z1, and z2.
z2 is shifted m digits over (where m is the length of the largest of two multiplied numbers).
Instead of simply multiplying by 10^(m), the algorithm uses *10^(2*m2)* where m2 is m/2.
I tried replacing 2*m2 with m and got incorrect results. I think this has to do with how the numbers are split but I'm not really sure what's going on.
Depending on your Python version you must or should replace / with the explicit floor division operator // which is the appropriate here; it rounds down ensuring that your exponents remain entire numbers.
This is essential for example when splitting your operands in high digits (by floor dividing by 10^m2) and low digits (by taking the residual modulo 10^m2) this would not work with a fractional m2.
It also explains why 2 * (x // 2) does not necessarily equal x but rather x-1 if x is odd.
In the last line of the algorithm 2 m2 is correct because what you are doing is giving a and c their zeros back.
If you are on an older Python version your code may still work because / used to be interpreted as floor division when applied to integers.
def karat(x,y):
if len(str(x)) == 1 or len(str(y)) == 1:
return x*y
else:
m = max(len(str(x)),len(str(y)))
m2 = m // 2
a = x // 10**(m2)
b = x % 10**(m2)
c = y // 10**(m2)
d = y % 10**(m2)
z0 = karat(b,d)
z1 = karat((a+b),(c+d))
z2 = karat(a,c)
return (z2 * 10**(2*m2)) + ((z1 - z2 - z0) * 10**(m2)) + (z0)
i have implemented the same idea but i have restricted to the 2 digit multiplication as the base case because i can reduce float multiplication in function
import math
def multiply(x,y):
sx= str(x)
sy= str(y)
nx= len(sx)
ny= len(sy)
if ny<=2 or nx<=2:
r = int(x)*int(y)
return r
n = nx
if nx>ny:
sy = sy.rjust(nx,"0")
n=nx
elif ny>nx:
sx = sx.rjust(ny,"0")
n=ny
m = n%2
offset = 0
if m != 0:
n+=1
offset = 1
floor = int(math.floor(n/2)) - offset
a = sx[0:floor]
b = sx[floor:n]
c = sy[0:floor]
d = sy[floor:n]
print(a,b,c,d)
ac = multiply(a,c)
bd = multiply(b,d)
ad_bc = multiply((int(a)+int(b)),(int(c)+int(d)))-ac-bd
r = ((10**n)*ac)+((10**(n/2))*ad_bc)+bd
return r
print(multiply(4,5))
print(multiply(4,58779))
print(int(multiply(4872139874092183,5977098709879)))
print(int(4872139874092183*5977098709879))
print(int(multiply(4872349085723098457,597340985723098475)))
print(int(4872349085723098457*597340985723098475))
print(int(multiply(4908347590823749,97098709870985)))
print(int(4908347590823749*97098709870985))
I tried replacing 2*m2 with m and got incorrect results. I think this has to do with how the numbers are split but I'm not really sure what's going on.
This goes to the heart of how you split your numbers for the recursive calls.
If you choose to use an odd n then n//2 will be rounded down to the nearest whole number, meaning your second number will have a length of floor(n/2) and you would have to pad the first with the floor(n/2) zeros.
Since we use the same n for both numbers this applies to both. This means if you stick to the original odd n for the final step, you would be padding the first term with the original n zeros instead of the number of zeros that would result from the combination of the first padding plus the second padding (floor(n/2)*2)
You have used m2 as a float. It needs to be an integer.
def karat(x,y):
if len(str(x)) == 1 or len(str(y)) == 1:
return x*y
else:
m = max(len(str(x)),len(str(y)))
m2 = m // 2
a = x // 10**(m2)
b = x % 10**(m2)
c = y // 10**(m2)
d = y % 10**(m2)
z0 = karat(b,d)
z1 = karat((a+b),(c+d))
z2 = karat(a,c)
return (z2 * 10**(2*m2)) + ((z1 - z2 - z0) * 10**(m2)) + (z0)
Your code and logic is correct, there is just issue with your base case. Since according to the algo a,b,c,d are 2 digit numbers you should modify your base case and keep the length of x and y equal to 2 in the base case.
I think it is better if you used math.log10 function to calculate the number of digits instead of converting to string, something like this :
def number_of_digits(number):
"""
Used log10 to find no. of digits
"""
if number > 0:
return int(math.log10(number)) + 1
elif number == 0:
return 1
else:
return int(math.log10(-number)) + 1 # Don't count the '-'
The base case if len(str(x)) == 1 or len(str(y)) == 1: return x*y is incorrect. If you run either of the python code given in answers against large integers, the karat() function will not produce the correct answer.
To make the code correct, you need to change the base case to if len(str(x) < 3 or len(str(y)) < 3: return x*y.
Below is a modified implementation of Paul Panzer's answer that correctly multiplies large integers.
def karat(x,y):
if len(str(x)) < 3 or len(str(y)) < 3:
return x*y
n = max(len(str(x)),len(str(y))) // 2
a = x // 10**(n)
b = x % 10**(n)
c = y // 10**(n)
d = y % 10**(n)
z0 = karat(b,d)
z1 = karat((a+b), (c+d))
z2 = karat(a,c)
return ((10**(2*n))*z2)+((10**n)*(z1-z2-z0))+z0

Get logarithm without math log python

I need to generate the result of the log.
I know that:
Then I made my code:
def log(x, base):
log_b = 2
while x != int(round(base ** log_b)):
log_b += 0.01
print(log_b)
return int(round(log_b))
But it works very slowly. Can I use other method?
One other thing you might want to consider is using the Taylor series of the natural logarithm:
Once you've approximated the natural log using a number of terms from this series, it is easy to change base:
EDIT: Here's another useful identity:
Using this, we could write something along the lines of
def ln(x):
n = 1000.0
return n * ((x ** (1/n)) - 1)
Testing it out, we have:
print ln(math.e), math.log(math.e)
print ln(0.5), math.log(0.5)
print ln(100.0), math.log(100.0)
Output:
1.00050016671 1.0
-0.692907009547 -0.69314718056
4.6157902784 4.60517018599
This shows our value compared to the math.log value (separated by a space) and, as you can see, we're pretty accurate. You'll probably start to lose some accuracy as you get very large (e.g. ln(10000) will be about 0.4 greater than it should), but you can always increase n if you need to.
I used recursion:
def myLog(x, b):
if x < b:
return 0
return 1 + myLog(x/b, b)
You can use binary search for that.
You can get more information on binary search on Wikipedia:
Binary search;
Doubling search.
# search for log_base(x) in range [mn, mx] using binary search
def log_in_range(x, base, mn, mx):
if (mn <= mx):
med = (mn + mx) / 2.0
y = base ** med
if abs(y - x) < 0.00001: # or if math.isclose(x, y): https://docs.python.org/3/library/math.html#math.isclose
return med
elif x > y:
return log_in_range(x, base, med, mx)
elif x < y:
return log_in_range(x, base, mn, med)
return 0
# determine range using doubling search, then call log_in_range
def log(x, base):
if base <= 0 or base == 1 or x <= 0:
raise ValueError('math domain error')
elif 0 < base < 1:
return -log(x, 1/base)
elif 1 <= x and 1 < base:
mx = 1
y = base
while y < x:
y *= y
mx *= 2
return log_in_range(x, base, 0, mx)
elif 0 <= x < 1 and 1 < base:
mn = -1
y = 1/base
while y > x:
y = y ** 0.5
mn *= 2
return log_in_range(x, base, mn, 0)
import math
try :
number_and_base = input() ##input the values for number and base
##assigning those values for the variables
number = int(number_and_base.split()[0])
base = int(number_and_base.split()[1])
##exception handling
except ValueError :
print ("Invalid input...!")
##program
else:
n1 = 1 ##taking an initial value to iterate
while(number >= int(round(base**(n1),0))) : ##finding the most similer value to the number given, varying the vlaue of the power
n1 += 0.000001 ##increasing the initial value bit by bit
n2 = n1-0.0001
if abs(number-base**(n2)) < abs(base**(n1)-number) :
n = n2
else :
n = n1
print(math.floor(n)) ##output value
Comparison:-
This is how your log works:-
def your_log(x, base):
log_b = 2
while x != int(round(base ** log_b)):
log_b += 0.01
#print log_b
return int(round(log_b))
print your_log(16, 2)
# %timeit %run your_log.py
# 1000 loops, best of 3: 579 us per loop
This is my proposed improvement:-
def my_log(x, base):
count = -1
while x > 0:
x /= base
count += 1
if x == 0:
return count
print my_log(16, 2)
# %timeit %run my_log.py
# 1000 loops, best of 3: 321 us per loop
which is faster, using the %timeit magic function in iPython to time the execution for comparison.
It will be long process since it goes in a loop. Therefore,
def log(x,base):
result = ln(x)/ln(base)
return result
def ln(x):
val = x
return 99999999*(x**(1/99999999)-1)
log(8,3)
Values are nearly equal but not exact.

passing a value calculated from one function to another

I have been doing python programming for my project and I have just started. This might be another trivial question. I have this code in which I need to use a value calculated in the function poly_root() which is x. That value should be used as u in the bezier() function. After poly_root() function it should go to bezier() function with its calculated value. I dont know if I am doing it in the correct way. There is no error but it doesnt print t from the bezier() function. Thank you very much.
import copy
import math
poly = [[-0.8,3], [0.75,2], [-0.75,1], [0.1,0]]
def poly_diff(poly):
""" Differentiate a polynomial. """
newlist = copy.deepcopy(poly)
for term in newlist:
term[0] *= term[1]
term[1] -= 1
return newlist
def poly_apply(poly, x):
""" Apply values to the polynomial. """
sum = 0.0 # force float
for term in poly:
sum += term[0] * (x ** term[1])
return sum
def poly_root(poly, start, n, r_i):
""" Returns a root of the polynomial, with a starting value."""
poly_d = poly_diff(poly)
x = start # starting guess value
counter = 0
while True:
if (n >= 0) and (n < 1):
break
x_n = x - (float(poly_apply(poly, x)) / poly_apply(poly_d, x))
if x_n == x:
break
x = x_n # this is the u value corresponding to the given time which will be used in bezier equation
n -= 1
counter += 1
if r_i:
#print [x, counter])
return [x, counter]
else:
#print x
return x
bezier(x)
def bezier(value) :
""" Calculates control points using rational bezier curve equation"""
u = value
w = 5
t = math.pow(1-u,3) * points[0][0] + 3 * u * math.pow(1-u,2) * points[1][0] \
+ 3 * (1-u) * math.pow(u,2) * points[2][0] + math.pow(u,3) * points[3][0]
t = t * w
d = math.pow(1-u,3) * w + 3 * u * w * math.pow(1-u,2) + 3 * (1-u) * w \
* math.pow(u,2) + math.pow(u,3) * w
t = t / d
print t
if __name__ == "__main__" :
poly_root(poly, 0.42, 1, 0)
In this part of code:
if r_i:
#print [x, counter])
return [x, counter]
else:
#print x
return x
bezier(x)
bezier(x) is unreachable. You need to rewrite it.
It would be better for poly_root to return the same type of thing in both situations (i.e. a list with two elements) ...
if r_i:
return [x, counter]
else:
return [x, None]
Then at the bottom, you can have ...
if __name__ == "__main__" :
x, counter = poly_root(poly, 0.42, 1, 0)
if counter is None: # I don't know if this is what you intended with your code.
bezier(x)

Simple program to find squre root using recursion

Hi I'm new to Python and I wrote a simple program to find the square root of a given number.
n = int(input("ENTER YOUR NUMBER: "))
g = n/2
t = 0.0001
def findRoot(x):
if ((x * x > n - t) and (x * x <= n + t)):
return x
else:
x = (x + n / x) / 2
findRoot(x)
r = findRoot(g)
print("ROOT OF {} IS {}".format(n, r))
t is the maximum error.
I know it's easy to use a while loop but I can't figure out what's wrong with this code. I debugged the code and after returning the value x (line 7), line 10 runs again resulting a "None" value.
Console output for any n, n > 0 (except 4) is ROOT OF (Given Number) IS None
Any idea how to correct the code?
You need to return something inside your else block. This should work:
def findRoot(x):
if ((x*x > n - t) and (x*x <= n + t)):
return x
else:
x = (x + n/x)/2
return findRoot(x)
An alternative as suggested by Alexander in the comment below is to remove the else altogether, because the code contained within will only ever be reached if we have not already returned inside the if block. So this is equivalent:
def findRoot(x):
if ((x*x > n - t) and (x*x <= n + t)):
return x
x = (x + n/x)/2
return findRoot(x)

Categories