Number of combinations with C-pair of N elements - combinations

I have N buckets. Each bucket can contain 0 or 1. C is number that represents how many number 1 is showing continuously (e.g. if C=3 i would have 111).
E.g. for N=5 and C=2, total number of all combinations is 19 (here C=2, so I have always to have at least two ones - 11 in row):
And this is calculation for first 20 N and C numbers (I marked yellow case above):
How to get to the formula that depends on C and N ?

This python progam
import scipy.special
import fractions
def bi(n, m):
return scipy.special.comb(n, m, exact=True)
def fr(*args):
return fractions.Fraction(*args)
def f(N, k):
N = fr(N)
k = fr(k)
s = 1
m = 0
while m <= k - 1:
if m % k == N % k:
x = (N - m)/k
s -= bi(m, x) * (-1)**x * 2**(-(k + 1)*x)
m += 1
while m <= N:
if m % k == N % k:
x = (N - m)/k
s -= (bi(m, x) - fr(1, 2)**k * bi(m - k, x) ) * (-1)**x * 2**(-(k + 1)*x)
m += 1
return(s * 2**N)
for N in range(1, 20):
for C in range(1, N + 1):
print("%6.d" % f(N, C), end = ' ')
print()
Outputs:
1
3 1
7 3 1
15 8 3 1
31 19 8 3 1
63 43 20 8 3 1
127 94 47 20 8 3 1
255 201 107 48 20 8 3 1
511 423 238 111 48 20 8 3 1
1023 880 520 251 112 48 20 8 3 1
2047 1815 1121 558 255 112 48 20 8 3 1
4095 3719 2391 1224 571 256 112 48 20 8 3 1
8191 7582 5056 2656 1262 575 256 112 48 20 8 3 1
16383 15397 10616 5713 2760 1275 576 256 112 48 20 8 3 1
32767 31171 22159 12199 5984 2798 1279 576 256 112 48 20 8 3 1
65535 62952 46023 25888 12880 6088 2811 1280 576 256 112 48 20 8 3 1
131071 126891 95182 54648 27553 13152 6126 2815 1280 576 256 112 48 20 8 3 1
262143 255379 196132 114832 58631 28240 13256 6139 2816 1280 576 256 112 48 20 8 3 1
524287 513342 402873 240335 124192 60320 28512 13294 6143 2816 1280 576 256 112 48 20 8 3 1
The formula is from Markus Scheuer.

Related

Why is this Pascal Triangle implementation giving me trailing zeroes?

I tried to implement it recursively (iteratively seemed less elegant, but please do correct me if I am wrong).But the output seems to be giving me trailing zeroes and the first few rows are unexpected.I have checked the base cases and the recursive cases , but they seem to be all right.The problem is definitely within the function.
#include <iostream>
unsigned long long p[1005][1005];
void pascal(int n)
{
if (n == 1)
{
p[0][0] = 1;
return;
}
else if (n == 2)
{
p[0][0] = 1; p[0][1] = 1;
return;
}
p[n][0] = 1;
p[n][n-1] = 1;
pascal(n-1);
for (int i = 1; i < n;++i)
{
p[n][i] = p[n-1][i-1] + p[n-1][i];
}
return;
}
int main()
{
int n;
std::cin >> n;
pascal(n);
for (int i = 0 ; i < n ; ++i)
{
for (int j = 0 ;j < i+1 ; ++j)
{
std::cout << p[i][j] << " ";
}
std::cout << "\n";
}
}
Output:
(I enter)15
1
0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 0
1 2 1 0 0 0
1 3 3 1 0 0 0
1 4 6 4 1 0 0 0
1 5 10 10 5 1 0 0 0
1 6 15 20 15 6 1 0 0 0
1 7 21 35 35 21 7 1 0 0 0
1 8 28 56 70 56 28 8 1 0 0 0
1 9 36 84 126 126 84 36 9 1 0 0 0
1 10 45 120 210 252 210 120 45 10 1 0 0 0
1 11 55 165 330 462 462 330 165 55 11 1 0 0 0
The base cases n = 1 and n = 2 are too aggressive (1 is never reached for a normal input like 10 because 2 breaks the recursion prematurely, leaving untouched zeroes in the array). These values for n should be covered automatically by the recursive case. Our real base case where we do nothing is when n < 0.
void pascal(int n)
{
if (n < 0) return;
p[n][0] = 1;
pascal(n - 1);
for (int i = 1; i <= n; ++i)
{
p[n][i] = p[n-1][i-1] + p[n-1][i];
}
}
Output for n = 15:
1
1 1
1 2 1
1 3 3 1
1 4 6 4 1
1 5 10 10 5 1
1 6 15 20 15 6 1
1 7 21 35 35 21 7 1
1 8 28 56 70 56 28 8 1
1 9 36 84 126 126 84 36 9 1
1 10 45 120 210 252 210 120 45 10 1
1 11 55 165 330 462 462 330 165 55 11 1
1 12 66 220 495 792 924 792 495 220 66 12 1
1 13 78 286 715 1287 1716 1716 1287 715 286 78 13 1
Having said this, it's poor practice to hard code the size of the array. Consider using vectors and passing parameters to the functions so that they don't mutate global state.
We can also write it iteratively in (to me) a more intuitive way:
void pascal(int n)
{
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
p[i][0] = 1;
for (int j = 1; j <= i; ++j)
{
p[i][j] = p[i-1][j-1] + p[i-1][j];
}
}
}

OpenMP integral image slower then sequential

I have implemented Summed Area Table (or Integral image) in C++ using OpenMP.
The problem is that the Sequential code is always faster then the Parallel code even changing the number of threads and image sizes.
For example I tried images from (100x100) to (10000x10000) and threads from 1 to 64, but none of the combination is ever faster.
I also tried this code in different machines like:
Mac OSX 1,4 GHz Intel Core i5 dual core
Mac OSX 2,3 GHz Intel Core i7 quad core
Ubuntu 16.04 Intel Xeon E5-2620 2,4 GHz 12 cores
The time has been measured with OpenMP function: omp_get_wtime().
For compiling I use: g++ -fopenmp -Wall main.cpp.
Here is the parallel code:
void transpose(unsigned long *src, unsigned long *dst, const int N, const int M) {
#pragma omp parallel for
for(int n = 0; n<N*M; n++) {
int i = n/N;
int j = n%N;
dst[n] = src[M*j + i];
}
}
unsigned long * integralImageMP(uint8_t*x, int n, int m){
unsigned long * out = new unsigned long[n*m];
unsigned long * rows = new unsigned long[n*m];
#pragma omp parallel for
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
rows[i*m] = x[i*m];
for (int j = 1; j < m; ++j)
{
rows[i*m + j] = x[i*m + j] + rows[i*m + j - 1];
}
}
transpose(rows, out, n, m);
#pragma omp parallel for
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
rows[i*m] = out[i*m];
for (int j = 1; j < m; ++j)
{
rows[i*m + j] = out[i*m + j] + rows[i*m + j - 1];
}
}
transpose(rows, out, m, n);
delete [] rows;
return out;
}
Here is the sequential code:
unsigned long * integralImage(uint8_t*x, int n, int m){
unsigned long * out = new unsigned long[n*m];
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i)
{
for (int j = 0; j < m; ++j)
{
unsigned long val = x[i*m + j];
if (i>=1)
{
val += out[(i-1)*m + j];
if (j>=1)
{
val += out[i*m + j - 1] - out[(i-1)*m + j - 1];
}
} else {
if (j>=1)
{
val += out[i*m + j -1];
}
}
out[i*m + j] = val;
}
}
return out;
}
I also tried without the transpose but it was even slower probably because the cache accesses.
An example of calling code:
int main(int argc, char **argv){
uint8_t* image = //read image from file (gray scale)
int height = //height of the image
int width = //width of the image
double start_omp = omp_get_wtime();
unsigned long* integral_image_parallel = integralImageMP(image, height, width); //parallel
double end_omp = omp_get_wtime();
double time_tot = end_omp - start_omp;
std::cout << time_tot << std::endl;
start_omp = omp_get_wtime();
unsigned long* integral_image_serial = integralImage(image, height, width); //sequential
end_omp = omp_get_wtime();
time_tot = end_omp - start_omp;
std::cout << time_tot << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Each thread is working on a block of rows (maybe an illustration of what each thread is doing can be useful):
Where ColumnSum is done transposing the matrix and repeating RowSum.
Let me first say, that the results are a bit surprising to me and I would guesstimate the problem being in the non local memory access required by the transpose algorithm.
You can anyway mitigate it by turning your sequential algorithm into parallel by a two pass approach. The first pass has to calculate the 2D integral in T threads N rows apart and the second pass must compensate the fact that each block didn't start from the accumulated result of the previous row but from zero.
An example with Matlab shows the principle in 2D.
f=fix(rand(12,8)*8) % A random matrix with 12 rows, 8 columns
5 6 1 4 7 5 4 4
4 6 0 7 1 3 2 0
7 0 2 3 0 1 6 3
5 3 1 7 4 3 7 2
6 4 3 2 7 3 5 1
3 3 2 5 5 0 2 1
3 5 7 5 1 4 4 3
6 5 7 4 2 1 0 0
0 2 0 5 3 3 7 4
1 3 5 5 7 4 7 3
1 0 2 1 1 2 6 5
3 7 3 1 6 2 2 5
ff=cumsum(cumsum(f')') % The Summed Area Table
5 11 12 16 23 28 32 36
9 21 22 33 41 49 55 59
16 28 31 45 53 62 74 81
21 36 40 61 73 85 104 113
27 46 53 76 95 110 134 144
30 52 61 89 113 128 154 165
33 60 76 109 134 153 183 197
39 71 94 131 158 178 208 222
39 73 96 138 168 191 228 246
40 77 105 152 189 216 260 281
41 78 108 156 194 223 273 299
44 88 121 170 214 245 297 328
fx=[cumsum(cumsum(f(1:4,:)')'); % The original table summed in
cumsum(cumsum(f(5:8,:)')'); % three parts -- 4 rows per each
cumsum(cumsum(f(9:12,:)')')] % "thread"
5 11 12 16 23 28 32 36
9 21 22 33 41 49 55 59
16 28 31 45 53 62 74 81
21 36 40 61 73 85 104 113 %% Notice this row #4
6 10 13 15 22 25 30 31
9 16 21 28 40 43 50 52
12 24 36 48 61 68 79 84
18 35 54 70 85 93 104 109 %% Notice this row #8
0 2 2 7 10 13 20 24
1 6 11 21 31 38 52 59
2 7 14 25 36 45 65 77
5 17 27 39 56 67 89 106
fx(4,:) + fx(8,:) %% this is the SUM of row #4 and row #8
39 71 94 131 158 178 208 222
%% and finally -- what is the difference of the piecewise
%% calculated result and the real result?
ff-fx
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 %% look !! the first block
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 %% is already correct
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
21 36 40 61 73 85 104 113 %% All these rows in this
21 36 40 61 73 85 104 113 %% block are short by
21 36 40 61 73 85 104 113 %% the row #4 above
21 36 40 61 73 85 104 113 %%
39 71 94 131 158 178 208 222 %% and all these rows
39 71 94 131 158 178 208 222 %% in this block are short
39 71 94 131 158 178 208 222 %% by the SUM of the rows
39 71 94 131 158 178 208 222 %% #4 and #8 above
Fortunately one can start integrating the block 2, i.e. rows 2N..3N-1 before the block #1 has been compensated -- one just has to calculate the offset, which is a relatively small sequential task.
acc_for_block_2 = row[2*N-1] + row[N-1];
acc_for_block_3 = acc_for_block_2 + row[3*N-1];
..
acc_for_block_T-1 = acc_for_block_(T-2) + row[N*(T-1)-1];

How to loop rows and columns in pandas while replacing values with a constant increment

I am trying to replace values in a dataframe by 0. the first column I need to replace the 1st 3 values, the next column the 1st 6 values so on so forth increasing by 3 every time
a=np.array([133,124,156,189,132,176,189,192,100,120,130,140,150,50,70,133,124,156,189,132])
b = pd.DataFrame(a.reshape(10,2), columns= ['s','t'])
for columns in b:
yy = 3
for i in xrange(yy):
b[columns][i] = 0
yy += 3
print b
the outcome is the following
s t
0 0 0
1 0 0
2 0 0
3 189 189
4 132 132
5 176 176
6 189 189
7 192 192
8 100 100
9 120 120
I am clearly missing something really simple, to make the loop replace 6 values instead of only 3 in column t, any ideas?
i would do it this way:
i = 1
for c in b.columns:
b.ix[0 : 3*i-1, c] = 0
i += 1
Demo:
In [86]: b = pd.DataFrame(np.random.randint(0, 100, size=(20, 4)), columns=list('abcd'))
In [87]: %paste
i = 1
for c in b.columns:
b.ix[0 : 3*i-1, c] = 0
i += 1
## -- End pasted text --
In [88]: b
Out[88]:
a b c d
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
3 10 0 0 0
4 8 0 0 0
5 49 0 0 0
6 55 48 0 0
7 99 43 0 0
8 63 29 0 0
9 61 65 74 0
10 15 29 41 0
11 79 88 3 0
12 91 74 11 4
13 56 71 6 79
14 15 65 46 81
15 81 42 60 24
16 71 57 95 18
17 53 4 80 15
18 42 55 84 11
19 26 80 67 59
You need inicialize yy=3 before loop:
yy = 3
for columns in b:
for i in xrange(yy):
b[columns][i] = 0
yy += 3
print b
Python 3 solution:
yy = 3
for columns in b:
for i in range(yy):
b[columns][i] = 0
yy += 3
print (b)
s t
0 0 0
1 0 0
2 0 0
3 189 0
4 100 0
5 130 0
6 150 50
7 70 133
8 124 156
9 189 132
Another solution:
yy= 3
for i, col in enumerate(b.columns):
b.ix[:i*yy+yy-1, col] = 0
print (b)
s t
0 0 0
1 0 0
2 0 0
3 189 0
4 100 0
5 130 0
6 150 50
7 70 133
8 124 156
9 189 132

Next higher number with one zero bit

Today I've run into this problem, but I couldn't solve it after a period of time. I need some help
I have number N. The problem is to find next higher number ( > N ) with only one zero bit in binary.
Example:
Number 1 can be represented in binary as 1.
Next higher number with only one zero bit is 2 - Binary 10
A few other examples:
N = 2 (10), next higher number with one zero bit is 5 (101)
N = 5 (101), next higher number is 6 (110)
N = 7 (111), next higher number is 11 (1011)
List of 200 number:
1 1
2 10 - 1
3 11
4 100
5 101 - 1
6 110 - 1
7 111
8 1000
9 1001
10 1010
11 1011 - 1
12 1100
13 1101 - 1
14 1110 - 1
15 1111
16 10000
17 10001
18 10010
19 10011
20 10100
21 10101
22 10110
23 10111 - 1
24 11000
25 11001
26 11010
27 11011 - 1
28 11100
29 11101 - 1
30 11110 - 1
31 11111
32 100000
33 100001
34 100010
35 100011
36 100100
37 100101
38 100110
39 100111
40 101000
41 101001
42 101010
43 101011
44 101100
45 101101
46 101110
47 101111 - 1
48 110000
49 110001
50 110010
51 110011
52 110100
53 110101
54 110110
55 110111 - 1
56 111000
57 111001
58 111010
59 111011 - 1
60 111100
61 111101 - 1
62 111110 - 1
63 111111
64 1000000
65 1000001
66 1000010
67 1000011
68 1000100
69 1000101
70 1000110
71 1000111
72 1001000
73 1001001
74 1001010
75 1001011
76 1001100
77 1001101
78 1001110
79 1001111
80 1010000
81 1010001
82 1010010
83 1010011
84 1010100
85 1010101
86 1010110
87 1010111
88 1011000
89 1011001
90 1011010
91 1011011
92 1011100
93 1011101
94 1011110
95 1011111 - 1
96 1100000
97 1100001
98 1100010
99 1100011
100 1100100
101 1100101
102 1100110
103 1100111
104 1101000
105 1101001
106 1101010
107 1101011
108 1101100
109 1101101
110 1101110
111 1101111 - 1
112 1110000
113 1110001
114 1110010
115 1110011
116 1110100
117 1110101
118 1110110
119 1110111 - 1
120 1111000
121 1111001
122 1111010
123 1111011 - 1
124 1111100
125 1111101 - 1
126 1111110 - 1
127 1111111
128 10000000
129 10000001
130 10000010
131 10000011
132 10000100
133 10000101
134 10000110
135 10000111
136 10001000
137 10001001
138 10001010
139 10001011
140 10001100
141 10001101
142 10001110
143 10001111
144 10010000
145 10010001
146 10010010
147 10010011
148 10010100
149 10010101
150 10010110
151 10010111
152 10011000
153 10011001
154 10011010
155 10011011
156 10011100
157 10011101
158 10011110
159 10011111
160 10100000
161 10100001
162 10100010
163 10100011
164 10100100
165 10100101
166 10100110
167 10100111
168 10101000
169 10101001
170 10101010
171 10101011
172 10101100
173 10101101
174 10101110
175 10101111
176 10110000
177 10110001
178 10110010
179 10110011
180 10110100
181 10110101
182 10110110
183 10110111
184 10111000
185 10111001
186 10111010
187 10111011
188 10111100
189 10111101
190 10111110
191 10111111 - 1
192 11000000
193 11000001
194 11000010
195 11000011
196 11000100
197 11000101
198 11000110
199 11000111
200 11001000
There are three cases.
The number x has more than one zero bit in its binary representation. All but one of these zero bits must be "filled in" with 1 to obtain the required result. Notice that all numbers obtained by taking x and filling in one or more of its low-order zero bits are numerically closer to x compared to the number obtained by filling just the top-most zero bit. Therefore the answer is the number x with all-but-one of its zero bits filled: only its topmost zero bit remains unfilled. For example if x=110101001 then the answer is 110111111. To get the answer, find the index i of the topmost zero bit of x, and then calculate the bitwise OR of x and 2^i - 1.
C code for this case:
// warning: this assumes x is known to have *some* (>1) zeros!
unsigned next(unsigned x)
{
unsigned topmostzero = 0;
unsigned bit = 1;
while (bit && bit <= x) {
if (!(x & bit)) topmostzero = bit;
bit <<= 1;
}
return x | (topmostzero - 1);
}
The number x has no zero bits in binary. It means that x=2^n - 1 for some number n. By the same reasoning as above, the answer is then 2^n + 2^(n-1) - 1. For example, if x=111, then the answer is 1011.
The number x has exactly one zero bit in its binary representation. We know that the result must be strictly larger than x, so x itself is not allowed to be the answer. If x has the only zero in its least-significant bit, then this case reduces to case #2. Otherwise, the zero should be moved one position to the right. Assuming x has zero in its i-th bit, the answer should have its zero in i-1-th bit. For example, if x=11011, then the result is 11101.
You could also use another approach:
Every number with exactly one zero bit can be represented as
2^n - 1 - 2^m
Now the task is easy:
1. Find an n, great enough for at least 2^n-1-2^0>x, that's equivalent to 2^n>x+2
2. Find the greatest m for which 2^n-1-2^m is still greater than x.
as Code:
#include <iostream>
#include <math.h>
using namespace std;
//binary representation
void bin(unsigned n)
{
for (int i = floor(log2(n));i >= 0;--i)
(n & (1<<i))? printf("1"): printf("0");
}
//outputs the next greater int to x with exactly one 0 in binary representation
int nextHigherOneZero(int x)
{
unsigned int n=0;
while((1<<n)<= x+2 ) ++n;
unsigned int m=0;
while((1<<n)-1-(1<<(m+1)) > x && m<n-2)
++m;
return (1<<n)-1-(1<<m);
}
int main()
{
int r=0;
for(int i = 1; i<100;++i){
r=nextHigherOneZero(i);
printf("\nX: %i=",i);
bin(i);
printf(";\tnextHigherOneZero(x):%i=",r);
bin(r);
printf("\n");
}
return 0;
}
You can try it here (with some additional Debug-Output):
http://ideone.com/6w3fAN
As a note: its probably possible to get m and n faster with some good binary logic, feel free to contribute...
Pro of this approach:
No assumptions needs to be made
Cons:
Ugly while loops
couldn't miss the opportunity to remember binary logic :), here's my solution:
here's main
main(int argc, char** argv)
{
int i = 139261;
i++;
while (!oneZero(i))
{
i++;
}
std::cout << i;
}
and here's all logic to find if number has 1 zero
bool oneZero(int i)
{
int count = 0;
while (i != 0)
{
// check last bit if it is zero
if ((1 & i) == 0) {
count++;
if (count > 1) return false;
}
// make the number shorter :)
i = i >> 1;
}
return (count == 1);
}

Histogram image maching using opencv

I need to perform a matching between an image and an histogram I receive as a text.
I do the cdf for both of them:
//Calculating cumulative histogram of src
double total = src.rows*src.cols;
double probSrc[255];
int newValuesSrc[255];
double cuml = 0;
for(int j = 0; j < 256; j++)
{
probSrc[j] = imageHistogram[j]/total; // Probability of each value in image
cuml = cuml + probSrc[j]; // Cumulative probability of current and all previous values
double cdfmax = cuml * 255; // Cumulative probability * max value
newValuesSrc[j] = (int) round(cdfmax);
cout << imageHistogram[j] << " "<< probSrc[j] << " " << newValuesSrc[j] << endl;
}
readHistogramFromFile();
//Calculating cumulative histogram from file
double probDst[255];
int newValuesDst[255];
cuml = 0;
for(int j = 0; j < 256; j++)
{
probDst[j] = receivedHistogram[j]/total; // Probability of each value in image
cuml = cuml + probDst[j]; // Cumulative probability of current and all previous values
double cdfmax = cuml * 255; // Cumulative probability * max value
newValuesDst[j] = (int) round(cdfmax);
cout << receivedHistogram[j] << " "<< probDst[j] << " " << newValuesDst[j] << endl;
}
and I get this values:
For the src image:
207677 0.0901376 23
37615 0.016326 27
19098 0.00828906 29
11955 0.0051888 31
8744 0.00379514 32
7386 0.00320573 32
6546 0.00284115 33
6178 0.00268142 34
5967 0.00258984 34
5437 0.00235981 35
5280 0.00229167 36
5127 0.00222526 36
5002 0.00217101 37
4839 0.00210026 37
4754 0.00206337 38
4676 0.00202951 38
4547 0.00197352 39
4517 0.0019605 39
4484 0.00194618 40
4290 0.00186198 40
4197 0.00182161 41
4188 0.00181771 41
4265 0.00185113 42
4229 0.0018355 42
4233 0.00183724 43
4245 0.00184245 43
4358 0.00189149 44
4330 0.00187934 44
4400 0.00190972 45
4474 0.00194184 45
4519 0.00196137 46
4415 0.00191623 46
4477 0.00194314 47
4468 0.00193924 47
4580 0.00198785 48
4416 0.00191667 48
4558 0.0019783 49
4674 0.00202865 49
4705 0.0020421 50
4998 0.00216927 50
4848 0.00210417 51
4782 0.00207552 51
4883 0.00211936 52
4989 0.00216536 52
4957 0.00215148 53
4987 0.0021645 53
5133 0.00222786 54
4967 0.00215582 54
5217 0.00226432 55
5185 0.00225043 56
5140 0.0022309 56
5236 0.00227257 57
5291 0.00229644 57
5458 0.00236892 58
5473 0.00237543 59
5464 0.00237153 59
5495 0.00238498 60
5439 0.00236068 60
5458 0.00236892 61
5557 0.00241189 62
5881 0.00255252 62
5900 0.00256076 63
5935 0.00257595 64
5902 0.00256163 64
6040 0.00262153 65
6203 0.00269227 66
6146 0.00266753 66
6140 0.00266493 67
6075 0.00263672 68
6054 0.0026276 68
6238 0.00270747 69
6060 0.00263021 70
6153 0.00267057 70
6303 0.00273568 71
6231 0.00270443 72
6278 0.00272483 72
6360 0.00276042 73
6359 0.00275998 74
6368 0.00276389 75
6438 0.00279427 75
6329 0.00274696 76
6408 0.00278125 77
6360 0.00276042 77
6378 0.00276823 78
6329 0.00274696 79
6394 0.00277517 79
6517 0.00282856 80
6521 0.0028303 81
6707 0.00291102 82
6788 0.00294618 82
6761 0.00293446 83
6878 0.00298524 84
7004 0.00303993 85
6963 0.00302214 85
7050 0.0030599 86
6940 0.00301215 87
6875 0.00298394 88
7073 0.00306988 89
7035 0.00305339 89
7146 0.00310156 90
7007 0.00304123 91
7159 0.0031072 92
7089 0.00307682 92
7185 0.00311849 93
7410 0.00321615 94
7237 0.00314106 95
7334 0.00318316 96
7364 0.00319618 97
7452 0.00323437 97
7760 0.00336806 98
7839 0.00340234 99
7882 0.00342101 100
7885 0.00342231 101
8055 0.00349609 102
7923 0.0034388 103
8165 0.00354384 103
8306 0.00360503 104
8271 0.00358984 105
8275 0.00359158 106
8634 0.0037474 107
8684 0.0037691 108
8752 0.00379861 109
9080 0.00394097 110
8958 0.00388802 111
9094 0.00394705 112
9279 0.00402734 113
9234 0.00400781 114
9348 0.00405729 115
9440 0.00409722 116
9431 0.00409332 117
9662 0.00419358 118
9842 0.0042717 119
9816 0.00426042 121
9957 0.00432161 122
10353 0.00449349 123
10626 0.00461198 124
10764 0.00467187 125
10832 0.00470139 126
10767 0.00467318 128
11222 0.00487066 129
11469 0.00497786 130
11661 0.0050612 131
11731 0.00509158 133
12023 0.00521832 134
12086 0.00524566 135
12094 0.00524913 137
12362 0.00536545 138
12364 0.00536632 139
12659 0.00549436 141
12587 0.00546311 142
12776 0.00554514 144
13037 0.00565842 145
13252 0.00575174 147
13425 0.00582682 148
13595 0.00590061 150
13795 0.00598741 151
14308 0.00621007 153
14232 0.00617708 154
14657 0.00636155 156
14966 0.00649566 157
14867 0.00645269 159
15051 0.00653255 161
15510 0.00673177 162
15357 0.00666536 164
15326 0.00665191 166
15308 0.0066441 168
15316 0.00664757 169
15321 0.00664974 171
15298 0.00663976 173
15435 0.00669922 174
15496 0.00672569 176
15307 0.00664366 178
15343 0.00665929 179
15356 0.00666493 181
15315 0.00664714 183
15444 0.00670312 185
15346 0.00666059 186
15583 0.00676345 188
15429 0.00669661 190
15641 0.00678863 191
15661 0.00679731 193
15638 0.00678733 195
15689 0.00680946 197
15866 0.00688628 198
15552 0.00675 200
15150 0.00657552 202
15185 0.00659071 203
14941 0.00648481 205
14989 0.00650564 207
14585 0.0063303 208
14718 0.00638802 210
14553 0.00631641 212
14612 0.00634201 213
14520 0.00630208 215
14358 0.00623177 216
13931 0.00604644 218
13580 0.0058941 220
13370 0.00580295 221
13281 0.00576432 222
13053 0.00566536 224
12711 0.00551693 225
12556 0.00544965 227
12556 0.00544965 228
12125 0.00526259 229
12184 0.00528819 231
11975 0.00519748 232
12198 0.00529427 233
11919 0.00517318 235
11898 0.00516406 236
11589 0.00502995 237
11348 0.00492535 239
11011 0.00477908 240
10523 0.00456727 241
10388 0.00450868 242
9795 0.0042513 243
9251 0.00401519 244
9014 0.00391233 245
8436 0.00366146 246
8266 0.00358767 247
7851 0.00340755 248
7299 0.00316797 249
6996 0.00303646 250
6303 0.00273568 250
5625 0.00244141 251
5375 0.0023329 251
5102 0.00221441 252
4747 0.00206033 253
4313 0.00187196 253
3809 0.00165321 253
3307 0.00143533 254
2756 0.00119618 254
2276 0.000987847 254
1935 0.000839844 255
1617 0.000701823 255
1087 0.000471788 255
547 0.000237413 255
217 9.4184e-05 255
31 1.34549e-05 255
4 1.73611e-06 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
0 0 255
And for the histogram I receive:
10 4.34028e-06 0
11 4.77431e-06 0
12 5.20833e-06 0
13 5.64236e-06 0
14 6.07639e-06 0
15 6.51042e-06 0
16 6.94444e-06 0
17 7.37847e-06 0
18 7.8125e-06 0
19 8.24653e-06 0
20 8.68056e-06 0
22 9.54861e-06 0
24 1.04167e-05 0
26 1.12847e-05 0
28 1.21528e-05 0
30 1.30208e-05 0
34 1.47569e-05 0
38 1.64931e-05 0
42 1.82292e-05 0
50 2.17014e-05 0
60 2.60417e-05 0
70 3.03819e-05 0
80 3.47222e-05 0
90 3.90625e-05 0
100 4.34028e-05 0
120 5.20833e-05 0
140 6.07639e-05 0
160 6.94444e-05 0
160 6.94444e-05 0
150 6.51042e-05 0
140 6.07639e-05 0
130 5.64236e-05 0
120 5.20833e-05 0
110 4.77431e-05 0
100 4.34028e-05 0
90 3.90625e-05 0
80 3.47222e-05 0
70 3.03819e-05 0
60 2.60417e-05 0
50 2.17014e-05 0
40 1.73611e-05 0
30 1.30208e-05 0
20 8.68056e-06 0
10 4.34028e-06 0
10 4.34028e-06 0
10 4.34028e-06 0
10 4.34028e-06 0
11 4.77431e-06 0
12 5.20833e-06 0
13 5.64236e-06 0
14 6.07639e-06 0
15 6.51042e-06 0
16 6.94444e-06 0
17 7.37847e-06 0
18 7.8125e-06 0
19 8.24653e-06 0
20 8.68056e-06 0
22 9.54861e-06 0
24 1.04167e-05 0
26 1.12847e-05 0
28 1.21528e-05 0
30 1.30208e-05 0
34 1.47569e-05 0
38 1.64931e-05 0
42 1.82292e-05 0
50 2.17014e-05 0
60 2.60417e-05 0
70 3.03819e-05 0
80 3.47222e-05 0
90 3.90625e-05 0
100 4.34028e-05 0
120 5.20833e-05 0
140 6.07639e-05 0
160 6.94444e-05 0
160 6.94444e-05 0
150 6.51042e-05 0
140 6.07639e-05 0
130 5.64236e-05 1
120 5.20833e-05 1
110 4.77431e-05 1
100 4.34028e-05 1
90 3.90625e-05 1
80 3.47222e-05 1
70 3.03819e-05 1
60 2.60417e-05 1
50 2.17014e-05 1
40 1.73611e-05 1
30 1.30208e-05 1
20 8.68056e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
11 4.77431e-06 1
12 5.20833e-06 1
13 5.64236e-06 1
14 6.07639e-06 1
15 6.51042e-06 1
16 6.94444e-06 1
17 7.37847e-06 1
18 7.8125e-06 1
19 8.24653e-06 1
20 8.68056e-06 1
22 9.54861e-06 1
24 1.04167e-05 1
26 1.12847e-05 1
28 1.21528e-05 1
30 1.30208e-05 1
34 1.47569e-05 1
38 1.64931e-05 1
42 1.82292e-05 1
50 2.17014e-05 1
60 2.60417e-05 1
70 3.03819e-05 1
80 3.47222e-05 1
90 3.90625e-05 1
100 4.34028e-05 1
120 5.20833e-05 1
140 6.07639e-05 1
160 6.94444e-05 1
160 6.94444e-05 1
150 6.51042e-05 1
140 6.07639e-05 1
130 5.64236e-05 1
120 5.20833e-05 1
110 4.77431e-05 1
100 4.34028e-05 1
90 3.90625e-05 1
80 3.47222e-05 1
70 3.03819e-05 1
60 2.60417e-05 1
50 2.17014e-05 1
40 1.73611e-05 1
30 1.30208e-05 1
20 8.68056e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
11 4.77431e-06 1
12 5.20833e-06 1
13 5.64236e-06 1
14 6.07639e-06 1
15 6.51042e-06 1
16 6.94444e-06 1
17 7.37847e-06 1
18 7.8125e-06 1
19 8.24653e-06 1
20 8.68056e-06 1
22 9.54861e-06 1
24 1.04167e-05 1
26 1.12847e-05 1
28 1.21528e-05 1
30 1.30208e-05 1
34 1.47569e-05 1
38 1.64931e-05 1
42 1.82292e-05 1
50 2.17014e-05 1
60 2.60417e-05 1
70 3.03819e-05 1
80 3.47222e-05 1
90 3.90625e-05 1
100 4.34028e-05 1
120 5.20833e-05 1
140 6.07639e-05 1
160 6.94444e-05 1
160 6.94444e-05 1
150 6.51042e-05 1
140 6.07639e-05 1
130 5.64236e-05 1
120 5.20833e-05 1
110 4.77431e-05 1
100 4.34028e-05 1
90 3.90625e-05 1
80 3.47222e-05 1
70 3.03819e-05 1
60 2.60417e-05 1
50 2.17014e-05 1
40 1.73611e-05 1
30 1.30208e-05 1
20 8.68056e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
20 8.68056e-06 1
30 1.30208e-05 1
40 1.73611e-05 1
50 2.17014e-05 1
60 2.60417e-05 1
70 3.03819e-05 1
80 3.47222e-05 1
90 3.90625e-05 1
100 4.34028e-05 1
120 5.20833e-05 1
140 6.07639e-05 1
160 6.94444e-05 1
160 6.94444e-05 1
150 6.51042e-05 1
140 6.07639e-05 1
130 5.64236e-05 1
120 5.20833e-05 1
110 4.77431e-05 1
100 4.34028e-05 1
90 3.90625e-05 1
80 3.47222e-05 1
70 3.03819e-05 1
60 2.60417e-05 1
50 2.17014e-05 1
40 1.73611e-05 1
30 1.30208e-05 1
20 8.68056e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
10 4.34028e-06 1
20 8.68056e-06 1
30 1.30208e-05 1
40 1.73611e-05 1
40 1.73611e-05 1
50 2.17014e-05 1
55 2.38715e-05 1
60 2.60417e-05 1
65 2.82118e-05 1
70 3.03819e-05 1
75 3.25521e-05 1
80 3.47222e-05 1
85 3.68924e-05 2
90 3.90625e-05 2
95 4.12326e-05 2
90 3.90625e-05 2
80 3.47222e-05 2
70 3.03819e-05 2
60 2.60417e-05 2
50 2.17014e-05 2
40 1.73611e-05 2
30 1.30208e-05 2
20 8.68056e-06 2
10 4.34028e-06 2
10 4.34028e-06 2
10 4.34028e-06 2
20 8.68056e-06 2
30 1.30208e-05 2
40 1.73611e-05 2
40 1.73611e-05 2
50 2.17014e-05 2
55 2.38715e-05 2
60 2.60417e-05 2
65 2.82118e-05 2
70 3.03819e-05 2
75 3.25521e-05 2
80 3.47222e-05 2
85 3.68924e-05 2
90 3.90625e-05 2
95 4.12326e-05 2
100 4.34028e-05 2
105 4.55729e-05 2
110 4.77431e-05 2
115 4.99132e-05 2
120 5.20833e-05 2
As you can see, the src histogram are a lot more distributed than the histrogram I receive ([0-255] against [0-2]).
My question is, what do I do now? How do I match them?
Why don't you scale [0-2] histogram to [0-255]? oldValue * 255 / 2.