Floating point error in C++ code - c++

I am trying to solve a question in which i need to find out the number of possible ways to make a team of two members.(note: a team can have at most two person)
After making this code, It works properly but in some test cases it shows floating point error ad i can't find out what it is exactly.
Input: 1st line : Number of test cases
2nd line: number of total person
Thank you
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
long C(long n, long r)
{
long f[n + 1];
f[0] = 1;
for (long i = 1; i <= n; i++)
{
f[i] = i * f[i - 1];
}
return f[n] / f[r] / f[n - r];
}
int main()
{
long n, r, m,t;
cin>>t;
while(t--)
{
cin>>n;
r=1;
cout<<C(n, min(r, n - r))+1<<endl;
}
return 0;
}

You aren't getting a floating point exception. You are getting a divide by zero exception. Because your code is attempting to divide by the number 0 (which can't be done on a computer).
When you invoke C(100, 1) the main loop that initializes the f array inside C increases exponentially. Eventually, two values are multiplied such that i * f[i-1] is zero due to overflow. That leads to all the subsequent f[i] values being initialized to zero. And then the division that follows the loop is a division by zero.
Although purists on these forums will say this is undefined, here's what's really happening on most 2's complement architectures. Or at least on my computer....
At i==21:
f[20] is already equal to 2432902008176640000
21 * 2432902008176640000 overflows for 64-bit signed, and will typically become -4249290049419214848 So at this point, your program is bugged and is now in undefined behavior.
At i==66
f[65] is equal to 0x8000000000000000. So 66 * f[65] gets calculated as zero for reasons that make sense to me, but should be understood as undefined behavior.
With f[66] assigned to 0, all subsequent assignments of f[i] become zero as well. After the main loop inside C is over, the f[n-r] is zero. Hence, divide by zero error.
Update
I went back and reverse engineered your problem. It seems like your C function is just trying to compute this expression:
N!
-------------
R! * (N-R)!
Which is the "number of unique sorted combinations"
In which case instead of computing the large factorial of N!, we can reduce that expression to this:
n
[ ∏ i ]
n-r
--------------------
R!
This won't eliminate overflow, but will allow your C function to be able to take on larger values of N and R to compute the number of combinations without error.
But we can also take advantage of simple reduction before trying to do a big long factorial expression
For example, let's say we were trying to compute C(15,5). Mathematically that is:
15!
--------
10! 5!
Or as we expressed above:
1*2*3*4*5*6*7*8*9*10*11*12*13*14*15
-----------------------------------
1*2*3*4*5*6*7*8*9*10 * 1*2*3*4*5
The first 10 factors of the numerator and denominator cancel each other out:
11*12*13*14*15
-----------------------------------
1*2*3*4*5
But intuitively, you can see that "12" in the numerator is already evenly divisible by denominators 2 and 3. And that 15 in the numerator is evenly divisible by 5 in the denominator. So simple reduction can be applied:
11*2*13*14*3
-----------------------------------
1 * 4
There's even more room for greatest common divisor reduction, but this is a great start.
Let's start with a helper function that computes the product of all the values in a list.
long long multiply_vector(std::vector<int>& values)
{
long long result = 1;
for (long i : values)
{
result = result * i;
if (result < 0)
{
std::cout << "ERROR - multiply_range hit overflow" << std::endl;
return 0;
}
}
return result;
}
Not let's implement C as using the above function after doing the reduction operation
long long C(int n, int r)
{
if ((r >= n) || (n < 0) || (r < 0))
{
std::cout << "invalid parameters passed to C" << std::endl;
return 0;
}
// compute
// n!
// -------------
// r! * (n-r)!
//
// assume (r < n)
// Which maps to
// n
// [∏ i]
// n - r
// --------------------
// R!
int end = n;
int start = n - r + 1;
std::vector<int> numerators;
std::vector<int> denominators;
long long numerator = 1;
long long denominator = 1;
for (int i = start; i <= end; i++)
{
numerators.push_back(i);
}
for (int i = 2; i <= r; i++)
{
denominators.push_back(i);
}
size_t n_length = numerators.size();
size_t d_length = denominators.size();
for (size_t n = 0; n < n_length; n++)
{
int nval = numerators[n];
for (size_t d = 0; d < d_length; d++)
{
int dval = denominators[d];
if ((nval % dval) == 0)
{
denominators[d] = 1;
numerators[n] = nval / dval;
}
}
}
numerator = multiply_vector(numerators);
denominator = multiply_vector(denominators);
if ((numerator == 0) || (denominator == 0))
{
std::cout << "Giving up. Can't resolve overflow" << std::endl;
return 0;
}
long long result = numerator / denominator;
return result;
}

You are not using floating-point. And you seem to be using variable sized arrays, which is a C feature and possibly a C++ extension but not standard.
Anyway, you will get overflow and therefore undefined behaviour even for rather small values of n.
In practice the overflow will lead to array elements becoming zero for not much larger values of n.
Your code will then divide by zero and crash.
They also might have a test case like (1000000000, 999999999) which is trivial to solve, but not for your code which I bet will crash.

You don't specify what you mean by "floating point error" - I reckon you are referring to the fact that you are doing an integer division rather than a floating point one so that you will always get integers rather than floats.
int a, b;
a = 7;
b = 2;
std::cout << a / b << std::endl;
this will result in 3, not 3.5! If you want floating point result you should use floats instead like this:
float a, b;
a = 7;
b = 2;
std::cout << a / b << std::end;
So the solution to your problem would simply be to use float instead of long long int.
Note also that you are using variable sized arrays which won't work in C++ - why not use std::vector instead??

Array syntax as:
type name[size]
Note: size must a constant not a variable
Example #1:
int name[10];
Example #2:
const int asize = 10;
int name[asize];

Related

The output of the program is always '0'?

I want to find the sum up to the 'n'th term for the following series:
(1/2)+((1*3)/(2*4))+((1*3*5)/(2*4*6))....
So, I wrote the following program in c++ :
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
#include <conio.h>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int p=1, k=1, n=0;
float h=0;
cout<<"Enter the term: ";
cin>>n;
for(int i=1; i<=n; i++)
{
for(int j=1; j<=i; j++)
{
p*=((2*j)-1);
k*=(2*j);
}
h+=(p/k);
p=1;
k=1;
}
cout<<"The sum is : "<<h;
return 0;
getch();
}
However, the output of the program always gives me '0'. I can't figure out the problem with the program.
N.B. I'm new to programming.
The problem here is that you haven't declared p and k as float or doubleor explicitly cast them as such before the calculation and assignment to h.
What's happening is for every iteration of the loop p < k (by nature of the problem) since p and k are both declared as int, p / k = 0. So you're just summing 0 for every iteration.
Either declare p and k as float or double or do this:
h += ((float) p) / ((float) k)
Also, for this specific problem I assume you're looking for precision, so be wary and look into that as well Should I use double or float?
implicit conversion and type casting are a trap where all newbies fall.
in the instruction:
h += p/k;
the compiler performs an integer division first, then a promotion of the result to floating point type.
and since:
p < k ; for all i,j < n
then:
res = (p / k) < 1 => truncates to 0; // by integer division
thus:
sum(1->n) of p/k = sum (1->n) 0 = 0;
finally:
h = conversion to float of (0) = 0.0f;
that's why you have the result of 0.0f at the end.
the solution:
1- first of all you need to use the natural type for floating point of c++ which is "double" (under the hood c++ promotes float to double, so use it directly).
2- declare all your variable as double, except the number of terms n:
3- the number of terms is never negative, you need to express that in your code by declaring it as an unsigned int.
4- if you do step 3, make sure to catch overflow errors, that is if the user enters a negative number your risk to have a very big number in "n", expel : n =-1 converts to 0xffffffff positive number.
5- engineer your code sometimes is better.
6- include only the headers that you need, and avoid a importing any namespace in your global namespace.
here is how i think you should write your program.
#include <iostream>
double sum_serie(unsigned int n)
{
double prod = 1.0, sum = 0.0;
for (double c=1; c<=n ; c++)
{
prod *= ( ( 2*c ) - 1 ) / ( 2*c ); // remark the parenthesis
sum += prod;
}
return sum;
}
int main()
{
unsigned int n = 0;
int temp = 0;
std::cout << " enter the number of terms n: ";
std::cin >> temp;
if (temp > 0)
n = temp; // this is how you catch overflow
else
{
std::cout << " n < 0, no result calculated " << std::endl;
return 0;
}
std::cout << " the result is sum = " << sum_serie(n) << std::endl;
return 0;
}
I know that the question was about the implicit conversion and casting in C++, but even the way of writing a code can show you what bugs you have in it, so try to learn a proper way of expressing your ideas into code, debugging comes natural afterward.
Good Luck

Hash Function Clarification

Went over this in class today:
const int tabsize = 100000;
int hash(string s) {
const int init = 21512712, mult = 96169, emergency = 876127;
int v = init;
for (int i=0; i<s.length(); i+=1)
v = v * mult + s[i];
if (v < 0) v = -v;
if (v < 0) v = emergency;
return v % tabsize;
}
Having some trouble figuring out what the last 2 if-statements are supposed to do.
Any ideas?
Thanks
The first if statement takes care of overflow behavior of signed integers. Thus if the integer gets too big that it wraps and becomes negative, this if statement ensures that only the positive integer is returned.
The second if statement is used to take care of the rare case of where v is 2147483648.
Note that positive signed 32 bit integers only go up to 231 - 1 or 2147483647 while the negative can go down to -231 or -2147483648.This number is negative and even negating it still gives a negative number. So that is what the emergency number is for
int main() {
int t = -2147483648;
std::cout << (-t) << std::endl;
}
They ensure the v is positive, because when you use the % operator on a negative number you can get a negative result which is not desirable for a hash value.
However, this does get into undefined behavior with the integer overflow so it might not work everywhere.

Generate random int with specified upper-bound (0 - n) without using / or %

roommate went to an interview and got this one:
Rules:
permitted to use rand();
RAND_MAX = 32 767;
no use of division or modulo;
TODO:
Write a function that takes one int parameter and returns
int in range 0 - parameter.
Head hurts, can't sleep. Any help appreciated.
Thanks
Few possibilities:
the range transposition approach: int r = rand() * 0.00003051855095 * n;
the "shuffle sort" approach: int r; do { r = random(); } while (r >= n);
the BSD approach: uint32_t r = arc4random_uniform(n);
Etc., etc., etc.
In my public domain randlib, I do it with
no floating point, no division, no multiplication, just bitmasking and rejection sampling, like this:
int ojr_rand(ojr_generator *g, int limit) {
int v, m = limit - 1;
m |= m >> 1;
m |= m >> 2;
m |= m >> 4;
m |= m >> 8; // m is smallest ((power of 2) - 1) > limit
do {
v = m & NEXT16(g); // 16-bit random number
} while (v >= limit);
return v;
}
In the worst case (limit is power of two plus one), this can reject close to 50% of the generated numbers, but it's still faster than division or floating math with most fast RNGs, and in the general case it's much faster. Also, unlike the floating point math or mod, it is exact, meaning if you ask for a limit of 3, you get values 0, 1, and 2 with exactly equal probability, not just approximately equal.
If c++11 is allowed there is a random header provided that makes this trivial:
#include <random>
#include <iostream>
int Roll(int Max)
{
if(Max>32767)
Max=32767;
std::random_device generator;
std::uniform_int_distribution<int> distribution(0,Max);
return distribution(generator);
}
int main()
{
std::cout << Roll(10) << std::endl
<< Roll(10) << std::endl
<< Roll(999999) << std::endl;
}
More details at: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/numeric/random
This presumes that RAND_MAX is provided by your problem and not by the C standard of course you could use the provided constant, for details see: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/numeric/random/RAND_MAX
do { r = random();} while (r >= max_rand);
At first I thought multiplying by a fraction would work but that could be considered cheating from a mathematical standpoint.
int getRand(int max)
{
int val = rand();
while (val > max)
{
val -= max + 1;
}
return val;
}
This will obviously be off slightly by counting values <= RAND_MAX % max once more than everything else but rand() % max has the same problem so I assume this error to be acceptable (for values of max << MAX_RAND the error is insignificant).

Sieve of Eratosthenes algorithm not working for large limits

I have programmed a sieve of Eratosthenes algorithm in C++, and it works fine for smaller numbers that I have tested it with. However, when I use large numbers, i.e. 2 000 000 as the upper limit, the program begins giving wrong answers. Can anyone clarify why?
Your help is appreciated.
#include <iostream>
#include <time.h>
using namespace std;
int main() {
clock_t a, b;
a = clock();
int n = 0, k = 2000000; // n = Sum of primes, k = Upper limit
bool r[k - 2]; // r = All numbers below k and above 1 (if true, it has been marked as a non-prime)
for(int i = 0; i < k - 2; i++) // Check all numbers
if(!r[i]) { // If it hasn't been marked as a non-prime yet ...
n += i + 2; // Add the prime to the total sum (+2 because of the shift - index 0 is 2, index 1 is 3, etc.)
for(int j = 2 * i + 2; j < k - 2; j += i + 2) // Go through all multiples of the prime under the limit
r[j] = true; // Mark the multiple as a non-prime
}
b = clock();
cout << "Final Result: " << n << endl;
cout << b - a << "ms runtime achieved." << endl;
return 0;
}
EDIT: I just did some debugging and found that it works with the limit at around 400. At 500, however, it is off - it should be 21536, but is 21499
EDIT 2: Ah, I found two errors and those seem to have fixed the problem.
The first was found by others who answered, and is that n is overflowing - upon being made a long long data type, it has begun working.
The second, rather facepalm-worthy mistake, was that the booleans in r had to be initialized. After running loop before checking for primes to make all of them false, the right answer is gotten. Does anyone know why this occured?
You simply get an integer overflow. The C++ type int is has a limited range (on a 32 bit System usually from -(2^32) / 2 to 2^32 / 2 - 1, that is the usual maximum is 2147483647 (The specific maximum on your setup can be found out by #including the <limits> header and evaluating std::numeric_limits<int>::max(). Even when k is smaller than the maximum, your code will sooner or later cause an overflow in the expressions n += i + 2 or int j = 2 * i + 2.
You will have to choose a better (read: more appropriate) type like unsigned which does not support negative numbers and can thus can represent numbers twice as large as int. You can also try unsigned long or even unsigned long long.
Also note that variable length arrays (VLAs; that's what bool r[k - 2] is) are not standard C++. You might want to use std::vector instead. You also did not initialize the array to false (std::vector would do this automatically), which could also be the problem, especially if you say that it does not work even at k=500.
In C++, you should also use <ctime> instead of <time.h> (then clock_t and andclock()are defined in thestdnamespace, but since you areusing namespace std`, this won't make a difference for you), but this is more or less a matter of style.
I found a working example in my "code archive". Although it is not based on yours, you might find it useful:
#include <vector>
#include <iostream>
int main()
{
typedef std::vector<bool> marked_t;
typedef marked_t::size_type number_t; // The type used for indexing marked_t.
const number_t max = 500;
static const number_t iDif = 2; // Account for the numbers 1 and 2.
marked_t marked(max - iDif);
number_t i = iDif;
while (i*i <= max) {
while (marked[i - iDif] == true)
++i;
for (number_t fac = iDif; i * fac < max; ++fac)
marked[i * fac - iDif] = true;
++i;
}
for (marked_t::size_type i = 0; i < marked.size(); ++i) {
if (!marked[i])
std::cout << i + iDif << ',';
}
}

Calculating a Sum with C++

I wrote the following code to sum the series (-1)^i*(i/(i+1)). But when I run it I get -1 for any value of n.
Can some one please point out what I am doing wrong? Thank you in advance!
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int sum = 0;
int i = 1.0;
int n = 5.0;
for(i=1;i<=n;i++)
sum = (-1)^i*(i/(i+1));
cout << "Sum" <<" = "<< sum << endl;
return 0;
}
Problem #1: The C++ ^ operator isn't the math power operator. It's a bitwise XOR.
You should use pow() instead.
Problem #2:
You are storing floating-point types into an integer type. So the following will result in integer division (truncated division):
i/(i+1)
Problem #3:
You are not actually summing anything up:
sum = ...
should be:
sum += ...
A corrected version of the code is as follows:
double sum = 0;
int i = 1;
int n = 5;
for(i = 1; i <= n; i++)
sum += pow(-1.,(double)i) * ((double)i / (i + 1));
Although you really don't need to use pow in this case. A simple test for odd/even will do.
double sum = 0;
int i = 1;
int n = 5;
for(i = 1; i <= n; i++){
double val = (double)i / (i + 1);
if (i % 2 != 0){
val *= -1.;
}
sum += val;
}
You need too put sum += pow(-1,i)*(i/(i+1));
Otherwise you lose previous result each time.
Use pow function for pow operation.
edit : as said in other post, use double or float instead of int to avoid truncated division.
How about this
((i % 2) == 0 ? 1 : -1)
instead of
std::pow(-1, i)
?
Full answer:
double sum = 0;
int i = 1.0;
int n = 5.0;
for (i = 1; i <= n; ++i) {
signed char sign = ((i % 2) == 0 ? 1 : -1);
sum += sign * (i / (i+1));
}
Few problems:
^ is teh bitwise exclusive or in c++ not "raised to power". Use pow() method.
Remove the dangling opening bracket from the last line
Use ints not floats when assigning to ints.
You seem to have a few things wrong with your code:
using namespace std;
This is not directly related to your problem at hand, but don't ever say using namespace std; It introduces subtle bugs.
int i = 1.0;
int n = 5.0;
You are initializaing integral variables with floating-point constants. Try
int i = 1;
int n = 5;
sum = (-1)^i*(i/(i+1));
You have two problems with this expression. First, the quantity (i/(i+1)) is always zero. Remember dividing two ints rounds the result. Second, ^ doesn't do what you think it does. It is the exclusive-or operator, not the exponentiation operator. Third, ^ binds less tightly than *, so your expression is:
-1 xor (i * (i/(i+1)))
-1 xor (i * 0)
-1 xor 0
-1
^ does not do what you think it does. Also there are some other mistakes in your code.
What it should be:
#include <iostream>
#include <cmath>
int main( )
{
long sum = 0;
int i = 1;
int n = 5;
for( i = 1; i <= n; i++ )
sum += std::pow( -1.f, i ) * ( i / ( i + 1 ) );
std::cout << "Sum = " << sum << std::endl;
return 0;
}
To take a power of a value, use std::pow (see here). Also you can not assign int to a decimal value. For that you need to use float or double.
The aforementioned ^ is a bitwise-XOR, not a mark for an exponent.
Also be careful of Integer Arithmetic as you may get unexpected results. You most likely want to change your variables to either float or double.
There are a few issues with the code:
int sum = 0;
The intermediate results are not integers, this should be a double
int i = 1.0;
Since you will use this in a division, it should be a double, 1/2 is 0 if calculated in integers.
int n = 5.0;
This is an int, not a floating point value, no .0 is needed.
for(i=1;i<=n;i++)
You've already initialized i to 1, why do it again?
sum = (-1)^i*(i/(i+1));
Every iteration you lose the previous value, you should use sum+= 'new values'
Also, you don't need pow to calculate (-1)^i, all this does is switch between +1 and -1 depending on the odd/even status of i. You can do this easier with an if statement or with 2 for's, one for odd i one for even ones... Many choices really.