I have a very big array of many value and store it in an row-major 1d array.
ex:
1 2 3
4 5 6
will be store in int* array = {1,2,3,4,5,6};
what I have to do is given the row1, row2, column1, column2, then print out the area's sum, and it will request to caulate different area for many times.
what I have think about it is first use nested loop to traverse the array and store each row's sum in sum_row and store each column's sum in sum_column and store the total element's sum im totalSum.
Then totalSum - the row and the columns that surrond it + the elemnts that has been minus twice.
But it seems fast enough, is there any algorithm that can do faster or some coding style tips that can make the factor little?
Thx in advance.
It seems to me that you have replaced one double iteration with another. The problem is in subtracting "the elemnts that has been minus twice"; unless I'm mistaken, this involves iterating over those elements to sum them.
Instead, just iterate over the rectangular area that you need to sum. I doubt it will be any slower.
A more efficient algorithm can be obtained by generating the matrix of summed upper-left matrices. (See the Wikipedia article on summed area table.) You can then compute any submatrix sum by looking up four area sums.
Related
i have 2D array and give tow points p1(x1,y1) and p2(x2,y2) , is that any way to know number of cells between them ?
For a point p(i,j), it's position in a matrix is equal to i*width+j where width is the width of the matrix. Hence the number of cells between two elemets is abs((i1*width+j1) - (i2*width+j2)).
I have a problem with resolving my programming task. In fact, I resolved it, but my code don't pass some of test (time overseed).
The text of task is following:
We have a matrix that have N*N size. The first line of input contain two int: N and K. K is a number of lines that define submatrices.
Next N lines contains elements of main matrix (whitespace as delimeter of elements, \n as delimeter of lines). After that we have K lines that defines submatrices.
Definition is following:
y_l x_l y_r x_r where (x_l, y_l) is column and line of left top corner of submatrix in main matrix and (x_r, y_r) is column and line of right bottom corner of submatrix. We have to calculate sum of all submatrices and divide it into equivalence classes (submatrices are belong to one class if that sums are equal).
Output of program should be following:
three int (divided by whitespace) where first one is number of equivalence classes, second one is number of equivalence classes that have maximum elements and third one is average of sum of all submatrices.
From tests I pick up fact that problem is in calculation of sum:
while(true){
for(int i = x_l; i <= x_r; i++)
sum += *diff++;
if(diff == d_end) break;
d_start = d_start + size;
diff = d_start;
}
But I have no idea how to optimize it. May be someone can give me algorithm or some ideas how to calculate those sums faster.
Thanks.
UPDATE: Answer
After few days of searching I finally got working version of my program. Thanks to Yakk, which gave some very usefull advices.
There's final code.
Very usefull link that I strangely couldn't find before unless I ask a very specific question (bases on information that Yakk gave me) link.
I hope that my code might be helpfull for somebody in future.
Build a sum matrix.
At location (a,b) in the sum matrix, the sum of all elements left&above (including at (a,b)) of (a,b) in the original matrix is summed.
Now calculating the sum of a submatrix is 4 lookups, one add and two subtracts. Draw a 4x4 matrix and express the bottom right 2x2 using such sums to see how.
If you double stored data you can halve lookups. But I would not bother.
Building the sum matrix requires only a modest amoumt of work if you do it carefully.
Given a list of N players who are to play a 2 player game. Each of them are either well versed in making a particular move or they are not. Find out the maximum number of moves a 2-player team can know.
And also find out how many teams can know that maximum number of moves?
Example Let we have 4 players and 5 moves with ith player is versed in jth move if a[i][j] is 1 otherwise it is 0.
10101
11100
11010
00101
Here maximum number of moves a 2-player team can know is 5 and their are two teams that can know that maximum number of moves.
Explanation : (1, 3) and (3, 4) know all the 5 moves. So the maximal moves a 2-player team knows is 5, and only 2 teams can acheive this.
My approach : For each pair of players i check if any of the players is versed in ith move or not and for each player maintain the maximum pairs he can make with other players with his local maximum move combination.
vector<int> pairmemo;
for(int i=0;i<n;i++){
int mymax=INT_MIN;
int countpairs=0;
for(int j=i+1;j<n;j++){
int count=0;
for(int k=0;k<m;k++){
if(arr[i][k]==1 || arr[j][k]==1)
{
count++;
}
}
if(mymax<count){
mymax=count;
countpairs=0;
}
if(mymax==count){
countpairs++;
}
}
pairmemo.push_back(countpairs);
maxmemo.push_back(mymax);
}
Overall maximum of all N players is answer and count is corresponding sum of the pairs being calculated.
for(int i=0;i<n;i++){
if(maxi<maxmemo[i])
maxi=maxmemo[i];
}
int countmaxi=0;
for(int i=0;i<n;i++){
if(maxmemo[i]==maxi){
countmaxi+=pairmemo[i];
}
}
cout<<maxi<<"\n";
cout<<countmaxi<<"\n";
Time complexity : O((N^2)*M)
Code :
How can i improve it?
Constraints : N<= 3000 and M<=1000
If you represent each set of moves by a very large integer, the problem boils down to finding pair of players (I, J) which have maximum number of bits set in MovesI OR MovesJ.
So, you can use bit-packing and compress all the information on moves in Long integer array. It would take 16 unsigned long integers to store according to the constraints. So, for each pair of players you OR the corresponding arrays and count number of ones. This would take O(N^2 * 16) which would run pretty fast given the constraints.
Example:
Lets say given matrix is
11010
00011
and you used 4-bit integer for packing it.
It would look like:
1101-0000
0001-1000
that is,
13,0
1,8
After OR the moves array for 2 player team becomes 13,8, now count the bits which are one. You have to optimize the counting of bits also, for that read the accepted answer here, otherwise the factor M would appear in complexity. Just maintain one count variable and one maxNumberOfBitsSet variable as you process the pairs.
What Ill do is:
1. Do logical OR between all the possible pairs - O(N^2) and store it's SUM in a 2D array with the symmetric diagonal ignored. (thats we save half of the calc - see example)
2. find the max value in the 2D Array (can be done while doing task 1) -> O(1)
3. count how many cells in the 2D array equals to the maximum value in task 2 O(N^2)
sum: 2*O(N^2)+ O(1) => O(N^2)
Example (using the data in the question (with letters indexes):
A[10101] B[11100] C[11010] D[00101]
Task 1:
[A|B] = 11101 = SUM(4)
[A|C] = 11111 = SUM(5)
[A|D] = 10101 = SUM(3)
[B|C] = 11110 = SUM(4)
[B|D] = 11101 = SUM(4)
[C|D] = 11111 = SUM(5)
Task 2 (Done while is done 1):
Max = 5
Task 3:
Count = 2
By the way, O(N^2) is the minimum possible since you HAVE to check all the possible pairs.
Since you have to find all solutions, unless you find a way to find a count without actually finding the solutions themselves, you have to actually look at or eliminate all possible solutions. So the worst case will always be O(N^2*M), which I'll call O(n^3) as long as N and M are both big and similar size.
However, you can hope for much better performance on the average case by pruning.
Don't check every case. Find ways to eliminate combinations without checking them.
I would sum and store the total number of moves known to each player, and sort the array rows by that value. That should provide an easy check for exiting the loop early. Sorting at O(n log n) should be basically free in an O(n^3) algorithm.
Use Priyank's basic idea, except with bitsets, since you obviously can't use a fixed integer type with 3000 bits.
You may benefit from making a second array of bitsets for the columns, and use that as a mask for pruning players.
Suppose I have an array of 100 numbers. The only distinct values in the array are 1, 2 and 3. The values are randomly ordered throughout the array. For instance, the array might be populated as:
int values[100];
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++)
values[i] = 1 + rand() % 3;
How can I efficiently sort an array like this?
The fastest solution is not to "sort" at all:
Run through the array and count the number of occurrences of 1,2 and 3. These counts should hopefully fit in registers...
Fill the array with the right number of 1s, 2s and 3s, overwriting whatever is there already.
At the end you will have a fully sorted array.
In general, this can be a useful O(n) sorting algorithm when you have a very small range of possible values compared to the size of the array.
Dutch National flag algorithm is the commonly cited algorithm for this and is actually the partition step in one of the variants of quicksort (1 corresponds to less than, 2 to equal to and 3 to greater than). In that variant, you don't need to sort the middle portion.
I am trying to solve subsets from the USACO training gateway...
Problem Statement
For many sets of consecutive integers from 1 through N (1 <= N <= 39), one can partition the set into two sets whose sums are identical.
For example, if N=3, one can partition the set {1, 2, 3} in one way so that the sums of both subsets are identical:
{3} and {1,2}
This counts as a single partitioning (i.e., reversing the order counts as the same partitioning and thus does not increase the count of partitions).
If N=7, there are four ways to partition the set {1, 2, 3, ... 7} so that each partition has the same sum:
{1,6,7} and {2,3,4,5}
{2,5,7} and {1,3,4,6}
{3,4,7} and {1,2,5,6}
{1,2,4,7} and {3,5,6}
Given N, your program should print the number of ways a set containing the integers from 1 through N can be partitioned into two sets whose sums are identical. Print 0 if there are no such ways.
Your program must calculate the answer, not look it up from a table.
End
Before I was running on a O(N*2^N) by simply permuting through the set and finding the sums.
Finding out how horribly inefficient that was, I moved on to mapping the sum sequences...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_(number_theory)
After many coding problems to scrape out repetitions, still too slow, so I am back to square one :(.
Now that I look more closely at the problem, it looks like I should try to find a way to not find the sums, but actually go directly to the number of sums via some kind of formula.
If anyone can give me pointers on how to solve this problem, I'm all ears. I program in java, C++ and python.
Actually, there is a better and simpler solution. You should use Dynamic Programming
instead. In your code, you would have an array of integers (whose size is the sum), where each value at index i represents the number of ways to possibly partition the numbers so that one of the partitions has a sum of i. Here is what your code could look like in C++:
int values[N];
int dp[sum+1]; //sum is the sum of the consecutive integers
int solve(){
if(sum%2==1)
return 0;
dp[0]=1;
for(int i=0; i<N; i++){
int val = values[i]; //values contains the consecutive integers
for(int j=sum-val; j>=0; j--){
dp[j+val]+=dp[j];
}
}
return dp[sum/2]/2;
}
This gives you an O(N^3) solution, which is by far fast enough for this problem.
I haven't tested this code, so there might be a syntax error or something, but you get the point. Let me know if you have any more questions.
This is the same thing as finding the coefficient x^0 term in the polynomial (x^1+1/x)(x^2+1/x^2)...(x^n+1/x^n), which should take about an upper bound of O(n^3).