I am implementing a collision detection algorithm stores the distance between all the objects in a single octree node. For instance if there are 4 objects in the node, there is a distance between objects 1&2, 1&3, 1&4, 2&3, 2&4 and 3&4. The formula for the total number of pairs is t = n * (n-1) / 2, where t is the total number of pairs and n is the number of objects in a node.
My question is, how do I convert from a position in the list to a pair of objects. For instance, using the above list of pairs, 3 would return the pair 2&3.
To save space in memory, the list is just a list of floats for the distance instead of containing distance and pointers to 2 objects.
I am unsure how to mathematically convert the single list index to a pair of numbers. Any help would be great. I am hoping to be able to break this down to 2 functions, the first returns the first object in the pair and the second returns the second, both the functions taking 2 variables, one being the index and the other being the total objects in the node. If possible I would like to make a function without any looping or having a recursive function because this will be run in real time for my collision detection algorithm.
Better ordering
I suggest using colexicographical order, as in that case you won't have to supply the total number of objects. Order your pairs like this:
0: 1: 2: 3: 4: 5: 6: 7: 8: 9: 10: 11: 12: 13: …
0&1, 0&2, 1&2, 0&3, 1&3, 2&3, 0&4, 1&4, 2&4, 3&4, 0&5, 1&5, 2&5, 3&5, …
You'll ve able to extend this list to infinite length, so you can know the index of any pair without knowing the number of items. This has the benefit that when you add new items to your data structure, you'll only have to append to your arrays, not relocate existing entries. I've adjusted the indices to zero-based, as you tagged your question C++ so I assume you'll be using zero-based indexing. All my answer below assumes this ordering.
You can also visualize the colex ordering like this:
a: 0 1 2 3 4 5 …
b:
1 0
2 1 2 index of
3 3 4 5 a&b
4 6 7 8 9
5 10 11 12 13 14
6 15 16 17 18 19 20
⋮ ⋮ ⋱
Pair to single index
Let us first turn a pair into a single index. The trick is that for every pair, you look at the second position and imagine all the pairs that had a lesser number in that position. So for example for the pair 2&4 you first count all the pairs where the second number is less than 4. This is the number of possible ways to choose two items from a set of 4 (i.e. the numbers 0 through 3), so you could express this as a binomial coefficient 4C2. If you evaluate it, you end up with 4(4−1)/2=6. To that you add the first number, as this is the number of pairs with lower index but with the same number in the second place. For 2&4 this is 2, so the overall index of 2&4 is 4(4−1)/2+2=8.
In general, for a pair a&b the index will be b(b−1)/2+a.
int index_from_pair(int a, int b) {
return b*(b - 1)/2 + a;
}
Single index to pair
One way to turn the single index i back into a pair of numbers would be increasing b until b(b+1)/2 > i, i.e. the situation where the next value of b would result in indices larger than i. Then you can find a as the difference a = i−b(b−1)/2. This approach by incrementing b one at a time involves using a loop.
pair<int, int> pair_from_index(int i) {
int a, b;
for (b = 0; b*(b + 1)/2 <= i; ++b)
/* empty loop body */;
a = i - b*(b - 1)/2;
return make_pair(a, b);
}
You could also interpret b(b−1)/2 = i as a quadratic equation, which you can solve using a square root. The real b you need is the floor of the floating point b you'd get as the positive solution to this quadratic equation. As you might encounter problems due to rounding errors in this approach, you might want to check whether b(b+1)/2 > i. If that is not the case, increment b as you would do in the loop approach. Once you have b, the computation of a remains the same.
pair<int, int> pair_from_index(int i) {
int b = (int)floor((sqrt(8*i + 1) + 1)*0.5);
if (b*(b + 1)/2 <= i) ++b; // handle possible rounding error
int a = i - b*(b - 1)/2;
return make_pair(a, b);
}
Sequential access
Note that you only need to turn indices back to pairs for random access to your list. When iterating over all pairs, a set of nested loops is easier. So instead of
for (int = 0; i < n*(n - 1)/2; ++i) {
pair<int, int> ab = pair_from_index(i);
int a = ab.first, b = ab.second;
// do stuff
}
you'd better write
for (int i = 0, b = 1; b != n; ++b) {
for (int a = 0; a != b; ++a) {
// do stuff
++i;
}
}
Based on my understanding of the question, one way to get a pair a&b (1-based, 2&3 in your example) from the index (0-based, 3 in your example) and the number of objects n (4 in your example) is:
t = n * (n - 1) / 2;
a = n - floor((1 + sqrt(1 + 8 * (t - index - 1))) / 2);
b = index + (n - a) * (n - a + 1) / 2 - t + a + 1;
Some credits to http://oeis.org/A002024
Generalized algorithms (for tuples rather than pairs) can be found at Calculate Combination based on position and http://saliu.com/bbs/messages/348.html, but they seem to involve calculating combinations in a loop.
Edit: a nicer formula for a (from the same source):
a = n - floor(0.5 + sqrt(2 * (t - index)));
Related
You are given a permutation p1,p2,...,pn of numbers from 1 to n.
A permutation is a sequence of integers from 1 to n of length n containing each number exactly once.
You are given q queries where each query consists of two integers a and b, In response to each query you need to return a number of inversions of permutation after swapping elements at index a and b, Here every query is independent i.e. after each query the permutation is restored to its initial state.
An inversion in a permutation p is a pair of indices (i, j) such that i > j and pi < pj. For example, a permutation [4, 1, 3, 2] contains 4 inversions: (2, 1), (3, 1), (4, 1), (4, 3).
Input: The first line contains n,q.
The second line contains the space-separated permutation p1,p2,...,pn.
Each line of the next q lines contains two integers a,b.
Output: For each query Print an integer denoting the number of Inversion on a new line.
Sample input:
5 5
1 2 3 4 5
1 2
1 3
2 5
2 4
3 3
Output:
1
3
5
3
0
Constraints:
2<=n<=1000
1<=q<=200000
My approach: I am counting no of inversions using BIT (https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/count-inversions-array-set-3-using-bit/) for each query after swapping elements at position a and b..and then again swapping it so that my array remains unchanged. But this solution gives TLE for large test cases. Is there any better approach for this problem?
You are getting TLE probably because number of computations in this approach is q * (n * log(n)) = 2 * 10^5 * 10^3 * log(1000) = ~10^9, which is more than generally accepted computations ~10^8.
I can think of the following solution. Please note that I have not coded / verified it:
Denoting ri == number of indices j, such that i > j && pi < pj. Eg: [2, 3, 1, 4], r3 = 2. Basically, it means the number of inversions with the farther index as i. (Please note that I am using 1-based index as per the question. Also,a < b as per the question)
Thus we have: Sum of ri == #invs (number of inversions)
We can calculate initial total #invs in O(n^2)
When a and b are swapped, we can observe that:
a) ri remains constant, where i < a .
b) ri remains constant, where i > b.
Only ri changes where a <= i <=b, and that too on these following conditions. I am considering the case when pa < pb. Exact opposite case will need to considered when pa > pb.
a) Since pa < pb, thus this swap causes #invs = #invs + 1
b) If (pi < pa && pi < pb) || (pi > pa && pi > pb), this swap does not change ri. Eg: [2,....10,....5]. Here Swapping 2 and 5 does not change the r value for 10.
c) If pa < pi < pb, it will increment ri by 1, and new rb by 1. Eg: [2,....3,.....4], when 2 and 4 are swapped, we have [4,....3,....2], the rvalue 3 increases by 1 (because of 4); and also the r value of 2 increase by 1 (because of 3). Please note that increment because of what about 4 > 2? was already calculated in step (a), and needs to be done once only.
d) We need to find all such indicies i where pa < pi < pb as we started with above. Let us call it f(a, b). Then the total change in #invs delta = (2 * f(a, b)) + 1, and answer will be #original_invs + delta.
As I mentioned, all the exact opposite steps need to be done for the case pa > pb. The delta will be negative in that case.
Now, the only thing remained is to solve: Given a, b, find f(a, b) efficiently. For this, we can pre-process and store it for all pairs of indices. This will take O(N^2) space, and O(N^2 * log(N)) time, using a balanced binary-search-tree (BST). Again showing steps for pre-processing for case pa < pb only. Another set of pre-processing steps needs to be done for the other case:
We will use self-balancing BST, in which each node also contains the following fields:
a) field_1: This denotes the size of the left sub-tree. This value will be updated on every insert operation, if size of left-sub-tree changes.
b) field_2: This denotes the number of elements < node.value that this tree has. This value is initialized once when the node is inserted and does not change thereafter. I have added a small explanation of how it will be achieved in Addendum-A. This field is basically our pre-processing, which will determine f(a, b).
With all of this now, for each index i, where 0 <= i < n, do the following: Create new tree. Insert pj values into the tree one by one, where (i < j < n ) && (pa < pj) . (Please note we are not inserting values where pa > pj). The method given in Addendum-A will make sure we find f(i, j) while inserting.
There will be n such pre-processed trees, one for every index. For finding f(a, b): We need to look into ath tree, and search node.value = pb. This node's field_2 = f(a, b).
The complexity of insertion is O(logN). So, the total pre-processing computation = O(N * N(logN)). Search is O(logN), so the query complexity is O(q * logN). Total complexity = O(N^2) + O(N * N (logN)) + O(q * logN) which will turn out ~10^7
==============================================================================
Addendum A: How to populate field_2 while inserting node:
i) Insert the node, and balance the tree. Update field_1 as required.
i) Initailze ans = 0. Traverse the BST from root searching for your node.
iii) do {
If node.value < search_key_b, ans += node.left_subtree_size + 1
} while(!node.found)
iv) ans -= 1
We can solve this in O(n log n) space and O(n log n + Q * log^2(n)) time with a merge-sort tree. The merge-sort tree allows us to find the number of elements inside a subarray that are greater than or lower than an input number in O(log^2(n)) time and O(n log n) space.
First we record the total number of inversions in O(n log n) time, for which there are known methods. To query the effect of a swap bound by left and right, consider the subarray between:
subtract the number of elements greater
than right in the subarray (those will
no longer be inversions)
subtract the number of elements smaller
than left in the subarray (those will
no longer be inversions)
add the number of elements greater
than left in the subarray (those will
be new inversions)
add the number of elements smaller
than right in the subarray (those will
be new inversions)
if right > left, add 1
if left > right, subtract 1
Let's say I have four numbers 0,1,1,3. I want to find number of unique combination of two number. Please help me to write the algo and code of this.
I know this is more of a math question but still I have to write the code.
Please help me.
From your example set 0,1,1,3, I assume you want to allow duplicates in your input, which makes this finding the number of unique combinations harder.
Since you only want to choose unique pairs, this is much simpler than choosing unique sets of n (at least when duplicates are allowed).
The idea is to first remove all duplicates, while keeping tack of how many inputs had duplicate values.
You're answer will then be
n C 2 + m where n is the # of different elements and m is the # of elements with duplicates.
for 0,1,1,3, n = 3 and m = 1 So you get 3 C 2 + 1 = 3 + 1 = 4
(0, 1), (0, 3), (1, 1), (1, 3)
The below code gives an implementation assuming your input is a vector of ints.
But you could change int to any type that has < defined.
unsigned long long unique_pairs(const std::vector<int>& elements){
std::map<int, int> counts;
for (int i = 0; i < elements.size(); ++i){
++counts[elements[i]];
}
unsigned long long n = counts.size(); // # of different elements
unsigned long long m(0); // # of repeated elements
for (std::map<int, int>::iterator it = counts.begin(); it != counts.end(); ++it){
if (it->second != 1){
++m;
}
}
return n * (n - 1) / 2 + m; // n C 2 + m
}
Demo
A simple pseudo-code for you is to do the thing like this:
1- getInputs(std::vector<int> inputs) //responsible to read inputs from the user
2- removeDuplicates(std:vector<int> inputs) //remove duplicates from the inputs
3- calculateCombination(n = length(inputs)) //if you are looking for combination you should implement n!/((n-2)!*2!) or if you are looking for permutation you should implement n!/(n-2)!
You have to use a combination formula in it. And you should write a factorial function for it.
suppose for example you have a 4 numbers and you want number of combinations without repetition so use 4C2
here 2 is for the number of elements you want to use in combination
4 is total number of elements that you have
so you can solve this by using 4! /(2!*(4-2)!) ....so this calculation will give you total number of combinations without repetition
Note : for unique combination you should have unique elements
Suppose that I have a sorted array, N, consisting of n elements. Now, given k, I need a highly efficient method to generate the k-combination that would be the middle combination (if all the k-combinations were lexicographically sorted).
Example:
N = {a,b,c,d,e} , k = 3
1: a,b,c
2: a,b,d
3: a,b,e
4: a,c,d
5: a,c,e
6: a,d,e
7: b,c,d
8: b,c,e
9: b,d,e
10: c,d,e
I need the algorithm to generate combination number 5.
The Wikipedia page on the combinatorial number system explains how this can be obtained (in a greedy way). However, since n is very large and I need to find the middle combination for all k's less than n, I need something much more efficient than that.
I'm hoping that since the combination of interest always lies in the middle, there is some sort of a straightforward method for finding it. For example, the first k-combination in the above list is always given by the first k elements in N, and similarly the last combination is always given by the last k elements. Is there such a way to find the middle combination as well?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_number_system
If you are looking for a way to obtain the K-indexes from the lexicographic index or rank of a unique combination, then your problem falls under the binomial coefficient. The binomial coefficient handles problems of choosing unique combinations in groups of K with a total of N items.
I have written a class in C# to handle common functions for working with the binomial coefficient. It performs the following tasks:
Outputs all the K-indexes in a nice format for any N choose K to a file. The K-indexes can be substituted with more descriptive strings or letters.
Converts the K-indexes to the proper lexicographic index or rank of an entry in the sorted binomial coefficient table. This technique is much faster than older published techniques that rely on iteration. It does this by using a mathematical property inherent in Pascal's Triangle and is very efficient compared to iterating over the set.
Converts the index in a sorted binomial coefficient table to the corresponding K-indexes. The technique used is also much faster than older iterative solutions.
Uses Mark Dominus method to calculate the binomial coefficient, which is much less likely to overflow and works with larger numbers.
The class is written in .NET C# and provides a way to manage the objects related to the problem (if any) by using a generic list. The constructor of this class takes a bool value called InitTable that when true will create a generic list to hold the objects to be managed. If this value is false, then it will not create the table. The table does not need to be created in order to use the 4 above methods. Accessor methods are provided to access the table.
There is an associated test class which shows how to use the class and its methods. It has been extensively tested with several cases and there are no known bugs.
To read about this class and download the code, see Tablizing The Binomial Coeffieicent.
The following tested code will calculate the median lexicographic element for any N Choose K combination:
void TestMedianMethod()
{
// This test driver tests out the GetMedianNChooseK method.
GetMedianNChooseK(5, 3); // 5 choose 3 case.
GetMedianNChooseK(10, 3); // 10 choose 3 case.
GetMedianNChooseK(10, 5); // 10 choose 5 case.
}
private void GetMedianNChooseK(int N, int K)
{
// This method calculates the median lexicographic index and the k-indexes for that index.
String S;
// Create the bin coeff object required to get all
// the combos for this N choose K combination.
BinCoeff<int> BC = new BinCoeff<int>(N, K, false);
int NumCombos = BinCoeff<int>.GetBinCoeff(N, K);
// Calculate the median value, which in this case is the number of combos for this N
// choose K case divided by 2.
int MedianValue = NumCombos / 2;
// The Kindexes array holds the indexes for the specified lexicographic element.
int[] KIndexes = new int[K];
// Get the k-indexes for this combination.
BC.GetKIndexes(MedianValue, KIndexes);
StringBuilder SB = new StringBuilder();
for (int Loop = 0; Loop < K; Loop++)
{
SB.Append(KIndexes[Loop].ToString());
if (Loop < K - 1)
SB.Append(" ");
}
// Print out the information.
S = N.ToString() + " choose " + K.ToString() + " case:\n";
S += " Number of combos = " + NumCombos.ToString() + "\n";
S += " Median Value = " + MedianValue.ToString() + "\n";
S += " KIndexes = " + SB.ToString() + "\n\n";
Console.WriteLine(S);
}
Output:
5 choose 3 case:
Number of combos = 10
Median Value = 5
KIndexes = 4 2 0
10 choose 3 case:
Number of combos = 120
Median Value = 60
KIndexes = 8 3 1
10 choose 5 case:
Number of combos = 252
Median Value = 126
KIndexes = 9 3 2 1 0
You should be able to port this class over fairly easily to the language of your choice. You probably will not have to port over the generic part of the class to accomplish your goals. Depending on the number of combinations you are working with, you might need to use a bigger word size than 4 byte ints.
I am having a Algorithm question, in which numbers are been given from 1 to N and a number of operations are to be performed and then min/max has to be found among them.
Two operations - Addition and subtraction
and operations are in the form a b c d , where a is the operation to be performed,b is the starting number and c is the ending number and d is the number to be added/subtracted
for example
suppose numbers are 1 to N
and
N =5
1 2 3 4 5
We perform operations as
1 2 4 5
2 1 3 4
1 4 5 6
By these operations we will have numbers from 1 to N as
1 7 8 9 5
-3 3 4 9 5
-3 3 4 15 11
So the maximum is 15 and min is -3
My Approach:
I have taken the lower limit and upper limit of the numbers in this case it is 1 and 5 only stored in an array and applied the operations, and then had found the minimum and maximum.
Could there be any better approach?
I will assume that all update (addition/subtraction) operations happen before finding max/min. I don't have a good solution for update and min/max operations mixing together.
You can use a plain array, where the value at index i of the array is the difference between the index i and index (i - 1) of the original array. This makes the sum from index 0 to index i of our array to be the value at index i of the original array.
Subtraction is addition with the negated number, so they can be treated similarly. When we need to add k to the original array from index i to index j, we will add k to index i of our array, and subtract k to index (j + 1) of our array. This takes O(1) time per update.
You can find the min/max of the original array by accumulating summing the values and record the max/min values. This takes O(n) time per operation. I assume this is done once for the whole array.
Pseudocode:
a[N] // Original array
d[N] // Difference array
// Initialization
d[0] = a[0]
for (i = 1 to N-1)
d[i] = a[i] - a[i - 1]
// Addition (subtraction is similar)
add(from_idx, to_idx, amount) {
d[from_idx] += amount
d[to_idx + 1] -= amount
}
// Find max/min for the WHOLE array after add/subtract
current = max = min = d[0];
for (i = 1 to N - 1) {
current += d[i]; // Sum from d[0] to d[i] is a[i]
max = MAX(max, current);
min = MIN(min, current);
}
Generally there is no "best way" to find the min/max in the performance point of view because it depends on how this application will be used.
-Finding the max and min in a list needs O(n) Time, so if you want to run many (many in the context of the input) operations, your approach to find the min/max after all the operations took place is fine.
-But if the list will hold many elements and you don’t want to run that many operations, you better check each result of the op if its a new max/min and update if necessary.
I've been trying to solve a problem in combinations. I have a matrix 6X6 i'm trying to find all combinations of length 8 in the matrix.
I have to move from neighbor to neighbor form each row,column position and i wrote a recursive program which generates the combination but the problem is it generates a lot of duplicates as well and hence is inefficient. I would like to know how could i eliminate calculating duplicates and save time.
int a={{1,2,3,4,5,6},
{8,9,1,2,3,4},
{5,6,7,8,9,1},
{2,3,4,5,6,7},
{8,9,1,2,3,4},
{5,6,7,8,9,1},
}
void genSeq(int row,int col,int length,int combi)
{
if(length==8)
{
printf("%d\n",combi);
return;
}
combi = (combi * 10) + a[row][col];
if((row-1)>=0)
genSeq(row-1,col,length+1,combi);
if((col-1)>=0)
genSeq(row,col-1,length+1,combi);
if((row+1)<6)
genSeq(row+1,col,length+1,combi);
if((col+1)<6)
genSeq(row,col+1,length+1,combi);
if((row+1)<6&&(col+1)<6)
genSeq(row+1,col+1,length+1,combi);
if((row-1)>=0&&(col+1)<6)
genSeq(row-1,col+1,length+1,combi);
if((row+1)<6&&(row-1)>=0)
genSeq(row+1,col-1,length+1,combi);
if((row-1)>=0&&(col-1)>=0)
genSeq(row-1,col-1,length+1,combi);
}
I was also thinking of writing a dynamic program basically recursion with memorization. Is it a better choice?? if yes than I'm not clear how to implement it in recursion. Have i really hit a dead end with approach???
Thankyou
Edit
Eg result
12121212,12121218,12121219,12121211,12121213.
the restrictions are that you have to move to your neighbor from any point, you have to start for each position in the matrix i.e each row,col. you can move one step at a time, i.e right, left, up, down and the both diagonal positions. Check the if conditions.
i.e
if your in (0,0) you can move to either (1,0) or (1,1) or (0,1) i.e three neighbors.
if your in (2,2) you can move to eight neighbors.
so on...
To eliminate duplicates you can covert 8 digit sequences into 8-digit integers and put them in a hashtable.
Memoization might be a good idea. You can memoize for each cell in the matrix all possible combinations of length 2-7 that can be achieved from it. Going backwards: first generate for each cell all sequences of 2 digits. Then based on that of 3 digits etc.
UPDATE: code in Python
# original matrix
lst = [
[1,2,3,4,5,6],
[8,9,1,2,3,4],
[5,6,7,8,9,1],
[2,3,4,5,6,7],
[8,9,1,2,3,4],
[5,6,7,8,9,1]]
# working matrtix; wrk[i][j] contains a set of all possible paths of length k which can end in lst[i][j]
wrk = [[set() for i in range(6)] for j in range(6)]
# for the first (0rh) iteration initialize with single step paths
for i in range(0, 6):
for j in range(0, 6):
wrk[i][j].add(lst[i][j])
# run iterations 1 through 7
for k in range(1,8):
# create new emtpy wrk matrix for the next iteration
nw = [[set() for i in range(6)] for j in range(6)]
for i in range(0, 6):
for j in range(0, 6):
# the next gen. wrk[i][j] is going to be based on the current wrk paths of its neighbors
ns = set()
if i > 0:
for p in wrk[i-1][j]:
ns.add(10**k * lst[i][j] + p)
if i < 5:
for p in wrk[i+1][j]:
ns.add(10**k * lst[i][j] + p)
if j > 0:
for p in wrk[i][j-1]:
ns.add(10**k * lst[i][j] + p)
if j < 5:
for p in wrk[i][j+1]:
ns.add(10**k * lst[i][j] + p)
nw[i][j] = ns
wrk = nw
# now build final set to eliminate duplicates
result = set()
for i in range(0, 6):
for j in range(0, 6):
result |= wrk[i][j]
print len(result)
print result
There are LOTS of ways to do this. Going through every combination is a perfectly reasonable first approach. It all depends on your requirements. If your matrix is small, and this operation isn't time sensitive, then there's no problem.
I'm not really an algorithms guy, but I'm sure there are really clever ways of doing this that someone will post after me.
Also, in Java when using CamelCase, method names should start with a lowercase character.
int a={{1,2,3,4,5,6},
{8,9,1,2,3,4},
{5,6,7,8,9,1},
{2,3,4,5,6,7},
{8,9,1,2,3,4},
{5,6,7,8,9,1},
}
By length you mean summation of combination of matrix elements resulting 8. i.e., elements to sum up 8 with in row itself and with the other row elements. From row 1 = { {2,6}, {3,5}, } and now row 1 elements with row 2 and so on. Is that what you are expecting ?
You can think about your matrix like it is one-dimension array - no matter here ("place" the rows one by one). For one-dimension array you can write a function like (assuming you should print the combinations)
f(i, n) prints all combinations of length n using elements a[i] ... a[last].
It should skip some elements from a[i] to a[i + k] (for all possible k), print a[k] and make a recursive call f(i + k + 1, n - 1).