Array partition using dynamic programming
What modification should I apply to the dynamic programming implementation of two partition problem to solve the following task:
You are given an array of positive integers as input, denote it C. The program should decide if it is possible to partition the array into two equal sum subsequences. You are allowed to remove some elements from the array, but not all, in order to make such partition feasible.
Example:
Suppose the input is 4 5 11 17 9. Two partition is possible if we remove 11 and 17. My question is what adjustments to my two partition implementation I should make to determine if two partition is possible (may or may not require to remove some elements) or output that two partition is impossible even if some elements are removed. The program should run in O(sum^2 * C) time.
Here is my two partition implementation in Python:
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
if s % 2 != 0: return False
T = [[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][i] = True
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[i][j] = T[i][j-1]
if i >= C[j-1]:
T[i][j] = T[i][j] or T[i-C[j-1]][j-1]
return T[s // 2][n]
python-3.x algorithm dynamic-programming
add a comment |
What modification should I apply to the dynamic programming implementation of two partition problem to solve the following task:
You are given an array of positive integers as input, denote it C. The program should decide if it is possible to partition the array into two equal sum subsequences. You are allowed to remove some elements from the array, but not all, in order to make such partition feasible.
Example:
Suppose the input is 4 5 11 17 9. Two partition is possible if we remove 11 and 17. My question is what adjustments to my two partition implementation I should make to determine if two partition is possible (may or may not require to remove some elements) or output that two partition is impossible even if some elements are removed. The program should run in O(sum^2 * C) time.
Here is my two partition implementation in Python:
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
if s % 2 != 0: return False
T = [[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][i] = True
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[i][j] = T[i][j-1]
if i >= C[j-1]:
T[i][j] = T[i][j] or T[i-C[j-1]][j-1]
return T[s // 2][n]
python-3.x algorithm dynamic-programming
Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 6:18
Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 15:46
@גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 20:09
In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 23:14
@גלעדברקן done.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:03
add a comment |
What modification should I apply to the dynamic programming implementation of two partition problem to solve the following task:
You are given an array of positive integers as input, denote it C. The program should decide if it is possible to partition the array into two equal sum subsequences. You are allowed to remove some elements from the array, but not all, in order to make such partition feasible.
Example:
Suppose the input is 4 5 11 17 9. Two partition is possible if we remove 11 and 17. My question is what adjustments to my two partition implementation I should make to determine if two partition is possible (may or may not require to remove some elements) or output that two partition is impossible even if some elements are removed. The program should run in O(sum^2 * C) time.
Here is my two partition implementation in Python:
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
if s % 2 != 0: return False
T = [[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][i] = True
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[i][j] = T[i][j-1]
if i >= C[j-1]:
T[i][j] = T[i][j] or T[i-C[j-1]][j-1]
return T[s // 2][n]
python-3.x algorithm dynamic-programming
What modification should I apply to the dynamic programming implementation of two partition problem to solve the following task:
You are given an array of positive integers as input, denote it C. The program should decide if it is possible to partition the array into two equal sum subsequences. You are allowed to remove some elements from the array, but not all, in order to make such partition feasible.
Example:
Suppose the input is 4 5 11 17 9. Two partition is possible if we remove 11 and 17. My question is what adjustments to my two partition implementation I should make to determine if two partition is possible (may or may not require to remove some elements) or output that two partition is impossible even if some elements are removed. The program should run in O(sum^2 * C) time.
Here is my two partition implementation in Python:
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
if s % 2 != 0: return False
T = [[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][i] = True
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[i][j] = T[i][j-1]
if i >= C[j-1]:
T[i][j] = T[i][j] or T[i-C[j-1]][j-1]
return T[s // 2][n]
python-3.x algorithm dynamic-programming
python-3.x algorithm dynamic-programming
edited Nov 13 '18 at 0:02
user1812
asked Nov 12 '18 at 5:14
user1812user1812
1134
1134
Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 6:18
Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 15:46
@גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 20:09
In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 23:14
@גלעדברקן done.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:03
add a comment |
Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 6:18
Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 15:46
@גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 20:09
In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 23:14
@גלעדברקן done.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:03
Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 6:18
Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 6:18
Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 15:46
Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 15:46
@גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 20:09
@גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 20:09
In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 23:14
In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 23:14
@גלעדברקן done.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:03
@גלעדברקן done.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:03
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.T[i][j][k]
if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i
& j
respectively within the first k
elements.
To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C)
.
To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i
such that T[i][i][n]
is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i
, as required by the question.
If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.
Here's a sample implementation:
def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
else:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True
for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
if s1 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
if s2 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
if T[i][i][n]:
return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
return False
print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))
@גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 7:05
Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:25
@user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 7:44
Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:45
@n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 14:15
|
show 15 more comments
To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.
4 5 11 17 9
0 (empty parts)
|0 ± 4| = 4
set now has 4 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 5| = 5
|4 - 5| = 1
|4 + 5| = 9
set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 11| = 11
|4 - 11| = 7
|4 + 11| = 15
|5 - 11| = 6
|5 + 11| = 16
|1 - 11| = 10
|1 + 11| = 12
|9 - 11| = 2
|9 + 11| = 20
... (iteration with 17)
|0 ± 9| = 9
|4 - 9| = 5
|4 + 9| = 13
|5 - 9| = 4
|5 + 9| = 14
|1 - 9| = 8
|1 + 9| = 10
|9 - 9| = 0
Bingo!
Python code:
def f(C):
diffs = set()
for n in C:
new_diffs = [n]
for d in diffs:
if d - n == 0:
return True
new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])
diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)
return False
Output:
> f([2, 3, 7, 2])
=> True
> f([2, 3, 7])
=> False
> f([7, 1000007, 1000000])
=> True
Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:05
@user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 13 '18 at 0:10
add a comment |
I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.
Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx]
in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)
But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx
inclusively.
Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2
Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)
function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
var
Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
Lists: array of TStringList;
found: Boolean;
s2: integer;
function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
var
key: string;
i: Integer;
begin
if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
found:= True;
Exit(True);
end;
if idx < 0 then
Exit(False);
//debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation
key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);
if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
//memoisation
Result := Map.Items[key]
else begin
Result := false;
//try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
for i := 0 to 2 do begin
if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
if Result then begin
//retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
if found then
Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
break;
end
else
//reset sums before the next try
Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
end;
end;
//remember result - memoization
Map.add(key, Result);
end;
end;
var
n, sum: Integer;
Subs: TArray<Word>;
begin
n := Length(A);
sum := SumInt(A);
s2 := sum div 2;
found := False;
Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
SetLength(Lists, 3);
Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;
if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
'[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
end else
Result := 'No luck :(';
end;
begin
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
end;
[16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]
No luck :(
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53256273%2farray-partition-using-dynamic-programming%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.T[i][j][k]
if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i
& j
respectively within the first k
elements.
To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C)
.
To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i
such that T[i][i][n]
is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i
, as required by the question.
If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.
Here's a sample implementation:
def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
else:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True
for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
if s1 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
if s2 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
if T[i][i][n]:
return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
return False
print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))
@גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 7:05
Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:25
@user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 7:44
Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:45
@n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 14:15
|
show 15 more comments
Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.T[i][j][k]
if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i
& j
respectively within the first k
elements.
To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C)
.
To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i
such that T[i][i][n]
is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i
, as required by the question.
If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.
Here's a sample implementation:
def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
else:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True
for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
if s1 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
if s2 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
if T[i][i][n]:
return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
return False
print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))
@גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 7:05
Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:25
@user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 7:44
Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:45
@n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 14:15
|
show 15 more comments
Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.T[i][j][k]
if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i
& j
respectively within the first k
elements.
To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C)
.
To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i
such that T[i][i][n]
is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i
, as required by the question.
If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.
Here's a sample implementation:
def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
else:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True
for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
if s1 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
if s2 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
if T[i][i][n]:
return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
return False
print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))
Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.T[i][j][k]
if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i
& j
respectively within the first k
elements.
To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C)
.
To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i
such that T[i][i][n]
is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i
, as required by the question.
If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.
Here's a sample implementation:
def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
else:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)
def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)
T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True
for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
if s1 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
if s2 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
if T[i][i][n]:
return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
return False
print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))
edited Nov 12 '18 at 16:57
answered Nov 12 '18 at 6:20
merlynmerlyn
1,73011222
1,73011222
@גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 7:05
Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:25
@user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 7:44
Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:45
@n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 14:15
|
show 15 more comments
@גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 7:05
Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:25
@user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 7:44
Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:45
@n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 14:15
@גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 7:05
@גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 7:05
Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:25
Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:25
@user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 7:44
@user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 7:44
Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:45
Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 7:45
@n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 14:15
@n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
– merlyn
Nov 12 '18 at 14:15
|
show 15 more comments
To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.
4 5 11 17 9
0 (empty parts)
|0 ± 4| = 4
set now has 4 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 5| = 5
|4 - 5| = 1
|4 + 5| = 9
set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 11| = 11
|4 - 11| = 7
|4 + 11| = 15
|5 - 11| = 6
|5 + 11| = 16
|1 - 11| = 10
|1 + 11| = 12
|9 - 11| = 2
|9 + 11| = 20
... (iteration with 17)
|0 ± 9| = 9
|4 - 9| = 5
|4 + 9| = 13
|5 - 9| = 4
|5 + 9| = 14
|1 - 9| = 8
|1 + 9| = 10
|9 - 9| = 0
Bingo!
Python code:
def f(C):
diffs = set()
for n in C:
new_diffs = [n]
for d in diffs:
if d - n == 0:
return True
new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])
diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)
return False
Output:
> f([2, 3, 7, 2])
=> True
> f([2, 3, 7])
=> False
> f([7, 1000007, 1000000])
=> True
Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:05
@user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 13 '18 at 0:10
add a comment |
To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.
4 5 11 17 9
0 (empty parts)
|0 ± 4| = 4
set now has 4 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 5| = 5
|4 - 5| = 1
|4 + 5| = 9
set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 11| = 11
|4 - 11| = 7
|4 + 11| = 15
|5 - 11| = 6
|5 + 11| = 16
|1 - 11| = 10
|1 + 11| = 12
|9 - 11| = 2
|9 + 11| = 20
... (iteration with 17)
|0 ± 9| = 9
|4 - 9| = 5
|4 + 9| = 13
|5 - 9| = 4
|5 + 9| = 14
|1 - 9| = 8
|1 + 9| = 10
|9 - 9| = 0
Bingo!
Python code:
def f(C):
diffs = set()
for n in C:
new_diffs = [n]
for d in diffs:
if d - n == 0:
return True
new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])
diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)
return False
Output:
> f([2, 3, 7, 2])
=> True
> f([2, 3, 7])
=> False
> f([7, 1000007, 1000000])
=> True
Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:05
@user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 13 '18 at 0:10
add a comment |
To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.
4 5 11 17 9
0 (empty parts)
|0 ± 4| = 4
set now has 4 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 5| = 5
|4 - 5| = 1
|4 + 5| = 9
set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 11| = 11
|4 - 11| = 7
|4 + 11| = 15
|5 - 11| = 6
|5 + 11| = 16
|1 - 11| = 10
|1 + 11| = 12
|9 - 11| = 2
|9 + 11| = 20
... (iteration with 17)
|0 ± 9| = 9
|4 - 9| = 5
|4 + 9| = 13
|5 - 9| = 4
|5 + 9| = 14
|1 - 9| = 8
|1 + 9| = 10
|9 - 9| = 0
Bingo!
Python code:
def f(C):
diffs = set()
for n in C:
new_diffs = [n]
for d in diffs:
if d - n == 0:
return True
new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])
diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)
return False
Output:
> f([2, 3, 7, 2])
=> True
> f([2, 3, 7])
=> False
> f([7, 1000007, 1000000])
=> True
To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.
4 5 11 17 9
0 (empty parts)
|0 ± 4| = 4
set now has 4 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 5| = 5
|4 - 5| = 1
|4 + 5| = 9
set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0
|0 ± 11| = 11
|4 - 11| = 7
|4 + 11| = 15
|5 - 11| = 6
|5 + 11| = 16
|1 - 11| = 10
|1 + 11| = 12
|9 - 11| = 2
|9 + 11| = 20
... (iteration with 17)
|0 ± 9| = 9
|4 - 9| = 5
|4 + 9| = 13
|5 - 9| = 4
|5 + 9| = 14
|1 - 9| = 8
|1 + 9| = 10
|9 - 9| = 0
Bingo!
Python code:
def f(C):
diffs = set()
for n in C:
new_diffs = [n]
for d in diffs:
if d - n == 0:
return True
new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])
diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)
return False
Output:
> f([2, 3, 7, 2])
=> True
> f([2, 3, 7])
=> False
> f([7, 1000007, 1000000])
=> True
edited Nov 13 '18 at 0:55
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:36
גלעד ברקןגלעד ברקן
12.8k21541
12.8k21541
Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:05
@user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 13 '18 at 0:10
add a comment |
Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:05
@user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 13 '18 at 0:10
Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:05
Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:05
@user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 13 '18 at 0:10
@user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 13 '18 at 0:10
add a comment |
I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.
Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx]
in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)
But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx
inclusively.
Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2
Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)
function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
var
Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
Lists: array of TStringList;
found: Boolean;
s2: integer;
function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
var
key: string;
i: Integer;
begin
if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
found:= True;
Exit(True);
end;
if idx < 0 then
Exit(False);
//debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation
key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);
if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
//memoisation
Result := Map.Items[key]
else begin
Result := false;
//try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
for i := 0 to 2 do begin
if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
if Result then begin
//retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
if found then
Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
break;
end
else
//reset sums before the next try
Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
end;
end;
//remember result - memoization
Map.add(key, Result);
end;
end;
var
n, sum: Integer;
Subs: TArray<Word>;
begin
n := Length(A);
sum := SumInt(A);
s2 := sum div 2;
found := False;
Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
SetLength(Lists, 3);
Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;
if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
'[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
end else
Result := 'No luck :(';
end;
begin
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
end;
[16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]
No luck :(
add a comment |
I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.
Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx]
in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)
But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx
inclusively.
Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2
Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)
function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
var
Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
Lists: array of TStringList;
found: Boolean;
s2: integer;
function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
var
key: string;
i: Integer;
begin
if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
found:= True;
Exit(True);
end;
if idx < 0 then
Exit(False);
//debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation
key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);
if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
//memoisation
Result := Map.Items[key]
else begin
Result := false;
//try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
for i := 0 to 2 do begin
if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
if Result then begin
//retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
if found then
Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
break;
end
else
//reset sums before the next try
Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
end;
end;
//remember result - memoization
Map.add(key, Result);
end;
end;
var
n, sum: Integer;
Subs: TArray<Word>;
begin
n := Length(A);
sum := SumInt(A);
s2 := sum div 2;
found := False;
Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
SetLength(Lists, 3);
Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;
if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
'[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
end else
Result := 'No luck :(';
end;
begin
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
end;
[16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]
No luck :(
add a comment |
I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.
Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx]
in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)
But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx
inclusively.
Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2
Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)
function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
var
Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
Lists: array of TStringList;
found: Boolean;
s2: integer;
function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
var
key: string;
i: Integer;
begin
if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
found:= True;
Exit(True);
end;
if idx < 0 then
Exit(False);
//debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation
key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);
if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
//memoisation
Result := Map.Items[key]
else begin
Result := false;
//try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
for i := 0 to 2 do begin
if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
if Result then begin
//retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
if found then
Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
break;
end
else
//reset sums before the next try
Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
end;
end;
//remember result - memoization
Map.add(key, Result);
end;
end;
var
n, sum: Integer;
Subs: TArray<Word>;
begin
n := Length(A);
sum := SumInt(A);
s2 := sum div 2;
found := False;
Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
SetLength(Lists, 3);
Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;
if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
'[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
end else
Result := 'No luck :(';
end;
begin
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
end;
[16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]
No luck :(
I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.
Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx]
in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)
But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx
inclusively.
Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2
Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)
function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
var
Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
Lists: array of TStringList;
found: Boolean;
s2: integer;
function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
var
key: string;
i: Integer;
begin
if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
found:= True;
Exit(True);
end;
if idx < 0 then
Exit(False);
//debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation
key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);
if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
//memoisation
Result := Map.Items[key]
else begin
Result := false;
//try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
for i := 0 to 2 do begin
if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
if Result then begin
//retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
if found then
Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
break;
end
else
//reset sums before the next try
Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
end;
end;
//remember result - memoization
Map.add(key, Result);
end;
end;
var
n, sum: Integer;
Subs: TArray<Word>;
begin
n := Length(A);
sum := SumInt(A);
s2 := sum div 2;
found := False;
Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
SetLength(Lists, 3);
Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;
if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
'[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
end else
Result := 'No luck :(';
end;
begin
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
end;
[16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]
No luck :(
edited Nov 12 '18 at 9:37
answered Nov 12 '18 at 9:12
MBoMBo
48.6k23050
48.6k23050
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53256273%2farray-partition-using-dynamic-programming%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
– n.m.
Nov 12 '18 at 6:18
Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 15:46
@גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
– user1812
Nov 12 '18 at 20:09
In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 '18 at 23:14
@גלעדברקן done.
– user1812
Nov 13 '18 at 0:03