Python floating point precision sum - python-3.x

I have the following array in python
n = [565387674.45, 321772103.48,321772103.48, 214514735.66,214514735.65,
357524559.41]
if I sum all these elements, I get this:
sum(n)
1995485912.1300004
But, this sum should be:
1995485912.13
In this way, I know about floating point "error". I already used the isclose() function from numpy to check the corrected value, but
how much is this limit? Is there any way to reduce this "error"?
The main issue here is that the error propagates to other operations, for example, the below assertion must be true:
assert (sum(n) - 1995485911) ** 100 - (1995485912.13 - 1995485911) ** 100 == 0.

This is problem with floating point numbers. One solution is having them represented in string form and using decimal module:
n = ['565387674.45', '321772103.48', '321772103.48', '214514735.66', '214514735.65',
'357524559.41']
from decimal import Decimal
s = sum(Decimal(i) for i in n)
print(s)
Prints:
1995485912.13

You could use round(num, n) function which rounds the number to the desired decimal places. So in your example you would use round(sum(n), 2)

Related

How to write a function that turns a float into an int and rounds it up instead of down(which is the usual response python gives)

Write a function that takes a float as input and rounds it away from zero, i.e., returns the integer obtained
by rounding up for positive floats and by rounding down for negative floats. The return value should always
be an int object. Consider the example below.
>>> round_away_from_zero(7.2)
8
>>> round_away_from_zero(-3.6)
-4
>>> round_away_from_zero(5.0)
5
Is there a simple iteration that I can solve using this.
I understand it has to do with floor division(i.e x//2) but not sure how to implement
You can use an IF statement. If the number is positive, then we use math.ceil(). Otherwise, we use math.floor().
def round_away_from_zero(n):
if n > 0:
return math.ceil(n)
else:
return math.floor(n)

How to print the fractional part of the number?

It's my first question
So, the problem is python rounding. I have seen it, but I dont really know how to get around it.
For example: i have the number 10.34 - I need to receive just fractional part, so 0.34
I had some ideas how to do that. One of this:
n = float(input())
print(n - int(n))
In case of 10.34 the code give me "0.33999999999999986" instead 0.34.
I have some ideas how to do it with help of strings or another tools, but the task assumes that I need just some basic tools
Use round:
res = n - int(n)
print(round(res, 10))
n = float(input()) n = n - int(n) n = round(n,2)
https://www.w3schools.com/python/ref_func_round.asp
The round() function returns a floating point number that is a rounded version of the specified number, with the specified number of decimals.
round(number, digits)
For your refrence

why is np.exp(x) not equal to np.exp(1)**x

Why is why is np.exp(x) not equal to np.exp(1)**x?
For example:
np.exp(400)
>>>5.221469689764144e+173
np.exp(1)**400
>>>5.221469689764033e+173
np.exp(400)-np.exp(1)**400
>>>1.1093513018771065e+160
This is optimisation of numpy that raise this diff.
Indeed, you have to understand how is calculated the Euler number in math:
e = (1/n)**n with n == inf.
I think numpy stop at a certain order:
You have in the numpy exp documentation here that is not very clear about how the Euler number is calculated.
Because of this order that is not equal to infinity, you have this small difference in the two calculations.
Indeed the value np.exp(400) is calculated using this: (1 + 400/n)**n
>>> (1 + 400/n)**n
5.221642085428121e+173
>>> numpy.exp(400)
5.221469689764144e+173
Here you have n = 1000000000000 wich is very small and raise this difference at 10e-5.
Indeed there is no exact value of the Euler number. Like Pi, you can only have an approched value.
It looks like a rounding issue. In the first case it's internally using a very precise value of e, while in the second you get a less precise value, which when multiplied 400 times the precision issues become more apparent.
The actual result when using the Windows calculator is 5.2214696897641439505887630066496e+173, so you can see your first outcome is fine, while the second is not.
5.2214696897641439505887630066496e+173 // calculator
5.221469689764144e+173 // exp(400)
5.221469689764033e+173 // exp(1)**400
Starting from your result, it looks it's using a value with 15 digits of precision.
2.7182818284590452353602874713527 // e
2.7182818284590450909589085441968 // 400th root of the 2nd result

how to generate random numbers between closed interval [0,1]?

I need to get soma random values between closed interval [0,1] rather than opened interval. Is there any way this can be done?
Is this ok?
You can use:
random.uniform(0, 1)
Note: When calling N = random.uniform(a, b), the behaviour is always that a <= N <= b but the end-point value b may or may not be included in the range depending on floating-point rounding.
See https://docs.python.org/3/library/random.html?highlight=uniform#random.uniform
First, try: import random (random.randint(0,10**6)*1.0 /10**6)
This will give you full floating point precision.
Otherwise, try:
import decimal
def randfloat():
decimal.getcontext().prec = 10 # 10 decimal points enough?!
return decimal.Decimal(0) + decimal.Decimal(random.uniform(0, 1))
# this should include both boundaries as float gets close enough to 1 to make decimal round
>>> decimal.Decimal(0) + decimal.Decimal(0.99999999999)
Decimal('1.000000000')
while uniform() apparently guarantees the inclusion of the lower boundary

math.sqrt function python gives same result for two different values [duplicate]

Why does the math module return the wrong result?
First test
A = 12345678917
print 'A =',A
B = sqrt(A**2)
print 'B =',int(B)
Result
A = 12345678917
B = 12345678917
Here, the result is correct.
Second test
A = 123456758365483459347856
print 'A =',A
B = sqrt(A**2)
print 'B =',int(B)
Result
A = 123456758365483459347856
B = 123456758365483467538432
Here the result is incorrect.
Why is that the case?
Because math.sqrt(..) first casts the number to a floating point and floating points have a limited mantissa: it can only represent part of the number correctly. So float(A**2) is not equal to A**2. Next it calculates the math.sqrt which is also approximately correct.
Most functions working with floating points will never be fully correct to their integer counterparts. Floating point calculations are almost inherently approximative.
If one calculates A**2 one gets:
>>> 12345678917**2
152415787921658292889L
Now if one converts it to a float(..), one gets:
>>> float(12345678917**2)
1.5241578792165828e+20
But if you now ask whether the two are equal:
>>> float(12345678917**2) == 12345678917**2
False
So information has been lost while converting it to a float.
You can read more about how floats work and why these are approximative in the Wikipedia article about IEEE-754, the formal definition on how floating points work.
The documentation for the math module states "It provides access to the mathematical functions defined by the C standard." It also states "Except when explicitly noted otherwise, all return values are floats."
Those together mean that the parameter to the square root function is a float value. In most systems that means a floating point value that fits into 8 bytes, which is called "double" in the C language. Your code converts your integer value into such a value before calculating the square root, then returns such a value.
However, the 8-byte floating point value can store at most 15 to 17 significant decimal digits. That is what you are getting in your results.
If you want better precision in your square roots, use a function that is guaranteed to give full precision for an integer argument. Just do a web search and you will find several. Those usually do a variation of the Newton-Raphson method to iterate and eventually end at the correct answer. Be aware that this is significantly slower that the math module's sqrt function.
Here is a routine that I modified from the internet. I can't cite the source right now. This version also works for non-integer arguments but just returns the integer part of the square root.
def isqrt(x):
"""Return the integer part of the square root of x, even for very
large values."""
if x < 0:
raise ValueError('square root not defined for negative numbers')
n = int(x)
if n == 0:
return 0
a, b = divmod(n.bit_length(), 2)
x = (1 << (a+b)) - 1
while True:
y = (x + n//x) // 2
if y >= x:
return x
x = y
If you want to calculate sqrt of really large numbers and you need exact results, you can use sympy:
import sympy
num = sympy.Integer(123456758365483459347856)
print(int(num) == int(sympy.sqrt(num**2)))
The way floating-point numbers are stored in memory makes calculations with them prone to slight errors that can nevertheless be significant when exact results are needed. As mentioned in one of the comments, the decimal library can help you here:
>>> A = Decimal(12345678917)
>>> A
Decimal('123456758365483459347856')
>>> B = A.sqrt()**2
>>> B
Decimal('123456758365483459347856.0000')
>>> A == B
True
>>> int(B)
123456758365483459347856
I use version 3.6, which has no hardcoded limit on the size of integers. I don't know if, in 2.7, casting B as an int would cause overflow, but decimal is incredibly useful regardless.

Resources