Given a binary string s, we need to find the number of its substrings, containing exactly k characters that are '1'.
For example: s = "1010" and k = 1, answer = 6.
Now, I solved it using binary search technique over the cumulative sum array.
I also used another approach to solve it. The approach is as follows:
For each position i, find the total substrings that end at i containing
exactly k characters that are '1'.
To find the total substrings that end at i containing exactly k characters that are 1, it can be represented as the set of indices j such that substring j to i contains exactly k '1's. The answer would be the size of the set. Now, to find all such j for the given position i, we can rephrase the problem as finding all j such that
number of ones from [1] to [j - 1] = the total number of ones from 1 to i - [the total number of ones from j to i = k].
i.e. number of ones from [1] to [j - 1] = C[i] - k
which is equal to
C[j - 1] = C[i] - k,
where C is the cumulative sum array, where
C[i] = sum of characters of string from 1 to i.
Now, the problem is easy because, we can find all the possible values of j's using the equation by counting all the prefixes that sum to C[i] - k.
But I found this solution,
int main() {
cin >> k >> S;
C[0] = 1;
for (int i = 0; S[i]; ++i) {
s += S[i] == '1';
++C[s];
}
for (int i = k; i <= s; ++i) {
if (k == 0) {
a += (C[i] - 1) * C[i] / 2;
} else {
a += C[i] * C[i - k];
}
}
cout << a << endl;
return 0;
}
In the code, S is the given string and K as described above, C is the cumulative sum array and a is the answer.
What is the code exactly doing by using multiplication, I don't know.
Could anybody explain the algorithm?
If you see the way C[i] is calculated, C[i] represents the number of characters between ith 1 and i+1st 1.
If you take an example S = 1001000
C[0] = 1
C[1] = 3 // length of 100
C[2] = 4 // length of 1000
So coming to your doubt, Why multiplication
Say your K=1, then you want to find out the substring which have only one 1, now you know that after first 1 there are two zeros since C[1] = 3. So number of of substrings will be 3, because you have to include this 1.
{1,10,100}
But when you come to the second part: C[2] =4
now if you see 1000 and you know that you can make 4 substrings (which is equal to C[2])
{1,10,100,1000}
and also you should notice that there are C[1]-1 zeroes before this 1.
So by including those zeroes you can make more substring, in this case by including 0 once
0{1,10,100,1000}
=> {01,010,0100,01000}
and 00 once
00{1,10,100,1000}
=> {001,0010,00100,001000}
so essentially you are making C[i] substrings starting with 1 and you can append i number of zeroes before this one and make another C[i] * C[i-k]-1 substrings. i varies from 1 to C[i-k]-1 (-1 because we want to leave that last one).
((C[i-k]-1)* C[i]) +C[i]
=> C[i-k]*C[i]
Related
I was asked the following question in an onsite interview:
A string is considered "balanced" when every letter in the string appears both in uppercase and lowercase. For e.g., CATattac is balanced (a, c, t occur in both cases), while Madam is not (a, d only appear in lowercase). Write a function that, given a string, returns the shortest balanced substring of that string. For e.g.,:
“azABaabza” should return “ABaab”
“TacoCat” should return -1 (not balanced)
“AcZCbaBz” should returns the entire string
Doing it with the brute force approach is trivial - calculating all the pairs of substrings and then checking if they are balanced, while keeping track of the size and starting index of the smallest one.
How do I optimize? I have a strong feeling it can be done with a sliding-window/two-pointer approach, but I am not sure how. When to update the pointers of the sliding window?
Edit: Removing the sliding-window tag since this is not a sliding-window problem (as discussed in the comments).
Due to the special property of string. There is only 26 uppercase letters and 26 lowercase letters.
We can loop every 26 letter j and denote the minimum length for any substrings starting from position i to find matches for uppercase and lowercase letter j be len[i][j]
Demo C++ code:
string s = "CATattac";
// if len[i] >= s.size() + 1, it denotes there is no matching
vector<vector<int>> len(s.size(), vector<int>(26, 0));
for (int i = 0; i < 26; ++i) {
int upperPos = s.size() * 2;
int lowerPos = s.size() * 2;
for (int j = s.size() - 1; j >= 0; --j) {
if (s[j] == 'A' + i) {
upperPos = j;
} else if (s[j] == 'a' + i) {
lowerPos = j;
}
len[j][i] = max(lowerPos - j + 1, upperPos - j + 1);
}
}
We also keep track of the count of characters.
// cnt[i][j] denotes the number of characters j in substring s[0..i-1]
// cnt[0][j] is always 0
vector<vector<int>> cnt(s.size() + 1, vector<int>(26, 0));
for (int i = 0; i < s.size(); ++i) {
for (int j = 0; j < 26; ++j) {
cnt[i + 1][j] = cnt[i][j];
if (s[i] == 'A' + j || s[i] == 'a' + j) {
++cnt[i + 1][j];
}
}
}
Then we can loop over s.
int m = s.size() + 1;
for (int i = 0; i < s.size(); ++i) {
bool done = false;
int minLen = 1;
while (!done && i + minLen <= s.size()) {
// execute at most 26 times, a new character must be added to change minLen
int prevMinLen = minLen;
done = true;
for (int j = 0; j < 26 && i + minLen <= s.size(); ++j) {
if (cnt[i + minLen][j] - cnt[i][j] > 0) {
// character j exists in the substring, have to find pair of it
minLen = max(minLen, len[i][j]);
}
}
if (prevMinLen != minLen) done = false;
}
// find overall minLen
if (i + minLen <= s.size())
m = min(m, minLen);
cout << minLen << '\n';
}
Output: (if i + minLen <= s.size(), it is valid. Otherwise substring doesn't exist if starting at that position)
The invalid output difference is due to how the array len is generated.
8
4
15
14
13
12
11
10
I'm not sure whether there is a simpler solution but it is the best I could think of right now.
Time complexity: O(N) with a constant of 26 * 26
Edit: I previously had O(nlog(n)) due to a unnecessary binary search.
I thought of a solution, which is technically O(n), where n is the length of the string, but the constant is pretty large.
For simplicity's sake, let's consider an analogous situation with only two letters, A and B (and their lowercase counterparts), and let l be the size of the alphabet for future reference. I worked on an example string ABabBaaA.
We start by computing the prefix counts of the number of occurrences of each letter. In this case, we get
i: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
----------------------------
A: 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2
a: 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3
B: 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2
b: 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1
This way, assuming we are indexing the string starting from 1 (for implementation's sake you can add an extra character to the beginning, like a dollar sign $), we can get the number of occurrences of each letter on any substring in constant time (or rather -- in O(l), but in my case l is set to 2 and in your case l = 26 so technically this is constant time).
OK now we prepare arrays / vectors / queues of character indices, so if the character A appears on indices 1 and 8, the structure will consist of 1 and 8. We get
A: 1, 8
a: 3, 6, 7
B: 2, 5
b: 4
What is important, is that in arrays and vectors, we can look up certain "lowest element greater than" in amortized constant time by discarding indices which are smaller than every index one by one.
Now, the algorithm. Starting at each (left) index greater than 0, we will find the earliest right index for which the substring bound by [left_index, right_index] is balanced. We do that as follows:
Start with left_index = right_index = i for i = 1, ..., n.
Read the array of prefix counts for right_index and subtract the prefix counts for left_index - 1 receiving the counts for the substring [left_index, right_index]. Find any letter, which fails the "balance" check. If there is none, you found the shortest balanced substring starting at left_index.
Find the first occurrence of the "missing" letter, greater than left_index. Set right_index to the index of that occurrence. Go to step 1 keeping the modified right_index.
For example: starting with left_index = right_index = 1 we see that the number of occurrences of each letter in the substring is 1, 0, 0, 0, so a fails the check. The earliest occurrence of a is 3, so we set right_index = 3. We go back to step 1 receiving a new array of occurrences: 1, 1, 1, 0. Now b fails the check, and its earliest occurrence greater than 1 is 4, so we set right_index to 4. We go to step 1 receiving an array of occurrences 1, 1, 1, 1, which passes the balance check.
Another example: starting with left_index = right_index = 2 we get in step 1 an array of occurrences 0, 0, 1, 0. Now b fails the check. The earliest occurrence of b greater than left_index is 4, so we set right_index to 4. Now we get an array of occurrences 0, 1, 1, 1, so A fails the check. The earliest occurrence of A greater than left_index is 8, so we set right_index to that. Now, the array of occurrences is 2-1, 3-0, 2-0, 1-0, which is 1, 3, 2, 1 and it passes the balance check.
Ultimately we will find the shortest balanced substring to be bB with left_index = 4.
The complexity of this algorithm is O(nl^2) because: we start at n different indices and we perform a maximum of l lookups (for l different letters which can fail the check) in O(1). For each lookup, we have to calculate l differences of prefix sums. But as l is constant (albeit it may be large, like 26), this simplifies to O(n).
I'm using a recursive approach to this; I'm not sure what it's time complexity is though.
The idea is we check what characters in the string are present in both their lower and upper form formats. For any characters that aren't given in both forms, we replace them with a space ' '. We then split the remaining string on ' ' into a list.
In the first case, if we have only one string left after it- we return it's length.
In the second case, if we have no characters left, we return -1.
In the third case, if we have more than one string left, we re-evaluate each of the strings sub-lengths and return the length of the longest string we then evaluate.
from collections import Counter
def findMutual(s):
lower = dict(Counter( [x for x in s if x.lower() == x] ))
upper = dict(Counter( [x for x in s if x.upper() == x] ))
mutual = {}
for charr in lower:
if charr.upper() in upper:
mutual[charr] = upper[charr.upper()] + lower[charr]
matching_charrs = ''.join([x if x.lower() in mutual else ' ' for x in s ]).split()
print(s)
print(matching_charrs)
return matching_charrs
def smallestSubstring(s):
matching_charrs = findMutual(s)
if len(matching_charrs) == 1:
return(len(matching_charrs[0]))
elif len(matching_charrs) == 0:
return(-1)
else:
list_lens = []
for i in matching_charrs:
list_lens.append(smallestSubstring(i))
return max(list_lens)
print(smallestSubstring('azABaabza'))
print(smallestSubstring('dAcZCbaBz'))
print(smallestSubstring('TacoCat'))
print(smallestSubstring('Tt'))
print(smallestSubstring('T'))
print(smallestSubstring('TaCc'))
Given n = 1 to 10^5, stored as a string in decimal format.
Example: If n = 968, then out of all subsequences i.e 9, 6, 8, 96, 68, 98, 968 there are 3 sub-sequences of it, i.e 968, 96 and 8, that are divisible by 8. So, the answer is 3.
Since the answer can be very large, print the answer modulo (10^9 + 7).
You can use dynamic programming. Let f(len, sum) be the number of subsequences of the prefix of length len such that their sum is sum modulo 8 (sum ranges from 0 to 7).
The value of f for len = 1 is obvious. The transitions go as follows:
We can start a new subsequence in the new position: f(len, a[i] % 8) += 1.
We can continue any subsequence from the shorter prefix:
for old_sum = 0..7
f(len, (old_sum * 10 + a[i]) % 8) += f(len - 1, old_sum) // take the new element
f(len, old_sum) += f(len - 1, old_sum) // ignore the new element
Of course, you can perform all computations module 10^9 + 7 and use a standard integer type.
The answer is f(n, 0) (all elements are taken into account and the sum modulo 8 is 0).
The time complexity of this solution is O(n) (as there are O(n) states and 2 transition from each of them).
Note: if the numbers can't have leading zeros, you can just one more parameter to the state: a flag that indicates whether the first element of the subsequence is zero (this sequences should never be extended). The rest of the solution stays the same.
Note: This answer assumes you mean contiguous subsequences.
The divisibility rule for a number to be divisible by 8 is if the last three digits of the number are divisible by 8. Using this, a simple O(n) algorithm can be obtained where n is the number of digits in the number.
Let N=a_0a_1...a_(n-1) be the decimal representation of N with n digits.
Let the number of sequences so far be s = 0
For each set of three digits, a_i a_(i+1) a_(i+2), check if the number is divisible by 8. If so, add i + 1 to the number of sequences, i.e., s = s + i. This is because all strings a_k..a_(i+2) will be divisible by 8 for k ranging from 0..i.
Loop i from 0 to n-2-1 and continue.
So, if you have 1424968, the subsequences divisible are at:
i=1 (424 yielding i+1 = 2 numbers: 424 and 1424)
i=3 (496 yielding i+1 = 4 numbers: 496, 2496, 42496, 142496)
i=4 (968 yielding i+1 = 5 numbers: 968, 4968, 24968, 424968, 1424968)
Note that some small modifications will be needed to consider numbers lesser than three digits in length.
Hence the total number of sequences = 2 + 4 + 5 = 11. Total complexity = O(n) where n is the number of digits.
One can use the fact that for any three-digit number abc the following holds:
abc % 8 = ((ab % 8) * 10 + c) % 8
Or in other words: the test for a number with a fixed start-index can be cascaded:
int div8(String s){
int total = 0, mod = 0;
for(int i = 0; i < s.length(); i++)
{
mod = (mod * 10 + s.charAt(i) - '0') % 8
if(mod == 0)
total++;
}
return total;
}
But we don't have fixed start-indices!
Well, that's pretty easy to fix:
Suppose two sequences a and b, such that int(a) % 8 = int(b) % 8 and b is a suffix of a. No matter what how the sequence continues, the modulos of a and b will always remain equal. Thus it's sufficient to keep track of the number of sequences that share the property of having an equal value modulo 8.
final int RESULTMOD = 1000000000 + 7;
int div8(String s){
int total = 0;
//modtable[i] is the number of subsequences with int(sequence) % 8 = i
int[] modTable = new int[8];
for(int i = 0; i < s.length(); i++){
int[] nextTable = new int[8];
//transform table from last loop-run (shared modulo)
for(int j = 0; j < 8; j++){
nextTable[(j * 10 + s.charAt(i) - '0') % 8] = modTable[j] % RESULTMOD;
}
//add the sequence that starts at this index to the appropriate bucket
nextTable[(s.charAt(i) - '0') % 8]++;
//add the count of all sequences with int(sequence) % 8 = 0 to the result
total += nextTable[0];
total %= RESULTMOD;
//table for next run
modTable = nextTable;
}
return total;
}
Runtime is O(n).
There are 10 possible states a subsequence can be in. The first is empty. The second is that there was a leading 0. And the other 8 are a ongoing number that is 0-7 mod 8. You start at the beginning of the string with 1 way of being empty, no way to be anything else. At the end of the string your answer is the number of ways to have a leading 0 plus an ongoing number that is 0 mod 8.
The transition table should be obvious. The rest is just normal dynamic programming.
Given two bit strings, x and y, with x longer than y, I'd like to compute a kind of asymmetric variant of the Levensthein distance between them. Starting with x, I'd like to know the minimum number of deletions and substitutions it takes to turn x into y.
Can I just use the usual Levensthein distance for this, or do I need I need to modify the algorithm somehow? In other words, with the usual set of edits of deletion, substitution, and addition, is it ever beneficial to delete more than the difference in lengths between the two strings and then add some bits back? I suspect the answer is no, but I'm not sure. If I'm wrong, and I do need to modify the definition of Levenshtein distance to disallow deletions, how do I do so?
Finally, I would expect intuitively that I'd get the same distance if I started with y (the shorter string) and only allowed additions and substitutions. Is this right? I've got a sense for what these answers are, I just can't prove them.
If i understand you correctly, I think the answer is yes, the Levenshtein edit distance could be different than an algorithm that only allows deletions and substitutions to the larger string. Because of this, you would need to modify, or create a different algorithm to get your limited version.
Consider the two strings "ABCD" and "ACDEF". The Levenshtein distance is 3 (ABCD->ACD->ACDE->ACDEF). If we start with the longer string, and limit ourselves to deletions and substitutions we must use 4 edits (1 deletion and 3 substitutions. The reason is that strings where deletions are applied to the smaller string to efficiently get to the larger string can't be achieved when starting with the longer string, because it does not have the complimentary insertion operation (since you're disallowing that).
Your last paragraph is true. If the path from shorter to longer uses only insertions and substitutions, then any allowed path can simply be reversed from the longer to the shorter. Substitutions are the same regardless of direction, but the inserts when going from small to large become deletions when reversed.
I haven't tested this thoroughly, but this modification shows the direction I would take, and appears to work with the values I've tested with it. It's written in c#, and follows the psuedo code in the wikipedia entry for Levenshtein distance. There are obvious optimizations that can be made, but I refrained from doing that so it was more obvious what changes I've made from the standard algorithm. An important observation is that (using your constraints) if the strings are the same length, then substitution is the only operation allowed.
static int LevenshteinDistance(string s, string t) {
int i, j;
int m = s.Length;
int n = t.Length;
// for all i and j, d[i,j] will hold the Levenshtein distance between
// the first i characters of s and the first j characters of t;
// note that d has (m+1)*(n+1) values
var d = new int[m + 1, n + 1];
// set each element to zero
// c# creates array already initialized to zero
// source prefixes can be transformed into empty string by
// dropping all characters
for (i = 0; i <= m; i++) d[i, 0] = i;
// target prefixes can be reached from empty source prefix
// by inserting every character
for (j = 0; j <= n; j++) d[0, j] = j;
for (j = 1; j <= n; j++) {
for (i = 1; i <= m; i++) {
if (s[i - 1] == t[j - 1])
d[i, j] = d[i - 1, j - 1]; // no operation required
else {
int del = d[i - 1, j] + 1; // a deletion
int ins = d[i, j - 1] + 1; // an insertion
int sub = d[i - 1, j - 1] + 1; // a substitution
// the next two lines are the modification I've made
//int insDel = (i < j) ? ins : del;
//d[i, j] = (i == j) ? sub : Math.Min(insDel, sub);
// the following 8 lines are a clearer version of the above 2 lines
if (i == j) {
d[i, j] = sub;
} else {
int insDel;
if (i < j) insDel = ins; else insDel = del;
// assign the smaller of insDel or sub
d[i, j] = Math.Min(insDel, sub);
}
}
}
}
return d[m, n];
}
This is a problem from a programming contest that was held recently.
Two strings a[0..n-1] and b[0..n-1] are called cyclic equivalent if and only if there exists an offset d, such that for all 0 <= i < n, a[i] = b[(i + d) mod n].
Given two strings s[0..L-1] and t[0..L-1] with same length L. You need to find the maximum p such that s[0..p-1] and t[0..p-1] are cyclic equivalent.Print 0 if no such valid p exists.
Input
The first line contains an integer T indicating the number of test cases.
For each test case, there are two lines in total. The first line contains s. The second line contains t.
All strings contain only lower case alphabets.
Output
Output T lines in total. Each line should start with "Case #: " and followed by the maximum p. Here "#" is the number of the test case starting from 1.
Constraints
1 ≤ T ≤ 10
1 ≤ L ≤ 1000000
Example
Input:
2
abab
baba
abab
baac
Output:
Case 1: 4
Case 2: 3
Explanation
Case 1, d can be 1.
Case 2, d can be 2.
My approach :
Generate all substrings of S and T in the from S[0...i], T[0...i] and concatenate S[0...i] with itself and check if T is a substring of S[0...i]+S[0...i]. if it a substring then maximum P = i
bool isCyclic( string s, string t ){
string str = s;
str.append(s);
if( str.find(t) != string::npos )
return true;
return false;
}
int main(){
string s, t;
int t1,l, o=1;
scanf("%d", &t1);
while( t1-- ){
cin>>s>>t;
l = min( s.length(), t.length());
int i, maxP = 0;
for( i=1; i<=l; i++ ){
if( isCyclic(s.substr(0,i), t.substr(0,i)) ){
maxP = i;
}
}
printf("Case %d: %d\n", o++, maxP);
}
return 0;
}
I knew that this not the most optimized approach for this problem since i got Time Limit Exceeded.I came to know that prefix function can be used to get an O(n) algorithm. I dont know about prefix function.Could someone explain the O(n) approach ?
Contest link http://www.codechef.com/ACMKGP14/problems/ACM14KP3
I was going through suffix array and its use to compute longest common prefix of two suffixes.
The source says:
"The lcp between two suffixes is the minimum of the lcp's of all pairs of adjacent suffixes between them on the array"
i.e. lcp(x,y)=min{ lcp(x,x+1),lcp(x+1,x+2),.....,lcp(y-1,y) }
where x and y are two index of the string from where the two suffix of the string starts.
I am not convinced with the statement as in example of string "abca".
lcp(1,4)=1 (considering 1 based indexing)
but if I apply the above equation then
lcp(1,4)=min{lcp(1,2),lcp(2,3),lcp(3,4)}
and I think lcp(1,2)=0.
so the answer must be 0 according to the equation.
Am i getting it wrong somewhere?
I think the index referred by the source is not the index of the string itself, but index of the sorted suffixes.
a
abca
bca
ca
Hence
lcp(1,2) = lcp(a, abca) = 1
lcp(1,4) = min(lcp(1,2), lcp(2,3), lcp(3,4)) = 0
You can't find LCP of any two suffixes by simply calculating the minimum of the lcp's of all pairs of adjacent suffixes between them on the array.
We can calculate the LCPs of any suffixes (i,j)
with the Help of Following :
LCP(suffix i,suffix j)=LCP[RMQ(i + 1; j)]
Also Note (i<j) as LCP (suff i,suff j) may not necessarly equal LCP (Suff j,suff i).
RMQ is Range Minimum Query .
Page 3 of this paper.
Details:
Step 1:
First Calculate LCP of Adjacents /consecutive Suffix Pairs .
n= Length of string.
suffixArray[] is Suffix array.
void calculateadjacentsuffixes(int n)
{
for (int i=0; i<n; ++i) Rank[suffixArray[i]] = i;
Height[0] = 0;
for (int i=0, h=0; i<n; ++i)
{
if (Rank[i] > 0)
{
int j = suffixArray[Rank[i]-1];
while (i + h < n && j + h < n && str[i+h] == str[j+h])
{
h++;
}
Height[Rank[i]] = h;
if (h > 0) h--;
}
}
}
Note: Height[i]=LCPs of (Suffix i-1 ,suffix i) ie. Height array contains LCP of adjacent suffix.
Step 2:
Calculate LCP of Any two suffixes i,j using RMQ concept.
RMQ pre-compute function:
void preprocesses(int N)
{
int i, j;
//initialize M for the intervals with length 1
for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
M[i][0] = i;
//compute values from smaller to bigger intervals
for (j = 1; 1 << j <= N; j++)
{
for (i = 0; i + (1 << j) - 1 < N; i++)
{
if (Height[M[i][j - 1]] < Height[M[i + (1 << (j - 1))][j - 1]])
{
M[i][j] = M[i][j - 1];
}
else
{
M[i][j] = M[i + (1 << (j - 1))][j - 1];
}
}
}
}
Step 3: Calculate LCP between any two Suffixes i,j
int LCP(int i,int j)
{
/*Make sure we send i<j always */
/* By doing this ,it resolve following
suppose ,we send LCP(5,4) then it converts it to LCP(4,5)
*/
if(i>j)
swap(i,j);
/*conformation over*/
if(i==j)
{
return (Length_of_str-suffixArray[i]);
}
else
{
return Height[RMQ(i+1,j)];
//LCP(suffix i,suffix j)=LCPadj[RMQ(i + 1; j)]
//LCPadj=LCP of adjacent suffix =Height.
}
}
Where RMQ function is:
int RMQ(int i,int j)
{
int k=log((double)(j-i+1))/log((double)2);
int vv= j-(1<<k)+1 ;
if(Height[M[i][k]]<=Height[ M[vv][ k] ])
return M[i][k];
else
return M[ vv ][ k];
}
Refer Topcoder tutorials for RMQ.
You can check the complete implementation in C++ at my blog.