Problem :
There is a stack consisting of N bricks. You and your friend decide to play a game using this stack. In this game, one can alternatively remove 1/2/3 bricks from the top and the numbers on the bricks removed by the player is added to his score. You have to play in such a way that you obtain maximum possible score while it is given that your friend will also play optimally and you make the first move.
Input Format
First line will contain an integer T i.e. number of test cases. There will be two lines corresponding to each test case, first line will contain a number N i.e. number of element in stack and next line will contain N numbers i.e. numbers written on bricks from top to bottom.
Output Format
For each test case, print a single line containing your maximum score.
I have tried with recursion but didn't work
int recurse(int length, int sequence[5], int i) {
if(length - i < 3) {
int sum = 0;
for(i; i < length; i++) sum += sequence[i];
return sum;
} else {
int sum1 = 0;
int sum2 = 0;
int sum3 = 0;
sum1 += recurse(length, sequence, i+1);
sum2 += recurse(length, sequence, i+2);
sum3 += recurse(length, sequence, i+3);
return max(max(sum1,sum2),sum3);
}
}
int main() {
int sequence[] = {0, 0, 9, 1, 999};
int length = 5;
cout << recurse(length, sequence, 0);
return 0;
}
My approach to solving this problem was as follows:
Both players play optimally.
So, the solution is to be built in a manner that need not take the player into account. This is because both players are going to pick the best choice available to them for any given state of the stack of bricks.
The base cases:
Either player, when left with the last one/two/three bricks, will choose to remove all bricks.
For the sake of convenience, let's assume that the array is actually in reverse order (i.e. a[0] is the value of the bottom-most brick in the stack) (This can easily be incorporated by performing a reverse operation on the array.)
So, the base cases are:
# Base Cases
dp[0] = a[0]
dp[1] = a[0]+a[1]
dp[2] = a[0]+a[1]+a[2]
Building the final solution:
Now, in each iteration, a player has 3 choices.
pick brick (i), or,
pick brick (i and i-1) , or,
pick brick (i,i-1 and i-2)
If the player opted for choice 1, the following would result:
player secures a[i] points from the brick (i) (+a[i])
will not be able to procure the points on the bricks removed by the opponent. This value is stored in dp[i-1] (which the opponent will end up scoring by virtue of this choice made by the player).
will surely procure the points on the bricks not removed by the opponent. (+ Sum of all the bricks up until brick (i-1) not removed by opponent )
A prefix array to store the partial sums of points of bricks can be computed as follows:
# build prefix sum array
pre = [a[0]]
for i in range(1,n):
pre.append(pre[-1]+a[i])
And, now, if player opted for choice 1, the score would be:
ans1 = a[i] + (pre[i-1] - dp[i-1])
Similarly, for choices 2 and 3. So, we get:
ans1 = a[i]+ (pre[i-1] - dp[i-1]) # if we pick only ith brick
ans2 = a[i]+a[i-1]+(pre[i-2] - dp[i-2]) # pick 2 bricks
ans3 = a[i]+a[i-1]+a[i-2]+(pre[i-3] - dp[i-3]) # pick 3 bricks
Now, each player wants to maximize this value. So, in each iteration, we pick the maximum among ans1, ans2 and ans3.
dp[i] = max(ans1, ans2, ans3)
Now, all we have to do is to iterate from 3 through to n-1 to get the required solution.
Here is the final snippet in python:
a = map(int, raw_input().split())
a.reverse() # so that a[0] is bottom brick of stack
dp = [0 for x1 in xrange(n)]
dp[0] = a[0]
dp[1] = a[0]+a[1]
dp[2] = a[0]+a[1]+a[2]
# build prefix sum array
pre = [a[0]]
for i in range(1,n):
pre.append(pre[-1]+a[i])
for i in xrange(3,n):
# We can pick brick i, (i,i-1) or (i,i-1,i-2)
ans1 = a[i]+ (pre[i-1] - dp[i-1]) # if we pick only ith brick
ans2 = a[i]+a[i-1]+(pre[i-2] - dp[i-2]) # pick 2
ans3 = a[i]+a[i-1]+a[i-2]+(pre[i-3] - dp[i-3]) #pick 3
# both players maximise this value. Doesn't matter who is playing
dp[i] = max(ans1, ans2, ans3)
print dp[n-1]
At a first sight your code seems totally wrong for a couple of reasons:
The player is not taken into account. You taking a brick or your friend taking a brick is not the same (you've to maximize your score, the total is of course always the total of the score on the bricks).
Looks just some form of recursion with no memoization and that approach will obviously explode to exponential computing time (you're using the "brute force" approach, enumerating all possible games).
A dynamic programming approach is clearly possible because the best possible continuation of a game doesn't depend on how you reached a certain state. For the state of the game you'd need
Who's next to play (you or your friend)
How many bricks are left on the stack
With these two input you can compute how much you can collect from that point to the end of the game. To do this there are two cases
1. It's your turn
You need to try to collect 1, 2 or 3 and call recursively on the next game state where the opponent will have to choose. Of the three cases you keep what is the highest result
2. It's opponent turn
You need to simulate collection of 1, 2 or 3 bricks and call recursively on next game state where you'll have to choose. Of the three cases you keep what is the lowest result (because the opponent is trying to maximize his/her result, not yours).
At the very begin of the function you just need to check if the same game state has been processed before, and when returning from a computation you need to store the result. Thanks to this lookup/memorization the search time will not be exponential, but linear in the number of distinct game states (just 2*N where N is the number of bricks).
In Python:
memory = {}
bricks = [0, 0, 9, 1, 999]
def maxResult(my_turn, index):
key = (my_turn, index)
if key in memory:
return memory[key]
if index == len(bricks):
result = 0
elif my_turn:
result = None
s = 0
for i in range(index, min(index+3, len(bricks))):
s += bricks[i]
x = s + maxResult(False, i+1)
if result is None or x > result:
result = x
else:
result = None
for i in range(index, min(index+3, len(bricks))):
x = maxResult(True, i+1)
if result is None or x < result:
result = x
memory[key] = result
return result
print maxResult(True, 0)
import java.io.*;
import java.util.*;
import java.text.*;
import java.math.*;
import java.util.regex.*;
public class Solution {
public static void main(String[] args){
Scanner sc=new Scanner(System.in);
int noTest=sc.nextInt();
for(int i=0; i<noTest; i++){
int noBrick=sc.nextInt();
ArrayList<Integer> arr=new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (int j=0; j<noBrick; j++){
arr.add(sc.nextInt());
}
long sum[]= new long[noBrick];
sum[noBrick-1]= arr.get(noBrick-1);
for (int j=noBrick-2; j>=0; j--){
sum[j]= sum[j+1]+ arr.get(j);
}
long[] max=new long[noBrick];
if(noBrick>=1)
max[noBrick-1]=arr.get(noBrick-1);
if(noBrick>=2)
max[noBrick-2]=(int)Math.max(arr.get(noBrick-2),max[noBrick-1]+arr.get(noBrick-2));
if(noBrick>=3)
max[noBrick-3]=(int)Math.max(arr.get(noBrick-3),max[noBrick-2]+arr.get(noBrick-3));
if(noBrick>=4){
for (int j=noBrick-4; j>=0; j--){
long opt1= arr.get(j)+sum[j+1]-max[j+1];
long opt2= arr.get(j)+arr.get(j+1)+sum[j+2]-max[j+2];
long opt3= arr.get(j)+arr.get(j+1)+arr.get(j+2)+sum[j+3]-max[j+3];
max[j]= (long)Math.max(opt1,Math.max(opt2,opt3));
}
}
long cost= max[0];
System.out.println(cost);
}
}
}
I tried this using Java, seems to work alright.
here a better solution that i found on the internet without recursion.
#include <iostream>
#include <fstream>
#include <algorithm>
#define MAXINDEX 10001
using namespace std;
long long maxResult(int a[MAXINDEX], int LENGTH){
long long prefixSum [MAXINDEX] = {0};
prefixSum[0] = a[0];
for(int i = 1; i < LENGTH; i++){
prefixSum[i] += prefixSum[i-1] + a[i];
}
long long dp[MAXINDEX] = {0};
dp[0] = a[0];
dp[1] = dp[0] + a[1];
dp[2] = dp[1] + a[2];
for(int k = 3; k < LENGTH; k++){
long long x = prefixSum[k-1] + a[k] - dp[k-1];
long long y = prefixSum[k-2] + a[k] + a[k-1] - dp[k-2];
long long z = prefixSum[k-3] + a[k] + a[k-1] + a[k-2] - dp[k-3];
dp[k] = max(x,max(y,z));
}
return dp[LENGTH-1];
}
using namespace std;
int main(){
int cases;
int bricks[MAXINDEX];
ifstream fin("test.in");
fin >> cases;
for (int i = 0; i < cases; i++){
long n;
fin >> n;
for(int j = 0; j < n; j++) fin >> bricks[j];
reverse(bricks, bricks+n);
cout << maxResult(bricks, n)<< endl;
}
return 0;
}
Related
It hasn't been long since I started studying algorithm coding tests, and I found it difficult to find regularity in Memoization.
Here are two problems.
Min Cost Climbing Stairs
You are given an integer array cost where cost[i] is the cost of ith step on a staircase. Once you pay the cost, you can either climb one or two steps.
You can either start from the step with index 0, or the step with index 1.
Return the minimum cost to reach the top of the floor.
Min Cost Climbing Stairs
Recurrence Relation Formula:
minimumCost(i) = min(cost[i - 1] + minimumCost(i - 1), cost[i - 2] + minimumCost(i - 2))
House Robber
You are a professional robber planning to rob houses along a street. Each house has a certain amount of money stashed, the only constraint stopping you from robbing each of them is that adjacent houses have security systems connected and it will automatically contact the police if two adjacent houses were broken into on the same night.
Given an integer array nums representing the amount of money of each house, return the maximum amount of money you can rob tonight without alerting the police.
House Robber
Recurrence Relation Formula:
robFrom(i) = max(robFrom(i + 1), robFrom(i + 2) + nums(i))
So as you can see, first problem consist of the previous, and second problem consist of the next.
Because of this, when I try to make recursion function, start numbers are different.
Start from n
int rec(int n, vector<int>& cost)
{
if(memo[n] == -1)
{
if(n <= 1)
{
memo[n] = 0;
} else
{
memo[n] = min(rec(n-1, cost) + cost[n-1], rec(n-2, cost) + cost[n-2]);
}
}
return memo[n];
}
int minCostClimbingStairs(vector<int>& cost) {
const int n = cost.size();
memo.assign(n+1,-1);
return rec(n, cost); // Start from n
}
Start from 0
int getrob(int n, vector<int>& nums)
{
if(how_much[n] == -1)
{
if(n >= nums.size())
{
return 0;
} else {
how_much[n] = max(getrob(n + 1, nums), getrob(n + 2, nums) + nums[n]);
}
}
return how_much[n];
}
int rob(vector<int>& nums) {
how_much.assign(nums.size() + 2, -1);
return getrob(0, nums); // Start from 0
}
How can I easily know which one need to be started from 0 or n? Is there some regularity?
Or should I just solve a lot of problems and increase my sense?
Your question is right, but somehow examples are not correct. Both the problems you shared can be done in both ways : 1. starting from top & 2. starting from bottom.
For example: Min Cost Climbing Stairs : solution that starts from 0.
int[] dp;
public int minCostClimbingStairs(int[] cost) {
int n = cost.length;
dp = new int[n];
for(int i=0; i<n; i++) {
dp[i] = -1;
}
rec(0, cost);
return Math.min(dp[0], dp[1]);
}
int rec(int in, int[] cost) {
if(in >= cost.length) {
return 0;
} else {
if(dp[in] == -1) {
dp[in] = cost[in] + Math.min(rec(in+1, cost), rec(in+2, cost));
}
return dp[in];
}
}
However, there are certain set of problems where this is not easy. Their structure is such that if you start in reverse, the computation could get complicated or mess up the future results:
Example: Reaching a target sum from numbers in an array using an index at max only 1 time. Reaching 10 in {3, 4, 6, 5, 2} : {4,6} is one answer but not {6, 2, 2} as you are using index (4) 2 times.
This can be done easily in top down way:
int m[M+10];
for(i=0; i<M+10; i++) m[i]=0;
m[0]=1;
for(i=0; i<n; i++)
for(j=M; j>=a[i]; j--)
m[j] |= m[j-a[i]];
If you try to implement in bottom up way, you will end up using a[i] multiple times. You can definitely do it bottom up way if you figure a out a way to tackle this messing up of states. Like using a queue to only store reached state in previous iterations and not use numbers reached in current iterations. Or even check if you keep a count in m[j] instead of just 1 and only use numbers where count is less than that of current iteration count. I think same thing should be valid for all DP.
I'm facing difficulty in understanding O(sum) complexity solution of coin changing problem.
The problem statement is:
You are given a set of coins A. In how many ways can you make sum B assuming you have infinite amount of each coin in the set.
NOTE:
Coins in set A will be unique. Expected space complexity of this problem is O(B).
The solution is:
int count( int S[], int m, int n )
{
int table[n+1];
memset(table, 0, sizeof(table));
table[0] = 1;
for(int i=0; i<m; i++)
for(int j=S[i]; j<=n; j++)
table[j] += table[j-S[i]];
return table[n];
}
can someone explain me this code.?
First, let's identify the parameters and variables used in the function:
Parameters:
S contain the denomination of all m coins. i.e. Each element contain the value of each coin.
m represents the number of coin denominations. Essentially, it's the length of array S.
n represents the sum B to be achieved.
Variables:
table: Element i in array table contains the number of ways sum i can be achieved with the given coins. table[0] = 1 because there is a single way to achieve a sum of 0 (not using any coin).
i loops through each coin.
Logic:
The number of ways to achieve a sum j = sum of the following:
number of ways to achieve a sum of j - S[0]
number of ways to achieve a sum of j - S[1]
...
number of ways to achieve a sum of j - S[m-1] (S[m-1] is the value of the mth coin)
I did not completely decipher nor validate the rest of the code, but I hope this is a step in the right direction.
Added comments to code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int count( int S[], int m, int n )
{
int table[n+1];
memset(table, 0, sizeof(table));
table[0] = 1;
for(int i=0; i<m; i++) // Loop through all of the coins
for(int j=S[i]; j<=n; j++) // Achieve sum j between the value of S[i] and n.
table[j] += table[j-S[i]]; // Add to the number of ways to achieve sum j the number of ways to achieve sum j - S[i]
return table[n];
}
int main() {
int S[] = {1, 2};
int m = 2;
int n = 3;
int c = count(S, m, n);
printf("%d\n", c);
}
Notes:
The code avoids repeats: 3 = 1+1+1, 1+2 (2 ways instead of 3 if 2+1 was considered.
No dependence on the order of the coins in term of value.
The below question was asked in the atlassian company online test ,I don't have test cases , this is the below question I took from this link
find the number of ways you can form a string on size N, given an unlimited number of 0s and 1s. But
you cannot have D number of consecutive 0s and T number of consecutive 1s. N, D, T were given as inputs,
Please help me on this problem,any approach how to proceed with it
My approach for the above question is simply I applied recursion and tried for all possiblity and then I memoized it using hash map
But it seems to me there must be some combinatoric approach that can do this question in less time and space? for debugging purposes I am also printing the strings generated during recursion, if there is flaw in my approach please do tell me
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
unordered_map<string,int>dp;
int recurse(int d,int t,int n,int oldd,int oldt,string s)
{
if(d<=0)
return 0;
if(t<=0)
return 0;
cout<<s<<"\n";
if(n==0&&d>0&&t>0)
return 1;
string h=to_string(d)+" "+to_string(t)+" "+to_string(n);
if(dp.find(h)!=dp.end())
return dp[h];
int ans=0;
ans+=recurse(d-1,oldt,n-1,oldd,oldt,s+'0')+recurse(oldd,t-1,n-1,oldd,oldt,s+'1');
return dp[h]=ans;
}
int main()
{
int n,d,t;
cin>>n>>d>>t;
dp.clear();
cout<<recurse(d,t,n,d,t,"")<<"\n";
return 0;
}
You are right, instead of generating strings, it is worth to consider combinatoric approach using dynamic programming (a kind of).
"Good" sequence of length K might end with 1..D-1 zeros or 1..T-1 of ones.
To make a good sequence of length K+1, you can add zero to all sequences except for D-1, and get 2..D-1 zeros for the first kind of precursors and 1 zero for the second kind
Similarly you can add one to all sequences of the first kind, and to all sequences of the second kind except for T-1, and get 1 one for the first kind of precursors and 2..T-1 ones for the second kind
Make two tables
Zeros[N][D] and Ones[N][T]
Fill the first row with zero counts, except for Zeros[1][1] = 1, Ones[1][1] = 1
Fill row by row using the rules above.
Zeros[K][1] = Sum(Ones[K-1][C=1..T-1])
for C in 2..D-1:
Zeros[K][C] = Zeros[K-1][C-1]
Ones[K][1] = Sum(Zeros[K-1][C=1..T-1])
for C in 2..T-1:
Ones[K][C] = Ones[K-1][C-1]
Result is sum of the last row in both tables.
Also note that you really need only two active rows of the table, so you can optimize size to Zeros[2][D] after debugging.
This can be solved using dynamic programming. I'll give a recursive solution to the same. It'll be similar to generating a binary string.
States will be:
i: The ith character that we need to insert to the string.
cnt: The number of consecutive characters before i
bit: The character which was repeated cnt times before i. Value of bit will be either 0 or 1.
Base case will: Return 1, when we reach n since we are starting from 0 and ending at n-1.
Define the size of dp array accordingly. The time complexity will be 2 x N x max(D,T)
#include<bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
int dp[1000][1000][2];
int n, d, t;
int count(int i, int cnt, int bit) {
if (i == n) {
return 1;
}
int &ans = dp[i][cnt][bit];
if (ans != -1) return ans;
ans = 0;
if (bit == 0) {
ans += count(i+1, 1, 1);
if (cnt != d - 1) {
ans += count(i+1, cnt + 1, 0);
}
} else {
// bit == 1
ans += count(i+1, 1, 0);
if (cnt != t-1) {
ans += count(i+1, cnt + 1, 1);
}
}
return ans;
}
signed main() {
ios_base::sync_with_stdio(false), cin.tie(nullptr);
cin >> n >> d >> t;
memset(dp, -1, sizeof dp);
cout << count(0, 0, 0);
return 0;
}
Here's a problem:
Given string A and a substring B, remove the first occurence of substring B in string A till it is possible to do so. Note that removing a substring, can further create a new same substring. Ex. removing 'hell' from 'hehelllloworld' once would yield 'helloworld' which after removing once more would become 'oworld', the desired string.
Write a program for the above for input constraints of length 10^6 for A, and length 100 for B.
This question was asked to me in an interview, I gave them a simple algorithm to solve it that was to do exactly what the statement was and remove it iteratievly(to decresae over head calls), I later came to know there's a better solution for it that's much faster what would it be ? I've thought of a few optimizations but it's still not as fast as the fastest soln for the problem(acc. the company), so can anyone tell me of a faster way to solve the problem ?
P.S> I know of stackoverflow rules and that having code is better, but for this problem, I don't think that having code would be in any way beneficial...
Your approach has a pretty bad complexity. In a very bad case the string a will be aaaaaaaaabbbbbbbbb, and the string b will be ab, in which case you will need O(|a|) searches, each taking O(|a| + |b|) (assuming using some sophisticated search algorithm), resulting in a total complexity of O(|a|^2 + |a| * |b|), which with their constraints is years.
For their constraints a good complexity to aim for would be O(|a| * |b|), which is around 100 million operations, will finish in subsecond. Here's one way to approach it. For each position i in the string a let's compute the largest length n_i, such that the a[i - n_i : i] = b[0 : n_i] (in other words, the longest suffix of a at that position which is a prefix of b). We can compute it in O(|a| + |b|) by using Knuth-Morris-Pratt algorithm.
After we have n_i computed, finding the first occurrence of b in a is just a matter of finding the first n_i that is equal to |b|. This will be the right end of one of the occurrences of b in a.
Finally, we will need to modify Knuth-Morris-Pratt slightly. We will be logically removing occurrences of b as soon as we compute an n_i that is equal to |b|. To account for the fact that some letters were removed from a we will rely on the fact that Knuth-Morris-Pratt only relies on the last value of n_i (and those computed for b), and the current letter of a, so we just need a fast way of retrieving the last value of n_i after we logically remove an occurrence of b. That can be done with a deque, that stores all the valid values of n_i. Each value will be pushed into the deque once, and popped from it once, so that complexity of maintaining it is O(|a|), while the complexity of the Knuth-Morris-Pratt is O(|a| + |b|), resulting in O(|a| + |b|) total complexity.
Here's a C++ implementation. It could have some off-by-one errors, but it works on your sample, and it flies for the worst case that I described at the beginning.
#include <deque>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
using namespace std;
int main() {
string a, b;
cin >> a >> b;
size_t blen = b.size();
// make a = b$a
a = b + "$" + a;
vector<size_t> n(a.size()); // array for knuth-morris-pratt
vector<bool> removals(a.size()); // positions of right ends at which we remove `b`s
deque<size_t> lastN;
n[0] = 0;
// For the first blen + 1 iterations just do vanilla knuth-morris-pratt
for (size_t i = 1; i < blen + 1; ++ i) {
size_t z = n[i - 1];
while (z && a[i] != a[z]) {
z = n[z - 1];
}
if (a[i] != a[z]) n[i] = 0;
else n[i] = z + 1;
lastN.push_back(n[i]);
}
// For the remaining iterations some characters could have been logically
// removed from `a`, so use lastN to get last value of n instaed
// of actually getting it from `n[i - 1]`
for (size_t i = blen + 1; i < a.size(); ++ i) {
size_t z = lastN.back();
while (z && a[i] != a[z]) {
z = n[z - 1];
}
if (a[i] != a[z]) n[i] = 0;
else n[i] = z + 1;
if (n[i] == blen) // found a match
{
removals[i] = true;
// kill last |b| - 1 `n_i`s
for (size_t j = 0; j < blen - 1; ++ j) {
lastN.pop_back();
}
}
else {
lastN.push_back(n[i]);
}
}
string ret;
size_t toRemove = 0;
for (size_t pos = a.size() - 1; a[pos] != '$'; -- pos) {
if (removals[pos]) toRemove += blen;
if (toRemove) -- toRemove;
else ret.push_back(a[pos]);
}
reverse(ret.begin(), ret.end());
cout << ret << endl;
return 0;
}
[in] hehelllloworld
[in] hell
[out] oworld
[in] abababc
[in] ababc
[out] ab
[in] caaaaa ... aaaaaabbbbbb ... bbbbc
[in] ab
[out] cc
Ok, so I have a histogram (represented by an array of ints), and I'm looking for the best way to find local maxima and minima. Each histogram should have 3 peaks, one of them (the first one) probably much higher than the others.
I want to do several things:
Find the first "valley" following the first peak (in order to get rid of the first peak altogether in the picture)
Find the optimum "valley" value in between the remaining two peaks to separate the picture
I already know how to do step 2 by implementing a variant of Otsu.
But I'm struggling with step 1
In case the valley in between the two remaining peaks is not low enough, I'd like to give a warning.
Also, the image is quite clean with little noise to account for
What would be the brute-force algorithms to do steps 1 and 3? I could find a way to implement Otsu, but the brute-force is escaping me, math-wise. As it turns out, there is more documentation on doing methods like otsu, and less on simply finding peaks and valleys. I am not looking for anything more than whatever gets the job done (i.e. it's a temporary solution, just has to be implementable in a reasonable timeframe, until I can spend more time on it)
I am doing all this in c#
Any help on which steps to take would be appreciated!
Thank you so much!
EDIT: some more data:
most histogram are likely to be like the first one, with the first peak representing background.
Use peakiness-test. It's a method to find all the possible peak between two local minima, and measure the peakiness based on a formula. If the peakiness higher than a threshold, the peak is accepted.
Source: UCF CV CAP5415 lecture 9 slides
Below is my code:
public static List<int> PeakinessTest(int[] histogram, double peakinessThres)
{
int j=0;
List<int> valleys = new List<int> ();
//The start of the valley
int vA = histogram[j];
int P = vA;
//The end of the valley
int vB = 0;
//The width of the valley, default width is 1
int W = 1;
//The sum of the pixels between vA and vB
int N = 0;
//The measure of the peaks peakiness
double peakiness=0.0;
int peak=0;
bool l = false;
try
{
while (j < 254)
{
l = false;
vA = histogram[j];
P = vA;
W = 1;
N = vA;
int i = j + 1;
//To find the peak
while (P < histogram[i])
{
P = histogram[i];
W++;
N += histogram[i];
i++;
}
//To find the border of the valley other side
peak = i - 1;
vB = histogram[i];
N += histogram[i];
i++;
W++;
l = true;
while (vB >= histogram[i])
{
vB = histogram[i];
W++;
N += histogram[i];
i++;
}
//Calculate peakiness
peakiness = (1 - (double)((vA + vB) / (2.0 * P))) * (1 - ((double)N / (double)(W * P)));
if (peakiness > peakinessThres & !valleys.Contains(j))
{
//peaks.Add(peak);
valleys.Add(j);
valleys.Add(i - 1);
}
j = i - 1;
}
}
catch (Exception)
{
if (l)
{
vB = histogram[255];
peakiness = (1 - (double)((vA + vB) / (2.0 * P))) * (1 - ((double)N / (double)(W * P)));
if (peakiness > peakinessThres)
valleys.Add(255);
//peaks.Add(255);
return valleys;
}
}
//if(!valleys.Contains(255))
// valleys.Add(255);
return valleys;
}