What’s wrong with this code?
import math
y=1
z=y
while z>= 1 and z<1000 :
z= 2*y + 1
y=y+1
for a in range (2,int(math.sqrt(z) + 1)):
if z%a != 0:
print(z)
else:
break
What’s wrong here? I keep getting composite numbers as well in my output.
For z to be a prime number, it must be the case that there does not exist any number a such that 2 <= a <= sqrt(z) and a is a factor of z. I'd change your code to:
import math
y=1
z=y
while z>= 1 and z<1000 :
z= 2*y + 1
y=y+1
if all(z%a != 0 for a in range (2,int(math.sqrt(z) + 1))):
print(z)
You are printing a number even if it is not divisible by one number but divisible by another number.
The print should be outside the loop.
import math
y=1
z=y
while z>= 1 and z<1000 :
z= 2*y + 1
y=y+1
flag=0
for a in range (2,int(math.sqrt(z) + 1)):
if z%a == 0:
flag=1
break
if flag==0:
print z
Another way to improve your algorithm would be to move in multiples of six and check for numbers that are multipleofsix-1 and multiple of six+1 which would give you a much better efficiency. Except for 2 and 3 all other prime numbers could be found out in that range.
Further improvement would require you to maintain an array and store all previous primes and only divide by all primes below the square root of the number which you are checking.
There are still better improvisations like sieve of Eratosthenes and Atkins but these are the most basic that you can implement.
Related
I have this python program which computes the "Square Free Numbers" of a given number. I'm facing problem regarding the time complexity that is I'm getting the error as "Time Limit Exceeded" in an online compiler.
number = int(input())
factors = []
perfectSquares = []
count = 0
total_len = 0
# Find All the Factors of the given number
for i in range(1, number):
if number%i == 0:
factors.append(i)
# Find total number of factors
total_len = len(factors)
for items in factors:
for i in range(1,total_len):
# Eleminate perfect square numbers
if items == i * i:
if items == 1:
factors.remove(items)
count += 1
else:
perfectSquares.append(items)
factors.remove(items)
count += 1
# Eleminate factors that are divisible by the perfect squares
for i in factors:
for j in perfectSquares:
if i%j == 0:
count +=1
# Print Total Square Free numbers
total_len -= count
print(total_len)
How can I reduce the time complexity of this program? That is how can I reduce the for loops so the program gets executed with a smaller time complexity?
Algorithmic Techniques for Reducing Time Complexity(TC) of a python code.
In order to reduce time complexity of a code, it's very much necessary to reduce the usage of loops whenever and wherever possible.
I'll divide your code's logic part into 5 sections and suggest optimization in each one of them.
Section 1 - Declaration of Variables and taking input
number = int(input())
factors = []
perfectSquares = []
count = 0
total_len = 0
You can easily omit declaration of perfect squares, count and total_length, as they aren't needed, as explained further. This will reduce both Time and Space complexities of your code.
Also, you can use Fast IO, in order to speed up INPUTS and OUTPUTS
This is done by using 'stdin.readline', and 'stdout.write'.
Section 2 - Finding All factors
for i in range(1, number):
if number%i == 0:
factors.append(i)
Here, you can use List comprehension technique to create the factor list, due to the fact that List comprehension is faster than looping statements.
Also, you can just iterate till square root of the Number, instead of looping till number itself, thereby reducing time complexity exponentially.
Above code section guns down to...
After applying '1' hack
factors = [for i in range(1, number) if number%i == 0]
After applying '2' hack - Use from_iterable to store more than 1 value in each iteration in list comprehension
factors = list( chain.from_iterable(
(i, int(number/i)) for i in range(2, int(number**0.5)+1)
if number%i == 0
))
Section 3 - Eliminating Perfect Squares
# Find total number of factors
total_len = len(factors)
for items in factors:
for i in range(1,total_len):
# Eleminate perfect square numbers
if items == i * i:
if items == 1:
factors.remove(items)
count += 1
else:
perfectSquares.append(items)
factors.remove(items)
count += 1
Actually you can completely omit this part, and just add additional condition to the Section 2, namely ... type(i**0.5) != int, to eliminate those numbers which have integer square roots, hence being perfect squares themselves.
Implement as follows....
factors = list( chain.from_iterable(
(i, int(number/i)) for i in range(2, int(number**0.5)+1)
if number%i == 0 and type(i**0.5) != int
))
Section 4 - I think this Section isn't needed because Square Free Numbers doesn't have such Restriction
Section 5 - Finalizing Count, Printing Count
There's absolutely no need of counter, you can just compute length of factors list, and use it as Count.
OPTIMISED CODES
Way 1 - Little Faster
number = int(input())
# Find Factors of the given number
factors = []
for i in range(2, int(number**0.5)+1):
if number%i == 0 and type(i**0.5) != int:
factors.extend([i, int(number/i)])
print([1] + factors)
Way 2 - Optimal Programming - Very Fast
from itertools import chain
from sys import stdin, stdout
number = int(stdin.readline())
factors = list( chain.from_iterable(
(i, int(number/i)) for i in range(2, int(number**0.5)+1)
if number%i == 0 and type(i**0.5) != int
))
stdout.write(', '.join(map(str, [1] + factors)))
First of all, you only need to check for i in range(1, number/2):, since number/2 + 1 and greater cannot be factors.
Second, you can compute the number of perfect squares that could be factors in sublinear time:
squares = []
for i in range(1, math.floor(math.sqrt(number/2))):
squares.append(i**2)
Third, you can search for factors and when you find one, check that it is not divisible by a square, and only then add it to the list of factors.
This approach will save you all the time of your for items in factors nested loop block, as well as the next block. I'm not sure if it will definitely be faster, but it is less wasteful.
I used the code provided in the answer above but it didn't give me the correct answer. This actually computes the square free list of factors of a number.
number = int(input())
factors = [
i for i in range(2, int(number/2)+1)
if number%i == 0 and int(int(math.sqrt(i))**2)!=i
]
print([1] + factors)
### Run the code below and understand the error messages
### Fix the code to sum integers from 1 up to k
###
def f(k):
return f(k-1) + k
print(f(10))
I am confused on how to fix this code while using recursion, I keep getting the error messages
[Previous line repeated 995 more times]
RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded
Is there a simple way to fix this without using any while loops or creating more than 1 variable?
A recursion should have a termination condition, i.e. the base case. When your variable attains that value there are no more recursive function calls.
e.g. in your code,
def f(k):
if(k == 1):
return k
return f(k-1) + k
print(f(10))
we define the base case 1, if you want to take the sum of values from n to 1. You can put any other number, positive or negative there, if you want the sum to extend upto that number. e.g. maybe you want to take sum from n to -3, then base case would be k == -3.
Python doesn't have optimized tail recursion. You f function call k time. If k is very big number then Python trow RecursionError. You can see what is limit of recursion via sys.getrecursionlimit and change via sys.setrecursionlimit. But changing limit is not good idea. Instead of changing you can change your code logic or pattern.
Your recursion never terminates. You could try:
def f(k):
return k if k < 2 else f(k-1) + k
print(f(10))
You are working out the sum of all of all numbers from 1 to 10 which in essence returns the 10th triangular number. Eg. the number of black circles in each triangle
Using the formula on OEIS gives you this as your code.
def f(k):
return int(k*(k+1)/2)
print(f(10))
How do we know int() doesn't break this? k and k + 1 are adjacent numbers and one of them must have a factor of two so this formula will always return an integer if given an integer.
So I am working on a problem which need me to get factors of a certain number. So as always I am using the module % in order to see if a number is divisible by a certain number and is equal to zero. But when ever I am trying to do this I keep getting an error saying ZeroDivisionError . I tried adding a block of code like this so python does not start counting from zero instead it starts to count from one for potenial in range(number + 1): But this does not seem to work. Below is the rest of my code any help will be appreciated.
def Factors(number):
factors = []
for potenial in range(number + 1):
if number % potenial == 0:
factors.append(potenial)
return factors
In your for loop you are iterating from 0 (range() assumes starting number to be 0 if only 1 argument is given) up to "number". There is a ZeroDivisionError since you are trying to calculate number modulo 0 (number % 0) at the start of the for loop. When calculating the modulo, Python tries to divide number by 0 causing the ZeroDivisionError. Here is the corrected code (fixed the indentation):
def get_factors(number):
factors = []
for potential in range(1, number + 1):
if number % potential == 0:
factors.append(potential)
return factors
However, there are betters ways of calculating factors. For example, you can iterate only up to sqrt(n) where n is the number and then calculate "factor pairs" e.g. if 3 is a factor of 15 then 15/3 which is 5 is also a factor of 15.
I encourage you to try an implement a more efficient algorithm.
Stylistic note: According to PEP 8, function names should be lowercase with words separated by underscores. Uppercase names generally indicate class definitions.
I have made a code that doesn't seem to be very efficient. It only calculates a few of the primes.
This is my code:
num=float(1)
a=1
while(num>0): # Create variable to hold the factors and add 1 and itself (all numbers have these factors)
factors = [1, num]
# For each possible factor
for i in range(2, int(num/4)+3):
# Check that it is a factor and that the factor and its corresponding factor are not already in the list
if float(num) % i == 0 and i not in factors and float(num/i) not in factors:
# Add i and its corresponding factor to the list
factors.append(i)
factors.append(float(num/i))
num=float(num)
number=num
# Takes an integer, returns true or false
number = float(number)
# Check if the only factors are 1 and itself and it is greater than 1
if (len(factors) == 2 and number > 1):
num2=2**num-1
factors2=[1, num]
for i in range(2, int(num2/4)+3):
# Check that it is a factor and that the factor and its corresponding factor are not already in the list
if float(num2) % i == 0 and i not in factors2 and float(num2/i) not in factors2:
# Add i and its corresponding factor to the list
factors2.append(i)
factors2.append(float(num2/i))
if(len(factors2)==2 and num2>1):
print(num2)
a=a+1
num=num+2
How can I make my code more efficient and be able to calculate the Mersenne Primes quicker. I would like to use the program to find any possible new perfect numbers.
All the solutions shown so far use bad algorithms, missing the point of Mersenne primes completely. The advantage of Mersenne primes is we can test their primality more efficiently than via brute force like other odd numbers. We only need to check an exponent for primeness and use a Lucas-Lehmer primality test to do the rest:
def lucas_lehmer(p):
s = 4
m = 2 ** p - 1
for _ in range(p - 2):
s = ((s * s) - 2) % m
return s == 0
def is_prime(number):
"""
the efficiency of this doesn't matter much as we're
only using it to test the primeness of the exponents
not the mersenne primes themselves
"""
if number % 2 == 0:
return number == 2
i = 3
while i * i <= number:
if number % i == 0:
return False
i += 2
return True
print(3) # to simplify code, treat first mersenne prime as a special case
for i in range(3, 5000, 2): # generate up to M20, found in 1961
if is_prime(i) and lucas_lehmer(i):
print(2 ** i - 1)
The OP's code bogs down after M7 524287 and #FrancescoBarban's code bogs down after M8 2147483647. The above code generates M18 in about 15 seconds! Here's up to M11, generated in about 1/4 of a second:
3
7
31
127
8191
131071
524287
2147483647
2305843009213693951
618970019642690137449562111
162259276829213363391578010288127
170141183460469231731687303715884105727
6864797660130609714981900799081393217269435300143305409394463459185543183397656052122559640661454554977296311391480858037121987999716643812574028291115057151
531137992816767098689588206552468627329593117727031923199444138200403559860852242739162502265229285668889329486246501015346579337652707239409519978766587351943831270835393219031728127
This program bogs down above M20, but it's not a particulary efficient implementation. It's simply not a bad algorithm.
import math
def is_it_prime(n):
# n is already a factor of itself
factors = [n]
#look for factors
for i in range(1, int(math.sqrt(n)) + 1):
#if i is a factor of n, append it to the list
if n%i == 0: factors.append(i)
else: pass
#if the list has more than 2 factors n is not prime
if len(factors) > 2: return False
#otherwise n is prime
else: return True
n = 1
while True:
#a prime P is a Mersenne prime if P = 2 ^ n - 1
test = (2 ** n) - 1
#if test is prime is also a Mersenne prime
if is_it_prime(test):
print(test)
else: pass
n += 1
Probably it will stuck to 2147483647, but you know, the next Mersenne prime is 2305843009213693951... so don't worry if it takes more time than you expected ;)
If you just want to check if a number is prime, then you do not need to find all its factors. You already know 1 and num are factors. As soon as you find a third factor then the number cannot be prime. You are wasting time looking for the fourth, fifth etc. factors.
A Mersenne number is of the form 2^n - 1, and so is always odd. Hence all its factors are odd. You can halve the run-time of your loop if you only look for odd factors: start at 3 and step 2 to the next possible factor.
Factors come in pairs, one larger than the square root and one smaller. Hence you only need to look for factors up to the square root, as #Francesco's code shows. That can give you a major time saving for the larger Mersenne numbers.
Putting these two points together, your loop should be more like:
#look for factors
for i in range(3, int(math.sqrt(n)) + 1, 2):
I want to find an efficient algorithm to divide an integer number to some value in a max, min range. There should be as less values as possible.
For example:
max = 7, min = 3
then
8 = 4 + 4
9 = 4 + 5
16 = 5 + 5 + 6 (not 4 + 4 + 4 + 4)
EDIT
To make it more clear, let take an example. Assume that you have a bunch of apples and you want to pack them into baskets. Each basket can contain 3 to 7 apples, and you want the number of baskets to be used is as small as possible.
** I mentioned that the value should be evenly divided, but that's not so important. I am more concerned about less number of baskets.
This struck me as a fun problem so I had a go at hacking out a quick solution. I think this might be an interesting starting point, it'll either give you a valid solution with as few numbers as possible, or with numbers as similar to each other as possible, all within the bounds of the range defined by the min_bound and max_bound
number = int(input("Number: "))
min_bound = 3
max_bound = 7
def improve(solution):
solution = list(reversed(solution))
for i, num in enumerate(solution):
if i >= 2:
average = sum(solution[:i]) / i
if average.is_integer():
for x in range(i):
solution[x] = int(average)
break
return solution
def find_numbers(number, division, common_number):
extra_number = number - common_number * division
numbers_in_solution = [common_number] * division
if extra_number < min_bound and \
extra_number + common_number <= max_bound:
numbers_in_solution[-1] += extra_number
elif extra_number < min_bound or extra_number > max_bound:
return None
else:
numbers_in_solution.append(extra_number)
solution = improve(numbers_in_solution)
return solution
def tst(number):
try:
solution = None
for division in range(number//max_bound, number//min_bound + 1): # Reverse the order of this for numbers as close in value to each other as possible.
if round (number / division) in range(min_bound, max_bound + 1):
solution = find_numbers(number, division, round(number / division))
elif (number // division) in range(min_bound, max_bound + 1): # Rarely required but catches edge cases
solution = find_numbers(number, division, number // division)
if solution:
print(sum(solution), solution)
break
except ZeroDivisionError:
print("Solution is 1, your input is less than the max_bound")
tst(number)
for x in range(1,100):
tst(x)
This code is just to demonstrate an idea, I'm sure it could be tweaked for better performance.