I have a while loop that is supposed to randomly plant numberOfTruth true values in a 2 dimensional. I am only to change them if they are not true already, and only do so for numberOfTruths times:
function truthfulArray(maxY, maxX, numberOfTruths, array) {
var x;
var y;
var counter = 0;
while (counter < numberOfTruths) {
x = generateRandomNumber(maxX);
y = generateRandomNumber(maxY);
if (!array[x][y]) {
array[x][y] = true;
counter++;
}
}
return array;
}
I could see the issue with its optimization in relation to the size of 2 dimensional array and as the numberOfTruths approaches the product of maxY and maxX it would waste alot of resources to complete the task. I was wondering what tweaks I can make to the function to make it more efficient. Thanks in advance!
*** generateRandomNumber(max) is a simple function that returns a random number from 0 to the max value entered.
Based on #Bergi's comment, here's one optimization. It assumes the array is empty to begin with (or rather, it doesn't care and just overwrites things).
It's slower when the fill factor (N / (X * Y)) is low (testing with X = Y = 500), but seems to win out over the original implementation at about 40%, and is decisively faster (like 3x) at 80%. (You might want to use that as a heuristic.)
The general idea is that we first fill random rows from the rows' start, then spread out each row using Fisher-Yates shuffle. I've transposed the y and x compared to the original, because that's just how I'm used to dealing with 2D arrays. :D
function shuffle(array) { // h/t https://bost.ocks.org/mike/shuffle/
var m = array.length, t, i;
while (m) {
i = Math.floor(Math.random() * m--);
t = array[m];
array[m] = array[i];
array[i] = t;
}
return array;
}
function truthfulArrayFillRows(maxY, maxX, numberOfTruths, array) {
var nLeft = numberOfTruths;
var nSeededPerRow = new Array(maxY).fill(0);
// Seed rows randomly with trues starting from the left
while(nLeft > 0) {
var y = generateRandomNumber(maxY);
var x = nSeededPerRow[y];
if(x < maxX) {
array[y][x] = true;
nLeft --;
nSeededPerRow[y] ++;
}
}
// Shuffle the rows we seeded
for(var y = 0; y < maxY; y++) {
if(nSeededPerRow[y] > 0) {
shuffle(array[y]);
}
}
return array;
}
Instead of randomly selecting numberOfTruth many positions of all possible positions, you could randomly select numberOfTruth many of only the valid positions. To do that, you would have to find those positions first.
function shuffle(a) {
var j, x, i;
for (i = a.length - 1; i > 0; i--) {
j = Math.floor(Math.random() * (i + 1));
x = a[i];
a[i] = a[j];
a[j] = x;
}
return a;
}
function chunkArray(myArray, chunk_size){
var results = [];
while (myArray.length) {
results.push(myArray.splice(0, chunk_size));
}
return results;
}
function flatten(array) {
var flattened=[];
for (var i=0; i<array.length; ++i) {
var current = array[i];
for (var j=0; j<current.length; ++j)
flattened.push(current[j]);
}
return flattened;
}
function truthfulArray(maxY, maxX, numberOfTruths, array){
var flatArray = flatten(array);
var validPositions = flatArray.map(function(e, i){if(!e) return i});
var randomPositions = shuffle(validPositions).slice(0, numberOfTruths);
randomPositions.forEach(function(i){flatArray[i] = true;});
return chunkArray(flatArray, maxY);
}
var maxX = 20, maxY = 30;
var array = Array(maxX).fill(Array(maxY).fill(false));
truthfulArray(maxY, maxX, 40, array);
If this approach is more efficient depends on your data. If there are many valid positions to choose from, your code should be totally fine and efficient. The more trues there are in the array the less likely it is that your code (randomly) hits them. In that case the approach I described will be more efficient.
I hope you find that helpful.
Related
I need help with writing some code that will create a random number from an array of 12 numbers and print it 9 times without dupes. This has been tough for me to accomplish. Any ideas?
var nums = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12];
var gen_nums = [];
function in_array(array, el) {
for(var i = 0 ; i < array.length; i++)
if(array[i] == el) return true;
return false;
}
function get_rand(array) {
var rand = array[Math.floor(Math.random()*array.length)];
if(!in_array(gen_nums, rand)) {
gen_nums.push(rand);
return rand;
}
return get_rand(array);
}
for(var i = 0; i < 9; i++) {
console.log(get_rand(nums));
}
The most effective and efficient way to do this is to shuffle your numbers then print the first nine of them. Use a good shuffle algorithm.What Thilo suggested will give you poor results. See here.
Edit
Here's a brief Knuth Shuffle algorithm example:
void shuffle(vector<int> nums)
{
for (int i = nums.size()-1; i >= 0; i--)
{
// this line is really shorthand, but gets the point across, I hope.
swap(nums[i],nums[rand()%i]);
}
}
Try this once:
//Here o is the array;
var testArr = [6, 7, 12, 15, 17, 20, 21];
shuffle = function(o){ //v1.0
for(var j, x, i = o.length; i; j = parseInt(Math.random() * i), x = o[--i], o[i] = o[j], o[j] = x);
return o;
};
shuffle(testArr);
This is relatively simple to do, the theory behind it is creating another array which keeps track of which elements of the array you have used.
var tempArray = new Array(12),i,r;
for (i=0;i<9;i++)
{
r = Math.floor(Math.random()*12); // Get a random index
if (tempArray[r] === undefined) // If the index hasn't been used yet
{
document.write(numberArray[r]); // Display it
tempArray[r] = true; // Flag it as have been used
}
else // Otherwise
{
i--; // Try again
}
}
Other methods include shuffling the array, removing used elements from the array, or moving used elements to the end of the array.
If I understand you correctly, you want to shuffle your array.
Loop a couple of times (length of array should do), and in every iteration, get two random array indexes and swap the two elements there. (Update: if you are really serious about this, this may not be the best algorithm).
You can then print the first nine array elements, which will be in random order and not repeat.
Here is a generic way of getting random numbers between min and max without duplicates:
function inArray(arr, el) {
for(var i = 0 ; i < arr.length; i++)
if(arr[i] == el) return true;
return false;
}
function getRandomIntNoDuplicates(min, max, DuplicateArr) {
var RandomInt = Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1)) + min;
if (DuplicateArr.length > (max-min) ) return false; // break endless recursion
if(!inArray(DuplicateArr, RandomInt)) {
DuplicateArr.push(RandomInt);
return RandomInt;
}
return getRandomIntNoDuplicates(min, max, DuplicateArr); //recurse
}
call with:
var duplicates =[];
for (var i = 1; i <= 6 ; i++) {
console.log(getRandomIntNoDuplicates(1,10,duplicates));
}
const nums = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12];
for(var i = 1 ; i < 10; i++){
result = nums[Math.floor(Math.random()*nums.length)];
const index = nums.indexOf(result);
nums.splice(index, 1);
console.log(i+' - '+result);
}
I'm stuck on the circular array rotation algorithm on hackerrank with timeout issues and having trouble making it more efficient.
I'm using javascript:
function processData(input) {
var arr = new Array(4);
var arrInt = [];
var n, k, q, index, temp;
arr = input.split(" ", 3); //input is a string, get n,k,q from this
arrInt = input.split("\n");
n = parseInt(arr[0]);
k = parseInt(arr[1]);
q = parseInt(arr[2]);
var arrIntI = new Array(n);
arrIntI = arrInt[1].match(/\d+/g); //read in integer array
arrInt.shift();
arrInt.shift();
for(i = 0; i < k; i++){ //rotate array k times
arrIntI.unshift(arrIntI.pop()); //Timeout on cases: 5, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14; passes all others!!!!!!
//********************** Manual rotation:
//Timeout on cases: 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14; Worse that Pop/unshift!!
//temp = arrIntI[n-1];
//for(l = n; l > 0; l--){
// arrIntI[l] = arrIntI[l - 1];
//}
//arrIntI[0] = temp;
//delete arrIntI[n];
//*******************************
}
for(j = 0; j < q; j++){
index = arrInt[j];
console.log(arrIntI[index]);
}
}
process.stdin.resume();
process.stdin.setEncoding("ascii");
_input = "";
process.stdin.on("data", function (input) {
_input += input;
});
process.stdin.on("end", function () {
processData(_input);
});
I tried replacing the unshift/pop to rotate the array with a for loop but it didn't help the time out cases.
Thanks in advance!!
You don't need to actually rotate the Array at all, you can compute everything by just playing with the indices.
function int(v){ return v|0 }
function processData(input) {
//parse input string
var rows = input.split("\n");
var values = rows[1].split(" ");
var [n,k,q] = rows[0].split(" ").map( int );
//a minimal validation of the input string
if(values.length !== n || rows.length-2 !== q)
throw new Error("inconsistent imput");
//compute a positive offset
var offset = n - k%n;
//the requested indices start in row 3 (index 2)
return rows.slice(2)
//compute the offset positions, and return the particular values
.map(m => values[ ( int(m) + offset )%n ])
.join("\n")
}
Edit: Sorry, I'm a bit late with explaining this.
First, imagine you have a clock (one of the classic round ones with hands on it), and you get the excersize: "rotate the numbers on the clock 5 hours to the left, and then tell me wich numbers are at positions for 1, 3 and 6 o'clock?"
how do you do that? Would you start dismounting the clock and then, 5 times, moving each number one position to the left?
I bet you'd not touch the numbers at all, but simply say to yourself: "rotate 5 hours to the left, then every position shows the number 5 indices to the right of the asked position", and when asked for the actual numbers at a particular index you go to index 3 for example, add 5 indices, and tell the number you read at that position.
That's how this works. I simply add the asked index and the offset, and return the value at that position.
Is it clear now, how this works?
As far as i know the following is the fastest array rotater. It rotates an array by provided amount (n) and direction (+/-)
Array.prototype.rotate = function(n){
var len = this.length;
if (n % len === 0) return this.slice();
else for (var i = 0, res = Array(this.length); i < len; i++) res[i] = this[(i + (len + n % len)) % len];
return res;
};
function rotation (arrData, position) {
var newArr = arrData.slice();
var arrLen = newArr.length;
var num = (position < 0)
? arrLen-(position%arrLen)
: position%arrLen;
var tempArr = newArr.splice(0, num);
newArr.push.apply(newArr, tempArr);
return newArr;
}
It will rotate according to the input
var a = [11,2,3,4,5];
rotation(a, 42); // [3, 4, 5, 11, 2]
It works pretty well in timeout cases also.
Hope this helps ! Thanks
Working example : http://jsbin.com/rahidox/edit?html,js,console
function circularArrayRotation(a, k, queries) {
let y;
let x=[]
for (let i = 0; i < k; i++) {
y = a.pop()
a.unshift(y) // no timeout issue, might be a bit longer but it works.
}
for(let j = 0; j < queries.length; j++) {
x.push(a[(queries[j])])
}
return x
}
I experience a strange differences in performance of simple task depending of array I am working with. The task is to calculate sum of those elements in array which are greater than 5. Task is performed on arrays with equal lenghts.
I try the very same approach on three different array objects:
1) var hugeArray1 - array with all elemenets randomly picked from 0:10 range
2) var hugeArray2 - copy of hugeArray1 sorted with Array.prototype.sort()
3) var hugeArray3 - handcrafted but sorted array with values from 0:10 range, spread to equaly cover this interval.
I try to calculate sum of elements greater than 5 many times for each Array and then average them. What is strange, time needed varies a lot for those three arrays.
1) hugeArray1: 5.805ms
2) hugeArray2: 15.738ms
3) hugeArray3: 3.753ms
Result for array sorted with sort() is extreamly poor. Why is that? it looks like sort() returns some kind of wraper/proxy instead of 'native' Array, which affects performance. I tried it on 2 computers. Also i tried to change order of testing.
I include code below, please tell me what is happening here.
// random array with elements 0-10 of size n
function randomArray(n) {
var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
arr.push(Math.random() * 10);
}
return arr;
};
// measures time of execution
function measureTime(f) {
var start = new Date().getTime();
f();
var stop = new Date().getTime();
return stop - start;
};
// enumerate ofer array and calculate sum of elementsgreater than 5
function sumGreaterThan5(arr) {
var sum = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; ++i) {
if (arr[i] > 5.0)
sum += arr[i];
}
return sum;
}
// generate array os size 'size' with elements with constant step to fill interval 0:10
function generateSortedArr(size) {
var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
arr.push(i * 10 / size);
}
return arr;
}
var huge = 1000000;
var hugeArray1 = randomArray(huge);
var hugeArray2 = hugeArray1.slice(0).sort();
var hugeArray3 = generateSortedArr(huge);
var hugeArrays = [hugeArray1, hugeArray2, hugeArray3];
hugeArrays.forEach(x=> {
var res = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 1000; ++i) {
res.push(measureTime(function () {
sumGreaterThan5(x);
}));
}
console.log(res.reduce((prev, curr)=> prev + curr) / res.length);
});
// random array with elements 0-10 of size n
function randomArray(n) {
var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
arr.push(Math.random() * 10);
}
return arr;
};
// measures time of execution
function measureTime(f) {
var start = new Date().getTime();
f();
var stop = new Date().getTime();
return stop - start;
};
// enumerate ofer array and calculate sum of elementsgreater than 5
function sumGreaterThan5(arr) {
var sum = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; ++i) {
if (arr[i] > 5.0)
sum += arr[i];
}
return sum;
}
// generate array os size 'size' with elements with constant step to fill interval 0:10
function generateSortedArr(size) {
var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
arr.push(i * 10 / size);
}
return arr;
}
var huge = 1000000;
var hugeArray1 = randomArray(huge);
var hugeArray2 = hugeArray1.slice(0).sort();
var hugeArray3 = generateSortedArr(huge);
var hugeArrays = [hugeArray1, hugeArray2, hugeArray3];
hugeArrays.forEach(function(x){
var res = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 1000; ++i) {
res.push(measureTime(function () {
sumGreaterThan5(x);
}));
}
console.log(res.reduce(function(prev, curr){return prev + curr},0) / res.length);
});
I have a very big array which looks similar to this
var counts = ["gfdg 34243","jhfj 543554",....] //55268 elements long
this is my current loop
var replace = "";
var scored = 0;
var qgram = "";
var score1 = 0;
var len = counts.length;
function score(pplaintext1) {
qgram = pplaintext1;
for (var x = 0; x < qgram.length; x++) {
for (var a = 0, len = counts.length; a < len; a++) {
if (qgram.substring(x, x + 4) === counts[a].substring(0, 4)) {
replace = parseInt(counts[a].replace(/[^1-9]/g, ""));
scored += Math.log(replace / len) * Math.LOG10E;
} else {
scored += Math.log(1 / len) * Math.LOG10E;
}
}
}
score1 = scored;
scored = 0;
} //need to call the function 1000 times roughly
I have to loop through this array several times and my code is running slowly. My question is what the fastest way to loop through this array would be so I can save as much time as possible.
Your counts array appears to be a list of unique strings and values associated with them. Use an object instead, keyed on the unique strings, e.g.:
var counts = { gfdg: 34243, jhfj: 543554, ... };
This will massively improve the performance by removing the need for the O(n) inner loop by replacing it with an O(1) object key lookup.
Also, avoid divisions - log(1 / n) = -log(n) - and move loop invariants outside the loops. Your log(1/len) * Math.LOG10E is actually a constant added in every pass, except that in the first if branch you also need to factor in Math.log(replace), which in log math means adding it.
p.s. avoid using the outer scoped state variables for the score, too! I think the below replicates your scoring algorithm correctly:
var len = Object.keys(counts).length;
function score(text) {
var result = 0;
var factor = -Math.log(len) * Math.LOG10E;
for (var x = 0, n = text.length - 4; x < n; ++x) {
var qgram = text.substring(x, x + 4);
var replace = counts[qgram];
if (replace) {
result += Math.log(replace) + factor;
} else {
result += len * factor; // once for each ngram
}
}
return result;
}
How do I generate objects on a map, without them occupying the same space or overlapping on a HTML5 Canvas?
X coordinate is randomly generated, to an extent. I thought checking inside the array to see if it's there already, and the next 20 values after that (to account for the width), with no luck.
var nrOfPlatforms = 14,
platforms = [],
platformWidth = 20,
platformHeight = 20;
var generatePlatforms = function(){
var positiony = 0, type;
for (var i = 0; i < nrOfPlatforms; i++) {
type = ~~(Math.random()*5);
if (type == 0) type = 1;
else type = 0;
var positionx = (Math.random() * 4000) + 500 - (points/100);
var duplicatetest = 21;
for (var d = 0; d < duplicatetest; d++) {
var duplicate = $(jQuery.inArray((positionx + d), platforms));
if (duplicate > 0) {
var duplicateconfirmed = true;
}
}
if (duplicateconfirmed) {
var positionx = positionx + 20;
}
var duplicateconfirmed = false;
platforms[i] = new Platform(positionx,positiony,type);
}
}();
I originally made a cheat fix by having them generate in an area roughly 4000 big, decreasing the odds, but I want to increase the difficulty as the game progresses, by making them appear more together, to make it harder. But then they overlap.
In crude picture form, I want this
....[]....[].....[]..[]..[][]...
not this
......[]...[[]]...[[]]....[]....
I hope that makes sense.
For reference, here is the code before the array check and difficulty, just the cheap distance hack.
var nrOfPlatforms = 14,
platforms = [],
platformWidth = 20,
platformHeight = 20;
var generatePlatforms = function(){
var position = 0, type;
for (var i = 0; i < nrOfPlatforms; i++) {
type = ~~(Math.random()*5);
if (type == 0) type = 1;
else type = 0;
platforms[i] = new Platform((Math.random() * 4000) + 500,position,type);
}
}();
EDIT 1
after some debugging, duplicate is returning as [object Object] instead of the index number, not sure why though
EDIT 2
the problem is the objects are in the array platforms, and x is in the array object, so how can I search inside again ? , that's why it was failing before.
Thanks to firebug and console.log(platforms);
platforms = [Object { image=img, x=1128, y=260, more...}, Object { image=img, x=1640, y=260, more...} etc
You could implement a while loop that tries to insert an object and silently fails if it collides. Then add a counter and exit the while loop after a desired number of successful objects have been placed. If the objects are close together this loop might run longer so you might also want to give it a maximum life span. Or you could implement a 'is it even possible to place z objects on a map of x and y' to prevent it from running forever.
Here is an example of this (demo):
//Fill an array with 20x20 points at random locations without overlap
var platforms = [],
platformSize = 20,
platformWidth = 200,
platformHeight = 200;
function generatePlatforms(k) {
var placed = 0,
maxAttempts = k*10;
while(placed < k && maxAttempts > 0) {
var x = Math.floor(Math.random()*platformWidth),
y = Math.floor(Math.random()*platformHeight),
available = true;
for(var point in platforms) {
if(Math.abs(point.x-x) < platformSize && Math.abs(point.y-y) < platformSize) {
available = false;
break;
}
}
if(available) {
platforms.push({
x: x,
y: y
});
placed += 1;
}
maxAttempts -= 1;
}
}
generatePlatforms(14);
console.log(platforms);
Here's how you would implement a grid-snapped hash: http://jsfiddle.net/tqFuy/1/
var can = document.getElementById("can"),
ctx = can.getContext('2d'),
wid = can.width,
hei = can.height,
numPlatforms = 14,
platWid = 20,
platHei = 20,
platforms = [],
hash = {};
for(var i = 0; i < numPlatforms; i++){
// get x/y values snapped to platform width/height increments
var posX = Math.floor(Math.random()*(wid-platWid)/platWid)*platWid,
posY = Math.floor(Math.random()*(hei-platHei)/platHei)*platHei;
while (hash[posX + 'x' + posY]){
posX = Math.floor(Math.random()*wid/platWid)*platWid;
posY = Math.floor(Math.random()*hei/platHei)*platHei;
}
hash[posX + 'x' + posY] = 1;
platforms.push(new Platform(/* your arguments */));
}
Note that I'm concatenating the x and y values and using that as the hash key. This is to simplify the check, and is only a feasible solution because we are snapping the x/y coordinates to specific increments. The collision check would be more complicated if we weren't snapping.
For large sets (seems unlikely from your criteria), it'd probably be better to use an exclusion method: Generate an array of all possible positions, then for each "platform", pick an item from the array at random, then remove it from the array. This is similar to how you might go about shuffling a deck of cards.
Edit — One thing to note is that numPlatforms <= (wid*hei)/(platWid*platHei) must evaluate to true, otherwise the while loop will never end.
I found the answer on another question ( Searching for objects in JavaScript arrays ) using this bit of code to search the objects in the array
function search(array, value){
var j, k;
for (j = 0; j < array.length; j++) {
for (k in array[j]) {
if (array[j][k] === value) return j;
}
}
}
I also ended up rewriting a bunch of the code to speed it up elsewhere and recycle platforms better.
it works, but downside is I have fewer platforms, as it really starts to slow down. In the end this is what I wanted, but its no longer feasible to do it this way.
var platforms = new Array();
var nrOfPlatforms = 7;
platformWidth = 20,
platformHeight = 20;
var positionx = 0;
var positiony = 0;
var arrayneedle = 0;
var duplicatetest = 21;
function search(array, value){
var j, k;
for (j = 0; j < array.length; j++) {
for (k in array[j]) {
if (array[j][k] === value) return j;
}
}
}
function generatePlatforms(ind){
roughx = Math.round((Math.random() * 2000) + 500);
type = ~~(Math.random()*5);
if (type == 0) type = 1;
else type = 0;
var duplicate = false;
for (var d = 0; d < duplicatetest; d++) {
arrayneedle = roughx + d;
var result = search(platforms, arrayneedle);
if (result >= 0) {
duplicate = true;
}
}
if (duplicate = true) {
positionx = roughx + 20;
}
if (duplicate = false) {
positionx = roughx;
}
platforms[ind] = new Platform(positionx,positiony,type);
}
var generatedplatforms = function(){
for (var i = 0; i < nrOfPlatforms; i++) {
generatePlatforms(i);
};
}();
you go big data, generate all possibilities, store each in an array, shuffle the array,
trim the first X items, this is your non heuristic algorithm.