Solve each of the following recurrences using the Iteration Method: - iteration

T(n) = 2T(n-1) + 1, T(0) = 1
how to solve it
Solve each of the following recurrences using the Iteration Method:

In c++ you can do it like this
int t[n + 1];
t[0] = 1;
for(int i = 1; i <= n; ++i){
t[i] = 2 * t[i - 1] + 1;
}

Related

Given an array A[], determine the minimum value of expression: min( abs( a[ i ] - x ) , abs( a[ i ] - y ) )

Given an array A of N integers. Find two integers x and y such that the sum of the absolute difference between each array element to one of the two chosen integers is minimal.
Determine the minimum value of the expression
Σ(i=0 to n) min( abs(a[i] - x), abs(a[i] - y) )
Example 1:
N = 4
A = [2,3,6,7]
Approach
You can choose the two integers, 3 and 7
The required sum = |2-3| + |3-3| + |6-7| + |7-7| = 1+0+0+1 = 2
Example 2:
N = 8
A = [ 2, 3, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17, 996 ]
Approach
You can choose the two integers, 8 and 996
The required sum = |2-8| + |3-8| + |5-8| + |8-8| + |11-8| + |14-8| + |17-8| + |996-996| = 6+5+3+0+3+6+9+0 = 32
Constraints
1<=T<=100
2<=N<=5*10^3
1<=A[i]<=10^5
The sum of N over all test cases does not exceed 5*10^3.
**My code : **
Please help me with the optimal solution O(N) or O(NlogN)
int minAbsDiff(vector<int> Arr, int N)
{
// Approach: O(N^3)
sort(Arr.begin(), Arr.end());
int sum = INT_MAX;
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++)
for (int j = i + 1; j < N; j++)
{
int tmp_sum = 0;
for (int k = 0; k < N; k++)
{
tmp_sum += min(abs(Arr[k] - Arr[i]), abs(Arr[k] - Arr[j]));
}
sum = min(sum, tmp_sum);
}
std::cout << "Sum is :" << sum << std::endl;
return sum;
}

Algorithm for computing inverse polynomials in NTRUEncrypt

I'm implementing in code an algorithm for computing inverse polynomials in the NTRU cryptosystem, and I'm using the paper "Almost Inverses and Fast NTRU Key Creation" by Joseph H. Silverman. I implemented the second pseudo-code as:
int inverse_mod_p(polynomial *r, polynomial *a)
{
int k;
int16_t b[NTRU_N + 1], c[NTRU_N + 1], f[NTRU_N + 1], g[NTRU_N + 1];
int i;
int16_t aux;
int zero_f;
int constant_f;
int deg_fg;
memset(b, 0, (NTRU_N + 1) * sizeof(int16_t));
b[0] = 1;
memset(c, 0, (NTRU_N + 1) * sizeof(int16_t));
memcpy(f, a->coeffs, NTRU_N * sizeof(int16_t));
f[NTRU_N] = 0;
memset(g, 0, (NTRU_N + 1) * sizeof(int16_t));
g[0] = -1;
g[NTRU_N] = 1;
while (1)
{
zero_f = 1;
for (i = 0; i < NTRU_N + 1; i++)
{
if (f[i] != 0)
{
zero_f = 0;
break;
}
}
if (zero_f)
return 1;
while (f[0] == 0)
{
for (i = 0; i < NTRU_N; i++)
{
f[i] = f[i + 1];
c[NTRU_N - i] = c[NTRU_N - i - 1];
}
f[NTRU_N] = 0;
c[0] = 0;
k++;
}
constant_f = 1;
for (i = 1; i < NTRU_N + 1; i++)
{
if (f[i] != 0)
{
constant_f = 0;
break;
}
}
if (constant_f)
break;
deg_fg = 0;
for (i = NTRU_N; i >= 0; i--)
{
if (f[i] == 0 && g[i] != 0)
{
deg_fg = 1;
break;
}
else if (f[i] != 0 && g[i] == 0)
{
break;
}
}
if (deg_fg)
{
for (i = 0; i < NTRU_N + 1; i++)
{
aux = f[i];
f[i] = g[i];
g[i] = aux;
aux = b[i];
b[i] = c[i];
c[i] = aux;
}
}
if (f[0] == g[0])
{
for (i = 0; i < NTRU_N + 1; i++)
{
f[i] = (f[i] - g[i] + 3) % 3;
b[i] = (b[i] - c[i] + 3) % 3;
}
}
else
{
for (i = 0; i < NTRU_N + 1; i++)
{
f[i] = (f[i] + g[i] + 3) % 3;
b[i] = (b[i] + c[i] + 3) % 3;
}
}
}
k = k % NTRU_N;
for (i = NTRU_N - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
if (i - k < 0)
r->coeffs[i - k + NTRU_N] = b[i] * f[0];
else
r->coeffs[i - k] = b[i] * f[0];
}
for (i = 0; i < NTRU_N; i++)
r->coeffs[i] = (r->coeffs[i] + 3) % 3;
return 0;
}
But this seems to be wrong. I tested it using the example giveng in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTRUEncrypt . The polynomial -1 + x + x^2 - x^4 + x^6 + x^9 - x^10 should have as inverse the polynomial 1 + 2x + 2x^3 + 2x^4 + x^5 + 2x^7 + x^8 - x^10 , but I got the following result:
Polinomial:
-1 1 1 0 -1 0 1 0 0 1 -1
Inverse polinomial:
0 2 2 1 0 2 1 2 0 1 2
Where is the error in the implementation?

Is the Time Complexity of this function O(n * (n * log n² ))

What is the Time Complexity of the function below? n > 0
Function fun(n){
Let count = 0;
For( I = 0; I < n; I++){
For(j = 0; j < n; j /= 2) {
For(h = 0; h < n; h /= 2) {
Count = count + 1;
}
}
}
Return count;
}
I have O(n * (n * log n² )) , but something tells me i might be wrong.
The above loop is an infinite loop. time complexity for this cannot be determined, unless the problem statement is updated properly!
Function fun(n){
Let count = 0;
For( I = 0; I < n; I++){
// will run infinitely even if you change j /= 2 to j *= 2, because initial value is 0
For(j = 0; j < n; j /= 2) {
// will run infinitely even if you change h /= 2 to h *= 2, because initial value is 0
For(h = 0; h < n; h /= 2) {
Count = count + 1;
}
}
}
Return count;
}

Time complexity of two nested loops depending on n and k

I have a string of n chars and a k length of unique substrings
I'm trying to understand the time complexity of this code:
for (int i = 0; i <= inputStr.length() - k; i++) {
String substr = inputStr.substring(i, i + k);
Set<Character> setChars = new HashSet<Character>();
for (int j = 0; j < k; j++) {
setChars.add(substr.charAt(j));
}
if (setChars.size() == num) {
set.add(substr);
}
}
If I correctly understood the time complexity might be expressed by the formula:
f((n-k+1)*k)
I believe that the worse case I can have is when k = n/2, so:
f((n-k+1)k) = nn/2 - n/2*n/2 + n/2 = 1/2*n*n - 1/4*n*n + 1/2*n =>
O(n)
You are correct until the implication.
f((n-k+1)k) = nn/2 - n/2*n/2 + n/2 = 1/2*n*n - 1/4*n*n + 1/2*n
= 1/4n*n + 1/2*n => O(n*n)

why is the time complexity of bubble sort's best case being O(n)

I deduced the time complexity of bubble sort in its best case according to the mothod used in book ALGORITHMS 2.2. But the answer turned out to be O(n^2).
Here's my derivation, hope anyone can help me find out where is wrong:
public void bubbleSort(int arr[]) {
for(int i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len - 1; i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < len - i - 1; j++) {
if(arr[j + 1] < arr[j])
swap(arr, j, j + 1);
}
}
}
Statements cost times
i = 0,len = arr.length c1 1
i < len - 1 c2 n
i++ c3 n - 1
j = 0 c4 n - 1
j < len - i - 1 c5 t1(i=0) + t1(i=1) + ... + t1(i = n-2)
j++ c6 t2(i=0) + t2(i=1) + ... + t2(i = n-2)
arr[j + 1] < arr[j] c7 t3(i=0) + t3(i=1) + ... + t3(i = n-2)
swap(arr, j, j + 1) c8 t4(i=0) + t4(i=1) + ... + t4(i = n-2)
T(n) = c1 + c2n + c3(n - 1) + c4(n - 1) + c5t5 + c6t6 + c7t7 + c8t8
= c1 + c2n + c3(n - 1) + c4(n - 1) + c5[t1(i=0) + t1(i=1) + ... + t1(i = n-2)] + c6[t2(i=0) + t2(i=1) + ... + t2(i = n-2)] + c7[t3(i=0) + t3(i=1) + ... + t3(i = n-2)] + c8[t4(i=0) + t4(i=1) + ... + t4(i = n-2)];
in its best cast, the sequence is already positive before sorting. Then t8 sould be 0.
T(n) = c1 + c2n + c3(n - 1) + c4(n - 1) + c5[t1(i=0) + t1(i=1) + ... + t1(i = n-2)] + c6[t2(i=0) + t2(i=1) + ... + t2(i = n-2)] + c7[t3(i=0) + t3(i=1) + ... + t3(i = n-2)]
The time complexity is O(n^2)
Your implementation
public void bubbleSort(int arr[]) {
for(int i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len - 1; i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < len - i - 1; j++) {
if(arr[j + 1] < arr[j])
swap(arr, j, j + 1);
}
}
}
lacks the control whether there was any swap in the inner loop, and the breaking out of the outer loop if there wasn't.
That control makes it possible that the best case (an already sorted array) is O(n), since then there are no swaps in the inner loop when it runs the first time.
public void bubbleSort(int arr[]) {
boolean swapped = true;
for(int i = 0, len = arr.length; swapped && i < len - 1; i++) {
swapped = false;
for(int j = 0; j < len - i - 1; j++) {
if(arr[j + 1] < arr[j]) {
swap(arr, j, j + 1);
swapped = true;
}
}
}
}
The best case for bubble sort is when the elements are already sorted.
The usual implementation gives O(n^2) time complexity for best, average, worst case.
We can modify the bubble sort by checking if array is sorted or not(a swap would indicate an unsorted array) at every iteration.
As soon as the array is found to be sorted(if no swap occurs) control exits from loops or loop continues to execute till length-1.
And same is true for insertion sort as well!
I am not sure what are you counting. In general, when you are talking about comparison sort algorithms you should count the number of comparisons made. Bubble sort is regarded as such. In this case the algorithm you presented is O(n^2).
If you count the number of swaps its O(1) or maybe even one could say O(0). It is however rare to analyze Bubble sort like that.
You can, however very easily improve Bubble to get O(N) on best case. E.g by introducing a flag swap_was_made. If its false at the end of inner for you can finish. On best case it will cut complexity to O(N) (one inner for loop). In case of fair even distribution it cuts the expected or average complexity to O(N^2/2) ... But please double check me on it I might be wrong. Didn't do the math here.