I am trying to find where the probability reaches a certain point; then, the function will return the value responsible for this probability.
The function I wrote takes two arguments
p represents the number of CPUs
q the number of jobs processed by each CPU
The function wants to optimise the number of CPUs in a server that will guarantee a 0.9 probability that each CPU will handle only one job simultaneously. Therefore, the number of processors (p) needs to be > the number of jobs (q).
opcpu <- function(p,q){
if (p < q){
paste("The number of processors should be",q," or more")
} else {
prob = prod(p:(p-(q-1)))/p^q
while (prob < 0.9){
p = p + 1
opcpu(p,q)
}
return(p)
}
}
I wrote the function as a recursion function. But it seems there is something wrong.
I tried to run the function, but it is not working. Solving the problem by trial and error gives that p = 631 when q = 12.
You’re on the right track. Try using if instead of while, and returning either p or a recursive call:
opcpu <- function(p,q) {
if (p < q) {
stop("The number of processors should be", q, " or more")
}
prob <- prod(p:(p-(q-1)))/p^q
if (prob < 0.9) {
opcpu(p+1,q)
} else {
p
}
}
opcpu(12,12)
# 631
Or you could use while instead of recursion:
opcpu <- function(p,q) {
if (p < q) {
stop("The number of processors should be", q, " or more")
}
prob <- prod(p:(p-(q-1)))/p^q
while (prob < 0.9){
p <- p + 1
prob <- prod(p:(p-(q-1)))/p^q
}
p
}
opcpu(12,12)
# 631
Note, I changed your paste() to stop(), since it seems you’re trying to indicate that p < q isn’t valid input. Another option would be to just start testing at p = q if the input is missing or less than q:
opcpu <- function(p,q) {
if (missing(p) || p < q) p <- q
prob <- prod(p:(p-(q-1)))/p^q
if (prob < 0.9) {
opcpu(p+1,q)
} else {
p
}
}
opcpu(q = 12)
# 631
Related
I'm trying to solve the problem #14 of Project Euler.
So the main objective is finding length of Collatz sequence.
Firstly I solved problem with regular loop:
compute <- function(n) {
result <- 0
max_chain <- 0
hashmap <- 1
for (i in 1:n) {
chain <- 1
number <- i
while (number > 1) {
if (!is.na(hashmap[number])) {
chain <- chain + hashmap[number]
break
}
if (number %% 2 == 0) {
chain <- chain + 1
number <- number / 2
} else {
chain <- chain + 2
number <- (3 * number + 1) / 2
}
}
hashmap[i] <- chain
if (chain > max_chain) {
max_chain <- chain
result <- i
}
}
return(result)
}
Only 2 seconds for n = 1000000.
I decided to replace while loop to recursion
len_collatz_chain <- function(n, hashmap) {
get_len <- function(n) {
if (is.na(hashmap[n])) {
hashmap[n] <<- ifelse(n %% 2 == 0, 1 + get_len(n / 2), 2 + get_len((3 * n + 1) / 2))
}
return(hashmap[n])
}
get_len(n)
return(hashmap)
}
compute <- function(n) {
result <- 0
max_chain <- 0
hashmap <- 1
for (i in 1:n) {
hashmap <- len_collatz_chain(i, hashmap)
print(length(hashmap))
if (hashmap[i] > max_chain) {
max_chain <- hashmap[i]
result <- i
}
}
return(result)
}
This solution works but works so slow. Almost 1 min for n = 10000.
I suppose that one of the reasons is R creates hashmap object each time when call function len_collatz_chain.
I know about Rcpp packages and yes, the first solution works fine but I can't understand where I'm wrong.
Any tips?
For example, my Python recursive solution works in 1 second with n = 1000000
def len_collatz_chain(n: int, hashmap: dict) -> int:
if n not in hashmap:
hashmap[n] = 1 + len_collatz_chain(n // 2, hashmap) if n % 2 == 0 else 2 + len_collatz_chain((3 * n + 1) // 2, hashmap)
return hashmap[n]
def compute(n: int) -> int:
result, max_chain, hashmap = 0, 0, {1: 1}
for i in range(2, n):
chain = len_collatz_chain(i, hashmap)
if chain > max_chain:
result, max_chain = i, chain
return result
The main difference between your R and Python code is that in R you use a vector for the hashmap, while in Python you use a dictionary and that hashmap is transferred many times as function argument.
In Python, if you have a Dictionary as function argument, only a reference to the actual data is transfered to the called function. This is fast. The called function works on the same data as the caller.
In R, a vector is copied when used as function argument. This is potentially slow, but safer in the sense that the called function cannot alter the data of the caller.
This the main reason that Python is so much faster in your code.
You can however alter the R code slightly, such that the hashmap is not transfered as function argument anymore:
len_collatz_chain <- local({
hashmap <- 1L
get_len <- function(n) {
if (is.na(hashmap[n])) {
hashmap[n] <<- ifelse(n %% 2 == 0, 1 + get_len(n / 2), 2 + get_len((3 * n + 1) / 2))
}
hashmap[n]
}
get_len
})
compute <- function(n) {
result <- rep(NA_integer_, n)
for (i in seq_len(n)) {
result[i] <- len_collatz_chain(i)
}
result
}
compute(n=10000)
This makes the R code much faster. (Python will probably still be faster though).
Note that I have also removed the return statements in the R code, as they are not needed and add one level to the call stack.
I get a problem when I run this program in R.
anybody help me to solving this problem..?
par_1<-cbind(c(5.038159),c(3.899621))
par_2<-cbind(c(2.435457),c(13.89517))
tau<-365
cdf2 <- function(x, help) {
pgamma(x, shape=par_1[1], scale=par_1[2]) *
pgamma(x, shape=par_2[1], scale=par_2[2])-help
}
nextEventTime <- function(censoring) {
randomNumber <- runif(n=1, min=0, max=1)
pnew <- randomNumber * (1 - cdf2(censoring, 0)) + cdf2(censoring, 0)
uniroot(f=cdf2, interval=c(0, 1000*tau), help=pnew)$root
}
hazardRate1 <- function(t) {
dgamma(t, shape=par_1[1], scale=par_1[2]) /
(1 - pgamma(t, shape=par_1[1], scale=par_1[2]))
}
hazardRate2 <- function(t) {
dgamma(t, shape=par_2[1], scale=par_2[2]) /
(1 - pgamma(t,shape=par_2[1], scale=par_2[2]))
}
nextEventType <- function(t) {
p <- hazardRate1(t)/(hazardRate1(t)+hazardRate2(t))
randomNumber <- runif(n=1, min=0, max=1)
if (randomNumber <= p) {1} else {2}
}
baris<-c(1:20000)
nexteventtime<-rep(0,time=20000)
nexteventype<-rep(0,time=20000)
dfnexteventime<-data.frame(baris,nexteventtime,nexteventype)
for(i in 1:nrow(dfnexteventime)){
dfnexteventime$nexteventtime[i]<-nextEventTime(dfnexteventime$nexteventtime[i])
dfnexteventime$nexteventype[i]<-nextEventType(dfnexteventime$nexteventtime[i])
}
View(dfnexteventime)
When I run this program, this program will error & produce output like this
Error in if (randomNumber <= p) { : missing value where TRUE/FALSE needed
I think this problem because t value in nextEventType(t) function can't zero (t!=0).
But nextEventTime(dfnexteventime$nexteventtime[i]) never produce zero value, when I run this part for 10 times,
baris<-c(1:20000)
nexteventtime<-rep(0,time=20000)
nexteventype<-rep(0,time=20000)
dfnexteventime<-data.frame(baris,nexteventtime,nexteventype)
for(i in 1:nrow(dfnexteventime)){
dfnexteventime$nexteventtime[i]<-nextEventTime(dfnexteventime$nexteventtime[i])
}
without nextEventType function. This part never produce 0 value.
So, I confuse, what is a problem?.
I want result nextEventType(t) produce not zero value.
because if using zero value will be Error in if(ramdonNumber <= p) { :...
Your problem isn't calling nextEventType(t) on zero, since this will never happen. However, the same error occurs whenever nextEventType(t) is called on a value of t greater than 195. At this point, the term pgamma(t, shape=par_1[1], scale=par_1[2]) is so close to one that R evaluates 1 - pgamma(t, shape=par_1[1], scale=par_1[2]) to zero, so hazardRate1(t) returns Inf. Since nextEventType(t) is trying to assign p to Inf/Inf, p is never defined.
> p <- hazardRate1(196)/(hazardRate1(196) + hazardRate2(196))
> p
[1] NaN
This will only happen in very extreme cases, when you happen to draw > 195 in nextEventTime(t), which only occurs around once in 30,000 random draws. That's why you don't see it when you run it 10 times, but often you do when you run it 20,000 times.
random_draws <- numeric()
for(i in 1:1000000) random_draws[i] <- nextEventTime(0)
length(which(random_draws > 195))
# > [1] 28
I'm trying to write a square root function in R. The function is supposed to behave like sqrt() but not use that function of course. I'm supposed to use Newton's method for computing the square root, which is:
y(a+1) = [y(a) + x / y(a)]/2
Here x is the number I'm trying to calculate the square root of and y(0) would be the initial guess of the square root of x.
The function is supposed to take in four arguments: x (the number I'm trying to compute the square root of), eps (the difference in value between iterations that are considered be equal), iter (the max number of iterations), and verbose (says I want to output intermediate results).
My issue is that I am not very well versed in writing functions in R. I have experience in C++, but they are slightly different in R.
I believe I'm supposed to write something that goes like this.
Asks the user to input a number as a guess for the value we want to calculate the square root of. Make a for loop from 1 to iter with two if statements 1) that stop the function and output the y value if the max number of iterations have been reached 2) stop the function and output the y value if the difference between successive iterations is less than eps.
Here is the code I have so far:
MySqrt <- function (x, eps = 1e-6, iter = 100, verbose = TRUE) {
for (i in 0:itmax) {
y[0] <- readline(prompt="Please enter your initial square root guess: ")
y[i + 1] = (y[i] + x / y[i])/2
if (i == 100) {
stop (return(y[i + 1]))
}
if (abs(y[i + 1] - y[i]) < eps) {
stop (return(y[i + 1]))
}
}
return(y[i + 1])
}
Here is the error I receive after entering the initial square root guess: Error in y[0] <- readline(prompt = "Please enter your initial square root guess: ") :
object 'y' not found
Honestly, I didn't expect the code to work because I'm sure there are more than one errors.
You should use iter instead of itmax.
I initialized y within the function and input of y should be formatted as a number instead of a character. You could also simplify the if statement by using | (or).
I also added "cat" function so you could see what i is before the function prints out the square root value.
MySqrt <- function (x, eps = 1e-6, iter = 100, verbose = TRUE) {
y = 0
y[1] = as.numeric(readline(prompt="Please enter your initial square root guess: "))
for (i in 1:iter) {
y[i+1] = as.numeric((y[i] + (x/y[i]))/2)
if (i == 100 || abs(y[i+1] - y[i]) < eps) {
cat("This is", i,"th try: \n")
return(y[i+1])
}
}
}
Try this simply:
newton.raphson <- function(x, start, epsilon=0.0001, maxiter=100) {
y <- c(start) # initial guess
a <- 1 # number of iterations
while (TRUE) {
y <- c(y, (y[a] + x / y[a])/2)
if (abs(y[a+1] - y[a]) < epsilon | a > maxiter) { # converged or exceeded maxiter
return(y[a+1])
}
a <- a + 1
}
}
newton.raphson(2, 0.5, 0.01)
# [1] 1.414234
newton.raphson(3, 0.5, 0.01)
# [1] 1.732051
since sqrt(n) < n/2 then with precision of 1/10000
sqrnt=function(y){
x=y/2
while (abs(x*x-y) > 1e-10)
{x=(x+y/x)/2 }
x
}
In Newton’s method. If you want to know the square root of a, you can start estimate a number, x (for examples a/2), you can compute a better estimate with the following formula:
y = (x + a / x) / 2
If y != x, you set x = y, and repeat until y == x. Then you get the square root of a. Please see the code below:
square_root <- function(a) {
x <- a/2
while (TRUE) {
y <- (x + a / x) / 2
if (y == x) break
x <- y
}
return(y)
}
So, I'm supposed to write the code to execute Newton's Method to calculate the square root of any arbitrary number to a specified precision (tolerance).
Here is my code:
MySqrt <- function(x, eps = 1e-6, itmax = 100, verbose = TRUE) {
GUESS <- 11
myvector <- integer(0)
i <- 1
if (x < 0) {
stop("Square root of negative value")
}
else {
myvector[i] <- GUESS
while (i <= itmax) {
GUESS <- (GUESS + (x/GUESS)) * 0.5
myvector[i+1] <- GUESS
if (abs(GUESS-myvector[i]) < eps) {
break()
}
if (verbose) {
cat("Iteration: ", formatC(i, width = 1), formatC(GUESS, digits = 10, width = 12), "\n")
}
i <- i + 1
}
}
myvector[i]
}
eps is the tolerance. When I use the function to calculate the square root of, say, 21, I got this as an output:
> MySqrt(21, eps = 1e-1, verbose = TRUE)
Iteration: 1 6.454545455
Iteration: 2 4.854033291
Iteration: 3 4.59016621
I'm not sure if the function stops carrying out iterations when it is supposed to, however. Can someone verify if my code is correct? This would be greatly appreciated!
Your code is almost correct. It is iterating the correct number of times. The only bug is that you don't increment i until after the break statement, so you are not returning the most recent approximation. Instead you are returning the previous one.
In order to verify that it is stopping at the right time, you can move the tracing line up above the break. You can also add GUESS-myvector[i] to the trace, so you can watch it halt as soon as the difference gets small enough. If you do this and run the function, the fact that it is stopping at the right time, as well as the fact that it is returning the wrong value, will be obvious:
> MySqrt(21,eps=1e-1)
Iteration: 1 6.454545 -4.545455
Iteration: 2 4.854033 -1.600512
Iteration: 3 4.590166 -0.2638671
Iteration: 4 4.582582 -0.007584239
[1] 4.590166
While your code is (almost) correct, it is not written in very good R style. For example, unless you want to return the entire vector of estimates, there is no reason that you need to keep them all around. Also, rather than using a while loop, here it would make more sense to use a for loop. Here one possible improved version of your function:
MySqrt <- function(x, eps = 1e-6, itmax = 100, verbose = TRUE) {
GUESS <- 11
if (x < 0) {
stop("Square root of negative value")
}
for(i in 1:itmax){
nextGUESS <- (GUESS + (x/GUESS)) * 0.5
if (verbose)
cat("Iteration: ", i, nextGUESS, nextGUESS-GUESS, "\n")
if (abs(GUESS-nextGUESS) < eps)
break
GUESS<- nextGUESS
}
nextGUESS
}
I would like to create matrix A[i,j,k] with the following elements:
A[i,j,k] = 0 if k+j-s-i =/= 0
A[i,j,k] = p[s] if k+j-s-i =0 ( p[s] is given vector )
This may be written by characteristic function as p[s]*ð(k+j-s-i) or by Kronecker delta function as p[s]*ð(0,k+j-s-i).
Is there any "build in" function in R which gives that - I mean is there "ð" built in?
Or do I have to wrote it by myself?
I suppose it would be very useful to have built function which returns 1 for f(x)=0 and 0 otherwise, at least for linear f(x)
I'd rewrite this as
A[i,j,k] = p[k+j-i] if that exists, otherwise 0
which could then be implemented as
p <- c(1,2,3,4,5)
pfun <- function(x) {
if (x < 1 | x > length(p)) {
0
} else {
p[x]
}
}
n <- 5
A <- array(0, c(n, n, n))
for (i in 1:n) {
for (j in 1:n) {
for (k in 1:n) {
A[i,j,k] <- pfun(k+j-i)
}
}
}
There may be something more elegant than triply-nested for loops.
As for a the function you ask about, something as simple as
as.numeric(f(x)==0)
would work.