Array partition using dynamic programming










2














What modification should I apply to the dynamic programming implementation of two partition problem to solve the following task:



You are given an array of positive integers as input, denote it C. The program should decide if it is possible to partition the array into two equal sum subsequences. You are allowed to remove some elements from the array, but not all, in order to make such partition feasible.



Example:



Suppose the input is 4 5 11 17 9. Two partition is possible if we remove 11 and 17. My question is what adjustments to my two partition implementation I should make to determine if two partition is possible (may or may not require to remove some elements) or output that two partition is impossible even if some elements are removed. The program should run in O(sum^2 * C) time.



Here is my two partition implementation in Python:



def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)

if s % 2 != 0: return False

T = [[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][i] = True

for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[i][j] = T[i][j-1]
if i >= C[j-1]:
T[i][j] = T[i][j] or T[i-C[j-1]][j-1]

return T[s // 2][n]









share|improve this question























  • Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
    – n.m.
    Nov 12 at 6:18











  • Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 12 at 15:46










  • @גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 20:09










  • In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 12 at 23:14










  • @גלעדברקן done.
    – user1812
    Nov 13 at 0:03















2














What modification should I apply to the dynamic programming implementation of two partition problem to solve the following task:



You are given an array of positive integers as input, denote it C. The program should decide if it is possible to partition the array into two equal sum subsequences. You are allowed to remove some elements from the array, but not all, in order to make such partition feasible.



Example:



Suppose the input is 4 5 11 17 9. Two partition is possible if we remove 11 and 17. My question is what adjustments to my two partition implementation I should make to determine if two partition is possible (may or may not require to remove some elements) or output that two partition is impossible even if some elements are removed. The program should run in O(sum^2 * C) time.



Here is my two partition implementation in Python:



def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)

if s % 2 != 0: return False

T = [[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][i] = True

for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[i][j] = T[i][j-1]
if i >= C[j-1]:
T[i][j] = T[i][j] or T[i-C[j-1]][j-1]

return T[s // 2][n]









share|improve this question























  • Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
    – n.m.
    Nov 12 at 6:18











  • Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 12 at 15:46










  • @גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 20:09










  • In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 12 at 23:14










  • @גלעדברקן done.
    – user1812
    Nov 13 at 0:03













2












2








2


1





What modification should I apply to the dynamic programming implementation of two partition problem to solve the following task:



You are given an array of positive integers as input, denote it C. The program should decide if it is possible to partition the array into two equal sum subsequences. You are allowed to remove some elements from the array, but not all, in order to make such partition feasible.



Example:



Suppose the input is 4 5 11 17 9. Two partition is possible if we remove 11 and 17. My question is what adjustments to my two partition implementation I should make to determine if two partition is possible (may or may not require to remove some elements) or output that two partition is impossible even if some elements are removed. The program should run in O(sum^2 * C) time.



Here is my two partition implementation in Python:



def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)

if s % 2 != 0: return False

T = [[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][i] = True

for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[i][j] = T[i][j-1]
if i >= C[j-1]:
T[i][j] = T[i][j] or T[i-C[j-1]][j-1]

return T[s // 2][n]









share|improve this question















What modification should I apply to the dynamic programming implementation of two partition problem to solve the following task:



You are given an array of positive integers as input, denote it C. The program should decide if it is possible to partition the array into two equal sum subsequences. You are allowed to remove some elements from the array, but not all, in order to make such partition feasible.



Example:



Suppose the input is 4 5 11 17 9. Two partition is possible if we remove 11 and 17. My question is what adjustments to my two partition implementation I should make to determine if two partition is possible (may or may not require to remove some elements) or output that two partition is impossible even if some elements are removed. The program should run in O(sum^2 * C) time.



Here is my two partition implementation in Python:



def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)

if s % 2 != 0: return False

T = [[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][i] = True

for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[i][j] = T[i][j-1]
if i >= C[j-1]:
T[i][j] = T[i][j] or T[i-C[j-1]][j-1]

return T[s // 2][n]






python-3.x algorithm dynamic-programming






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 13 at 0:02

























asked Nov 12 at 5:14









user1812

1134




1134











  • Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
    – n.m.
    Nov 12 at 6:18











  • Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 12 at 15:46










  • @גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 20:09










  • In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 12 at 23:14










  • @גלעדברקן done.
    – user1812
    Nov 13 at 0:03
















  • Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
    – n.m.
    Nov 12 at 6:18











  • Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 12 at 15:46










  • @גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 20:09










  • In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 12 at 23:14










  • @גלעדברקן done.
    – user1812
    Nov 13 at 0:03















Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
– n.m.
Nov 12 at 6:18





Start with determining how your table should be dimensioned. Your current algo calls for a C*s/2 table, and the complexity is O(C*s). The required algo should have O(C*s*s) complexity, so...
– n.m.
Nov 12 at 6:18













Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 at 15:46




Please clarify the expected output for [2, 3, 1] and why.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 at 15:46












@גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
– user1812
Nov 12 at 20:09




@גלעדברקן The expected output is 2,1 and 3 so it is possible to partition the array into two equal sums subarrays. We don't need to remove any elements in this case.
– user1812
Nov 12 at 20:09












In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 at 23:14




In that case, I would change the word, "subarrays," to "subsets" or "subsequences." I think subarray is mostly understood as contiguous.
– גלעד ברקן
Nov 12 at 23:14












@גלעדברקן done.
– user1812
Nov 13 at 0:03




@גלעדברקן done.
– user1812
Nov 13 at 0:03












3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















2














Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.
T[i][j][k] if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i & j respectively within the first k elements.



To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C).



To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i such that T[i][i][n] is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i, as required by the question.



If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.



Here's a sample implementation:



def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
else:
a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)

def two_partition(C):
n = len(C)
s = sum(C)

T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True

for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
for j in range(1, n + 1):
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
if s1 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
if s2 >= C[j-1]:
T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
if T[i][i][n]:
return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
return False

print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))





share|improve this answer






















  • @גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
    – merlyn
    Nov 12 at 7:05










  • Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 7:25










  • @user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
    – n.m.
    Nov 12 at 7:44










  • Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 7:45











  • @n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
    – merlyn
    Nov 12 at 14:15


















1














To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.



4 5 11 17 9

0 (empty parts)

|0 ± 4| = 4

set now has 4 and empty-parts-0

|0 ± 5| = 5
|4 - 5| = 1
|4 + 5| = 9

set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0

|0 ± 11| = 11
|4 - 11| = 7
|4 + 11| = 15
|5 - 11| = 6
|5 + 11| = 16
|1 - 11| = 10
|1 + 11| = 12
|9 - 11| = 2
|9 + 11| = 20

... (iteration with 17)

|0 ± 9| = 9
|4 - 9| = 5
|4 + 9| = 13
|5 - 9| = 4
|5 + 9| = 14
|1 - 9| = 8
|1 + 9| = 10
|9 - 9| = 0

Bingo!


Python code:





def f(C):
diffs = set()

for n in C:
new_diffs = [n]

for d in diffs:
if d - n == 0:
return True
new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])

diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)

return False


Output:





> f([2, 3, 7, 2])

=> True

> f([2, 3, 7])

=> False

> f([7, 1000007, 1000000])

=> True





share|improve this answer






















  • Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
    – user1812
    Nov 13 at 0:05










  • @user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 13 at 0:10



















0














I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.



Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx] in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)



But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx inclusively.



Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2



Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)



function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
var
Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
Lists: array of TStringList;
found: Boolean;
s2: integer;

function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
var
key: string;
i: Integer;
begin
if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
found:= True;
Exit(True);
end;

if idx < 0 then
Exit(False);

//debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation

key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);

if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
//memoisation
Result := Map.Items[key]
else begin
Result := false;
//try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
for i := 0 to 2 do begin
if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
if Result then begin
//retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
if found then
Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
break;
end
else
//reset sums before the next try
Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
end;
end;
//remember result - memoization
Map.add(key, Result);
end;
end;


var
n, sum: Integer;
Subs: TArray<Word>;
begin
n := Length(A);
sum := SumInt(A);
s2 := sum div 2;
found := False;

Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
SetLength(Lists, 3);
Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;

if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
'[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
end else
Result := 'No luck :(';
end;



begin
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
end;

[16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]

No luck :(





share|improve this answer






















    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    );
    );
    , "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "1"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53256273%2farray-partition-using-dynamic-programming%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2














    Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.
    T[i][j][k] if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i & j respectively within the first k elements.



    To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
    Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C).



    To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i such that T[i][i][n] is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i, as required by the question.



    If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.



    Here's a sample implementation:



    def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
    if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
    if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
    return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
    elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
    a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
    return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
    else:
    a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
    return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)

    def two_partition(C):
    n = len(C)
    s = sum(C)

    T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
    for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True

    for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
    for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
    for j in range(1, n + 1):
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
    if s1 >= C[j-1]:
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
    if s2 >= C[j-1]:
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
    for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
    if T[i][i][n]:
    return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
    return False

    print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
    print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
    print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))





    share|improve this answer






















    • @גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
      – merlyn
      Nov 12 at 7:05










    • Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
      – user1812
      Nov 12 at 7:25










    • @user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
      – n.m.
      Nov 12 at 7:44










    • Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
      – user1812
      Nov 12 at 7:45











    • @n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
      – merlyn
      Nov 12 at 14:15















    2














    Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.
    T[i][j][k] if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i & j respectively within the first k elements.



    To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
    Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C).



    To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i such that T[i][i][n] is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i, as required by the question.



    If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.



    Here's a sample implementation:



    def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
    if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
    if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
    return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
    elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
    a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
    return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
    else:
    a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
    return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)

    def two_partition(C):
    n = len(C)
    s = sum(C)

    T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
    for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True

    for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
    for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
    for j in range(1, n + 1):
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
    if s1 >= C[j-1]:
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
    if s2 >= C[j-1]:
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
    for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
    if T[i][i][n]:
    return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
    return False

    print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
    print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
    print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))





    share|improve this answer






















    • @גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
      – merlyn
      Nov 12 at 7:05










    • Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
      – user1812
      Nov 12 at 7:25










    • @user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
      – n.m.
      Nov 12 at 7:44










    • Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
      – user1812
      Nov 12 at 7:45











    • @n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
      – merlyn
      Nov 12 at 14:15













    2












    2








    2






    Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.
    T[i][j][k] if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i & j respectively within the first k elements.



    To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
    Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C).



    To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i such that T[i][i][n] is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i, as required by the question.



    If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.



    Here's a sample implementation:



    def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
    if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
    if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
    return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
    elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
    a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
    return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
    else:
    a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
    return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)

    def two_partition(C):
    n = len(C)
    s = sum(C)

    T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
    for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True

    for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
    for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
    for j in range(1, n + 1):
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
    if s1 >= C[j-1]:
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
    if s2 >= C[j-1]:
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
    for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
    if T[i][i][n]:
    return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
    return False

    print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
    print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
    print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))





    share|improve this answer














    Create a 3 dimensional array indexed by sum of 1st partition, sum of 2nd partition and number of elements.
    T[i][j][k] if only true if it's possible to have two disjoint subsets with sum i & j respectively within the first k elements.



    To calculate it, you need to consider three possibilities for each element. Either it's present in first set, or second set, or it's removed entirely.
    Doing this in a loop for each combination of sum possible generates the required array in O(sum ^ 2 * C).



    To find the answer to your question, all you need to check is that there is some sum i such that T[i][i][n] is true. This implies that there are two distinct subsets both of which sum to i, as required by the question.



    If you need to find the actual subsets, doing so is easy using a simple backtracking function. Just check which of the three possibilities are possible in the back_track functions and recurse.



    Here's a sample implementation:



    def back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i):
    if s1 == 0 and s2 == 0: return ,
    if T[s1][s2][i-1]:
    return back_track(T, C, s1, s2, i-1)
    elif s1 >= C[i-1] and T[s1 - C[i-1]][s2][i-1]:
    a, b = back_track(T, C, s1 - C[i-1], s2, i-1)
    return ([C[i-1]] + a, b)
    else:
    a, b = back_track(T, C, s1, s2 - C[i-1], i-1)
    return (a, [C[i-1]] + b)

    def two_partition(C):
    n = len(C)
    s = sum(C)

    T = [[[False for _ in range(n + 1)] for _ in range(s//2 + 1)] for _ in range(s // 2 + 1)]
    for i in range(n + 1): T[0][0][i] = True

    for s1 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
    for s2 in range(0, s//2 + 1):
    for j in range(1, n + 1):
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j-1]
    if s1 >= C[j-1]:
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1-C[j-1]][s2][j-1]
    if s2 >= C[j-1]:
    T[s1][s2][j] = T[s1][s2][j] or T[s1][s2-C[j-1]][j-1]
    for i in range(1, s//2 + 1):
    if T[i][i][n]:
    return back_track(T, C, i, i, n)
    return False

    print(two_partition([4, 5, 11, 9]))
    print(two_partition([2, 3, 1]))
    print(two_partition([2, 3, 7]))






    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Nov 12 at 16:57

























    answered Nov 12 at 6:20









    merlyn

    1,29511221




    1,29511221











    • @גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
      – merlyn
      Nov 12 at 7:05










    • Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
      – user1812
      Nov 12 at 7:25










    • @user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
      – n.m.
      Nov 12 at 7:44










    • Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
      – user1812
      Nov 12 at 7:45











    • @n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
      – merlyn
      Nov 12 at 14:15
















    • @גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
      – merlyn
      Nov 12 at 7:05










    • Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
      – user1812
      Nov 12 at 7:25










    • @user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
      – n.m.
      Nov 12 at 7:44










    • Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
      – user1812
      Nov 12 at 7:45











    • @n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
      – merlyn
      Nov 12 at 14:15















    @גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
    – merlyn
    Nov 12 at 7:05




    @גלעדברקן Whoops, the function was returning true or false so I totally missed that part. It can be easily done by backtracking on successful i & j. If T1[i][j-1] is true as well, then jth element is skipped, else it is needed. decrement j until you hit 0. Apply the same procedure in reverse for T2.
    – merlyn
    Nov 12 at 7:05












    Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 7:25




    Just want to clarify what is the role of T2 and why the last loop guarantees that two partition is possible. Can you briefly explain?
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 7:25












    @user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
    – n.m.
    Nov 12 at 7:44




    @user1812 it doesn't. This function returns False for [2,3,1]. The idea is broken and cannot be fixed. Your complexity estimate is correct.
    – n.m.
    Nov 12 at 7:44












    Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 7:45





    Indeed @n.m. you are correct, so I made the assumptions too quick...
    – user1812
    Nov 12 at 7:45













    @n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
    – merlyn
    Nov 12 at 14:15




    @n.m. But, the answer should be false for [2, 3, 1]. The partition is supposed to be in two subarrays, not subsets. How is that possible for [2, 3, 1]?
    – merlyn
    Nov 12 at 14:15













    1














    To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.



    4 5 11 17 9

    0 (empty parts)

    |0 ± 4| = 4

    set now has 4 and empty-parts-0

    |0 ± 5| = 5
    |4 - 5| = 1
    |4 + 5| = 9

    set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0

    |0 ± 11| = 11
    |4 - 11| = 7
    |4 + 11| = 15
    |5 - 11| = 6
    |5 + 11| = 16
    |1 - 11| = 10
    |1 + 11| = 12
    |9 - 11| = 2
    |9 + 11| = 20

    ... (iteration with 17)

    |0 ± 9| = 9
    |4 - 9| = 5
    |4 + 9| = 13
    |5 - 9| = 4
    |5 + 9| = 14
    |1 - 9| = 8
    |1 + 9| = 10
    |9 - 9| = 0

    Bingo!


    Python code:





    def f(C):
    diffs = set()

    for n in C:
    new_diffs = [n]

    for d in diffs:
    if d - n == 0:
    return True
    new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])

    diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)

    return False


    Output:





    > f([2, 3, 7, 2])

    => True

    > f([2, 3, 7])

    => False

    > f([7, 1000007, 1000000])

    => True





    share|improve this answer






















    • Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
      – user1812
      Nov 13 at 0:05










    • @user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
      – גלעד ברקן
      Nov 13 at 0:10
















    1














    To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.



    4 5 11 17 9

    0 (empty parts)

    |0 ± 4| = 4

    set now has 4 and empty-parts-0

    |0 ± 5| = 5
    |4 - 5| = 1
    |4 + 5| = 9

    set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0

    |0 ± 11| = 11
    |4 - 11| = 7
    |4 + 11| = 15
    |5 - 11| = 6
    |5 + 11| = 16
    |1 - 11| = 10
    |1 + 11| = 12
    |9 - 11| = 2
    |9 + 11| = 20

    ... (iteration with 17)

    |0 ± 9| = 9
    |4 - 9| = 5
    |4 + 9| = 13
    |5 - 9| = 4
    |5 + 9| = 14
    |1 - 9| = 8
    |1 + 9| = 10
    |9 - 9| = 0

    Bingo!


    Python code:





    def f(C):
    diffs = set()

    for n in C:
    new_diffs = [n]

    for d in diffs:
    if d - n == 0:
    return True
    new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])

    diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)

    return False


    Output:





    > f([2, 3, 7, 2])

    => True

    > f([2, 3, 7])

    => False

    > f([7, 1000007, 1000000])

    => True





    share|improve this answer






















    • Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
      – user1812
      Nov 13 at 0:05










    • @user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
      – גלעד ברקן
      Nov 13 at 0:10














    1












    1








    1






    To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.



    4 5 11 17 9

    0 (empty parts)

    |0 ± 4| = 4

    set now has 4 and empty-parts-0

    |0 ± 5| = 5
    |4 - 5| = 1
    |4 + 5| = 9

    set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0

    |0 ± 11| = 11
    |4 - 11| = 7
    |4 + 11| = 15
    |5 - 11| = 6
    |5 + 11| = 16
    |1 - 11| = 10
    |1 + 11| = 12
    |9 - 11| = 2
    |9 + 11| = 20

    ... (iteration with 17)

    |0 ± 9| = 9
    |4 - 9| = 5
    |4 + 9| = 13
    |5 - 9| = 4
    |5 + 9| = 14
    |1 - 9| = 8
    |1 + 9| = 10
    |9 - 9| = 0

    Bingo!


    Python code:





    def f(C):
    diffs = set()

    for n in C:
    new_diffs = [n]

    for d in diffs:
    if d - n == 0:
    return True
    new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])

    diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)

    return False


    Output:





    > f([2, 3, 7, 2])

    => True

    > f([2, 3, 7])

    => False

    > f([7, 1000007, 1000000])

    => True





    share|improve this answer














    To determine if it's possible, keep a set of unique differences between the two parts. For each element, iterate over the differences seen so far; subtract and add the element. We're looking for the difference 0.



    4 5 11 17 9

    0 (empty parts)

    |0 ± 4| = 4

    set now has 4 and empty-parts-0

    |0 ± 5| = 5
    |4 - 5| = 1
    |4 + 5| = 9

    set now has 4,5,1,9 and empty-parts-0

    |0 ± 11| = 11
    |4 - 11| = 7
    |4 + 11| = 15
    |5 - 11| = 6
    |5 + 11| = 16
    |1 - 11| = 10
    |1 + 11| = 12
    |9 - 11| = 2
    |9 + 11| = 20

    ... (iteration with 17)

    |0 ± 9| = 9
    |4 - 9| = 5
    |4 + 9| = 13
    |5 - 9| = 4
    |5 + 9| = 14
    |1 - 9| = 8
    |1 + 9| = 10
    |9 - 9| = 0

    Bingo!


    Python code:





    def f(C):
    diffs = set()

    for n in C:
    new_diffs = [n]

    for d in diffs:
    if d - n == 0:
    return True
    new_diffs.extend([abs(d - n), abs(d + n)])

    diffs = diffs.union(new_diffs)

    return False


    Output:





    > f([2, 3, 7, 2])

    => True

    > f([2, 3, 7])

    => False

    > f([7, 1000007, 1000000])

    => True






    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Nov 13 at 0:55

























    answered Nov 12 at 15:36









    גלעד ברקן

    12.1k21439




    12.1k21439











    • Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
      – user1812
      Nov 13 at 0:05










    • @user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
      – גלעד ברקן
      Nov 13 at 0:10

















    • Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
      – user1812
      Nov 13 at 0:05










    • @user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
      – גלעד ברקן
      Nov 13 at 0:10
















    Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
    – user1812
    Nov 13 at 0:05




    Dynamic programming solution is preferred. Also please justify your solution, i.e why your algorithm works and running time.
    – user1812
    Nov 13 at 0:05












    @user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 13 at 0:10





    @user1812 It seems like dynamic programming to me - the overlapping subproblems are the achievable differences between the two disjoint subsets. It works because it tries to place each element either in one subset (-) or the other (+) and leaves the choice of neither in the set of seen differences. Running time is O(|C| * number-of-achievable-differences).
    – גלעד ברקן
    Nov 13 at 0:10












    0














    I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.



    Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx] in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)



    But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx inclusively.



    Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2



    Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)



    function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
    var
    Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
    Lists: array of TStringList;
    found: Boolean;
    s2: integer;

    function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
    var
    key: string;
    i: Integer;
    begin
    if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
    found:= True;
    Exit(True);
    end;

    if idx < 0 then
    Exit(False);

    //debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation

    key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);

    if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
    //memoisation
    Result := Map.Items[key]
    else begin
    Result := false;
    //try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
    for i := 0 to 2 do begin
    if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
    Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
    Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
    if Result then begin
    //retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
    if found then
    Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
    break;
    end
    else
    //reset sums before the next try
    Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
    end;
    end;
    //remember result - memoization
    Map.add(key, Result);
    end;
    end;


    var
    n, sum: Integer;
    Subs: TArray<Word>;
    begin
    n := Length(A);
    sum := SumInt(A);
    s2 := sum div 2;
    found := False;

    Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
    SetLength(Lists, 3);
    Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
    Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
    Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;

    if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
    Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
    '[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
    ' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
    end else
    Result := 'No luck :(';
    end;



    begin
    Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
    Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
    end;

    [16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]

    No luck :(





    share|improve this answer



























      0














      I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.



      Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx] in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)



      But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx inclusively.



      Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2



      Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)



      function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
      var
      Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
      Lists: array of TStringList;
      found: Boolean;
      s2: integer;

      function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
      var
      key: string;
      i: Integer;
      begin
      if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
      found:= True;
      Exit(True);
      end;

      if idx < 0 then
      Exit(False);

      //debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation

      key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);

      if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
      //memoisation
      Result := Map.Items[key]
      else begin
      Result := false;
      //try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
      for i := 0 to 2 do begin
      if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
      Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
      Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
      if Result then begin
      //retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
      if found then
      Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
      break;
      end
      else
      //reset sums before the next try
      Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
      end;
      end;
      //remember result - memoization
      Map.add(key, Result);
      end;
      end;


      var
      n, sum: Integer;
      Subs: TArray<Word>;
      begin
      n := Length(A);
      sum := SumInt(A);
      s2 := sum div 2;
      found := False;

      Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
      SetLength(Lists, 3);
      Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
      Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
      Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;

      if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
      Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
      '[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
      ' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
      end else
      Result := 'No luck :(';
      end;



      begin
      Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
      Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
      end;

      [16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]

      No luck :(





      share|improve this answer

























        0












        0








        0






        I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.



        Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx] in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)



        But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx inclusively.



        Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2



        Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)



        function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
        var
        Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
        Lists: array of TStringList;
        found: Boolean;
        s2: integer;

        function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
        var
        key: string;
        i: Integer;
        begin
        if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
        found:= True;
        Exit(True);
        end;

        if idx < 0 then
        Exit(False);

        //debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation

        key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);

        if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
        //memoisation
        Result := Map.Items[key]
        else begin
        Result := false;
        //try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
        for i := 0 to 2 do begin
        if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
        Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
        Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
        if Result then begin
        //retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
        if found then
        Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
        break;
        end
        else
        //reset sums before the next try
        Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
        end;
        end;
        //remember result - memoization
        Map.add(key, Result);
        end;
        end;


        var
        n, sum: Integer;
        Subs: TArray<Word>;
        begin
        n := Length(A);
        sum := SumInt(A);
        s2 := sum div 2;
        found := False;

        Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
        SetLength(Lists, 3);
        Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
        Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
        Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;

        if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
        Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
        '[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
        ' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
        end else
        Result := 'No luck :(';
        end;



        begin
        Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
        Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
        end;

        [16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]

        No luck :(





        share|improve this answer














        I quickly adapted code for searching of three equal-sums subsets to given problem.



        Algorithm tries to put every item A[idx] in the first bag, or in the second bag (both are real bags) or in the third (fake) bag (ignored items). Initial values (available space) in the real bags are half of overall sum. This approach as-is has exponential complexity (decision tree with 3^N leaves)



        But there is a lot of repeating distributions, so we can remember some state and ignore branches with no chance, so a kind of DP - memoization is used. Here mentioned state is set of available space in real bags when we use items from the last index to idx inclusively.



        Possible size of state storage might reach N * sum/2 * sum/2



        Working Delphi code (is not thoroughly tested, seems has a bug with ignored items output)



        function Solve2(A: TArray<Integer>): string;
        var
        Map: TDictionary<string, boolean>;
        Lists: array of TStringList;
        found: Boolean;
        s2: integer;

        function CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs: TArray<Word>; idx: Int16): boolean;
        var
        key: string;
        i: Integer;
        begin
        if (Subs[0] = Subs[1]) and (Subs[0] <> s2) then begin
        found:= True;
        Exit(True);
        end;

        if idx < 0 then
        Exit(False);

        //debug map contains current rests of sums in explicit representation

        key := Format('%d_%d_%d', [subs[0], subs[1], idx]);

        if Map.ContainsKey(key) then
        //memoisation
        Result := Map.Items[key]
        else begin
        Result := false;
        //try to put A[idx] into the first, second bag or ignore it
        for i := 0 to 2 do begin
        if Subs[i] >= A[idx] then begin
        Subs[i] := Subs[i] - A[idx];
        Result := CheckSubsetsWithItem(Subs, idx - 1);
        if Result then begin
        //retrieve subsets themselves at recursion unwindning
        if found then
        Lists[i].Add(A[idx].ToString);
        break;
        end
        else
        //reset sums before the next try
        Subs[i] := Subs[i] + A[idx];
        end;
        end;
        //remember result - memoization
        Map.add(key, Result);
        end;
        end;


        var
        n, sum: Integer;
        Subs: TArray<Word>;
        begin
        n := Length(A);
        sum := SumInt(A);
        s2 := sum div 2;
        found := False;

        Map := TDictionary<string, boolean>.Create;
        SetLength(Lists, 3);
        Lists[0] := TStringList.Create;
        Lists[1] := TStringList.Create;
        Lists[2] := TStringList.Create;

        if CheckSubsetsWithItem([s2, s2, sum], n - 1) then begin
        Result := '[' + Lists[0].CommaText + '], ' +
        '[' + Lists[1].CommaText + '], ' +
        ' ignored: [' + Lists[2].CommaText + ']';
        end else
        Result := 'No luck :(';
        end;



        begin
        Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 5, 4, 3, 2, 16,21,44, 19]));
        Memo1.Lines.Add(Solve2([1, 3, 9, 27, 81, 243, 729, 6561]));
        end;

        [16,21,19], [1,5,4,2,44], ignored: [3]

        No luck :(






        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited Nov 12 at 9:37

























        answered Nov 12 at 9:12









        MBo

        46.9k22848




        46.9k22848



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53256273%2farray-partition-using-dynamic-programming%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            How to read a connectionString WITH PROVIDER in .NET Core?

            In R, how to develop a multiplot heatmap.2 figure showing key labels successfully

            Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art of Trento and Rovereto