I am trying to write a tetranacci function using F# as efficiently as possible the first solution I came up with was really inefficient. can you help me come up with a better one? How would i be able to implement this in linear time?
let rec tetra n =
match n with
| 0 -> 0
| 1 -> 1
| 2 -> 1
| 3 -> 2
| _ -> tetra (n - 1) + tetra (n - 2) + tetra (n - 3) + tetra (n - 4)
You could economise by devising a function that computes the state for the next iteration on a 4-tuple. Then the sequence generator function Seq.unfold can be used to build a sequence that contains the first element of each state quadruple, an operation that is 'lazy` -- the elements of the sequence are only computed on demand as they are consumed.
let tetranacci (a3, a2, a1, a0) = a2, a1, a0, a3 + a2 + a1 + a0
(0, 1, 1, 2)
|> Seq.unfold (fun (a3, _, _, _ as a30) -> Some(a3, tetranacci a30))
|> Seq.take 10
|> Seq.toList
// val it : int list = [0; 1; 1; 2; 4; 8; 15; 29; 56; 108]
Note that the standard Tetranacci sequence (OEIS A000078) would usually be generated with the start state of (0, 0, 0, 1):
// val it : int list = [0; 0; 0; 1; 1; 2; 4; 8; 15; 29]
kaefer's answer is good, but why stop at linear time? It turns out that you can actually achieve logarithmic time instead, by noting that the recurrence can be expressed as a matrix multiplication:
[T_n+1] [0; 1; 0; 0][T_n]
[T_n+2] = [0; 0; 1; 0][T_n+1]
[T_n+3] [0; 0; 0; 1][T_n+2]
[T_n+4] [1; 1; 1; 1][T_n+3]
But then T_n can be achieved by applying the recurrence n times, which we can see as the first entry of M^n*[T_0; T_1; T_2; T_3] (which is just the upper right entry of M^n), and we can perform the matrix multiplication in O(log n) time by repeated squaring:
type Mat =
| Mat of bigint[][]
static member (*)(Mat arr1, Mat arr2) =
Array.init arr1.Length (fun i -> Array.init arr2.[0].Length (fun j -> Array.sum [| for k in 0 .. arr2.Length - 1 -> arr1.[i].[k]*arr2.[k].[j] |]))
|> Mat
static member Pow(m, n) =
match n with
| 0 ->
let (Mat arr) = m
Array.init arr.Length (fun i -> Array.init arr.Length (fun j -> if i = j then 1I else 0I))
|> Mat
| 1 -> m
| _ ->
let m2 = m ** (n/2)
if n % 2 = 0 then m2 * m2
else m2 * m2 * m
let tetr =
let m = Mat [| [|0I; 1I; 0I; 0I|]
[|0I; 0I; 1I; 0I|]
[|0I; 0I; 0I; 1I|]
[|1I; 1I; 1I; 1I|]|]
fun n ->
let (Mat m') = m ** n
m'.[0].[3]
for i in 0 .. 50 do
printfn "%A" (tetr i)
Here is a tail recursive version, which compiles to mostly loops (and its complexity should be O(n)):
let tetr n =
let rec t acc4 acc3 acc2 acc1 = function
| n when n = 0 -> acc4
| n when n = 1 -> acc3
| n when n = 2 -> acc2
| n when n = 3 -> acc1
| n -> t acc3 acc2 acc1 (acc1 + acc2 + acc3 + acc4) (n - 1)
t 0 1 1 2 n
acc1 corresponds to tetra (n - 1),
acc2 corresponds to tetra (n - 2),
acc3 corresponds to tetra (n - 3),
acc4 corresponds to tetra (n - 4)
Based on the Fibonacci example
I need some help with my hometask: to express one function (sort) through others (smallest, delete, insert). If you know how, please, tell me, how I can do running my recursion cicle? it doing now only one step. maybe something like this: val4 -> head :: tail |> sort tail on line 25 (val4)?
let rec smallest = function
| x :: y :: tail when x <= y -> smallest (x :: tail)
| x :: y :: tail when x > y -> smallest (y :: tail)
| [x] -> Some x
| _ -> None
let rec delete (n, xs) =
match (n, xs) with
| (n, x :: xs) when n <> x -> x :: delete (n, xs)
| (n, x :: xs) when n = x -> xs
| (n, _) -> []
let rec insert (xs, n) =
match (xs, n) with
| ([x], n) when x < n -> [x]#[n]
| (x :: xs, n) when x < n -> x :: insert (xs, n)
| (x :: xs, n) when x >= n -> n :: x :: xs
| (_, _) -> []
let rec sort = function
| xs -> let val1 = smallest xs
let val2 = val1.[0]
let val3 = delete (val2, xs)
let val4 = insert (val3, val2)
val4
let res = sort [5; 4; 3; 2; 1; 1]
printfn "%A" res
This is sort of like insertion sort, but since you're always finding the smallest number in the whole list instead of the next highest number, it will recurse forever unless you skip whatever you've already found to be the smallest.
Furthermore, your insert and delete functions act not on the item index, but on equality to the value, so it won't be able to handle repeated numbers.
Keeping most of your original code the same, usually you have an inner recursive function to help you keep track of state. This is a common FP pattern.
let sort lst =
let size = lst |> List.length
let rec sort' xs = function
| index when index = size -> xs
| index ->
let val1 = smallest (xs |> List.skip index)
let val2 = val1.[0]
let val3 = delete (val2, xs)
let val4 = insert (val3, val2)
sort' val4 (index + 1)
sort' lst 0
let res = sort [5; 3; 2; 4; 1; ]
printfn "%A" res
Needless to say, this isn't correct or performant, and each iteration traverses the list multiple times. It probably runs in cubic time.
But keep learning!
I found it... I only had changed 4 & 5 lines above in the "smallest" on this: | [x] -> Some x
| _ -> None, when there was: | [x] -> [x]
| _ -> []
let rec sort = function
| xs -> match xs with
| head :: tail -> let val1 = smallest xs
match val1 with
| Some x -> let val2 = delete (x, xs)
let val3 = insert (val2, x)
let val4 = (fun list -> match list with head :: tail -> head :: sort tail | _ -> [])
val4 val3
| None -> []
| _ -> []
// let res = sort [5; 4; 3; 2; 1]
// printfn "%A" res
I am seeking help, mainly because I am very new to F# environment. I need to use F# stream to generate an infinite stream of Armstrong Numbers. Can any one help with this one. I have done some mambo jumbo but I have no clue where I'm going.
type 'a stream = | Cons of 'a * (unit -> 'a stream)
let rec take n (Cons(x, xsf)) =
if n = 0 then []
else x :: take (n-1) (xsf());;
//to test if two integers are equal
let test x y =
match (x,y) with
| (x,y) when x < y -> false
| (x,y) when x > y -> false
| _ -> true
//to check for armstrong number
let check n =
let mutable m = n
let mutable r = 0
let mutable s = 0
while m <> 0 do
r <- m%10
s <- s+r*r*r
m <- m/10
if (test n s) then true else false
let rec armstrong n =
Cons (n, fun () -> if check (n+1) then armstrong (n+1) else armstrong (n+2))
let pos = armstrong 0
take 5 pos
To be honest your code seems a bit like a mess.
The most basic version I could think of is this:
let isArmstrong (a,b,c) =
a*a*a + b*b*b + c*c*c = (a*100+b*10+c)
let armstrongs =
seq {
for a in [0..9] do
for b in [0..9] do
for c in [0..9] do
if isArmstrong (a,b,c) then yield (a*100+b*10+c)
}
of course assuming a armstrong number is a 3-digit number where the sum of the cubes of the digits is the number itself
this will yield you:
> Seq.toList armstrongs;;
val it : int list = [0; 1; 153; 370; 371; 407]
but it should be easy to add a wider range or remove the one-digit numbers (think about it).
general case
the problem seems so interesting that I choose to implement the general case (see here) too:
let numbers =
let rec create n =
if n = 0 then [(0,[])] else
[
for x in [0..9] do
for (_,xs) in create (n-1) do
yield (n, x::xs)
]
Seq.initInfinite create |> Seq.concat
let toNumber (ds : int list) =
ds |> List.fold (fun s d -> s*10I + bigint d) 0I
let armstrong (m : int, ds : int list) =
ds |> List.map (fun d -> bigint d ** m) |> List.sum
let leadingZero =
function
| 0::_ -> true
| _ -> false
let isArmstrong (m : int, ds : int list) =
if leadingZero ds then false else
let left = armstrong (m, ds)
let right = toNumber ds
left = right
let armstrongs =
numbers
|> Seq.filter isArmstrong
|> Seq.map (snd >> toNumber)
but the numbers get really sparse quickly and using this will soon get you out-of-memory but the
first 20 are:
> Seq.take 20 armstrongs |> Seq.map string |> Seq.toList;;
val it : string list =
["0"; "1"; "2"; "3"; "4"; "5"; "6"; "7"; "8"; "9"; "153"; "370"; "371";
"407"; "1634"; "8208"; "9474"; "54748"; "92727"; "93084"]
remark/disclaimer
this is the most basic version - you can get big speed/performance if you just enumerate all numbers and use basic math to get and exponentiate the digits ;) ... sure you can figure it out
My code (below) falls over with a stack overflow exception. Im assuming F# isnt like haskell and dosent play well with recursive lists. Whats the correct way of dealing with recursive lists like this in F# ? Should i pass it an int so it has a determined size?
let rec collatz num =
match num with
|x when x % 2 = 0 ->num :: collatz (x/2)
|x -> num :: collatz ((x * 3) + 1)
let smallList = collatz(4) |> Seq.take(4)
For an infinite list like this, you want to return a sequence. Sequences are lazy; lists are not.
let rec collatz num =
seq {
yield num
match num with
| x when x % 2 = 0 -> yield! collatz (x/2)
| x -> yield! collatz ((x * 3) + 1)
}
let smallList =
collatz 4
|> Seq.take 4
|> Seq.toList //[4; 2; 1; 4]
let collatz num =
let next x = if x % 2 = 0 then x / 2 else x * 3 + 1
(num, next num)
|>Seq.unfold (fun (n, x) -> Some (n, (x, next x)))
Is it possible to combine memoization and tail-recursion somehow? I'm learning F# at the moment and understand both concepts but can't seem to combine them.
Suppose I have the following memoize function (from Real-World Functional Programming):
let memoize f = let cache = new Dictionary<_, _>()
(fun x -> match cache.TryGetValue(x) with
| true, y -> y
| _ -> let v = f(x)
cache.Add(x, v)
v)
and the following factorial function:
let rec factorial(x) = if (x = 0) then 1 else x * factorial(x - 1)
Memoizing factorial isn't too difficult and making it tail-recursive isn't either:
let rec memoizedFactorial =
memoize (fun x -> if (x = 0) then 1 else x * memoizedFactorial(x - 1))
let tailRecursiveFactorial(x) =
let rec factorialUtil(x, res) = if (x = 0)
then res
else let newRes = x * res
factorialUtil(x - 1, newRes)
factorialUtil(x, 1)
But can you combine memoization and tail-recursion? I made some attempts but can't seem to get it working. Or is this simply not possible?
As always, continuations yield an elegant tailcall solution:
open System.Collections.Generic
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>() // TODO move inside
let memoizedTRFactorial =
let rec fac n k = // must make tailcalls to k
match cache.TryGetValue(n) with
| true, r -> k r
| _ ->
if n=0 then
k 1
else
fac (n-1) (fun r1 ->
printfn "multiplying by %d" n //***
let r = r1 * n
cache.Add(n,r)
k r)
fun n -> fac n id
printfn "---"
let r = memoizedTRFactorial 4
printfn "%d" r
for KeyValue(k,v) in cache do
printfn "%d: %d" k v
printfn "---"
let r2 = memoizedTRFactorial 5
printfn "%d" r2
printfn "---"
// comment out *** line, then run this
//let r3 = memoizedTRFactorial 100000
//printfn "%d" r3
There are two kinds of tests. First, this demos that calling F(4) caches F(4), F(3), F(2), F(1) as you would like.
Then, comment out the *** printf and uncomment the final test (and compile in Release mode) to show that it does not StackOverflow (it uses tailcalls correctly).
Perhaps I'll generalize out 'memoize' and demonstrate it on 'fib' next...
EDIT
Ok, here's the next step, I think, decoupling memoization from factorial:
open System.Collections.Generic
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>() // TODO move inside
let memoize fGuts n =
let rec newFunc n k = // must make tailcalls to k
match cache.TryGetValue(n) with
| true, r -> k r
| _ ->
fGuts n (fun r ->
cache.Add(n,r)
k r) newFunc
newFunc n id
let TRFactorialGuts n k memoGuts =
if n=0 then
k 1
else
memoGuts (n-1) (fun r1 ->
printfn "multiplying by %d" n //***
let r = r1 * n
k r)
let memoizedTRFactorial = memoize TRFactorialGuts
printfn "---"
let r = memoizedTRFactorial 4
printfn "%d" r
for KeyValue(k,v) in cache do
printfn "%d: %d" k v
printfn "---"
let r2 = memoizedTRFactorial 5
printfn "%d" r2
printfn "---"
// comment out *** line, then run this
//let r3 = memoizedTRFactorial 100000
//printfn "%d" r3
EDIT
Ok, here's a fully generalized version that seems to work.
open System.Collections.Generic
let memoize fGuts =
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>()
let rec newFunc n k = // must make tailcalls to k
match cache.TryGetValue(n) with
| true, r -> k r
| _ ->
fGuts n (fun r ->
cache.Add(n,r)
k r) newFunc
cache, (fun n -> newFunc n id)
let TRFactorialGuts n k memoGuts =
if n=0 then
k 1
else
memoGuts (n-1) (fun r1 ->
printfn "multiplying by %d" n //***
let r = r1 * n
k r)
let facCache,memoizedTRFactorial = memoize TRFactorialGuts
printfn "---"
let r = memoizedTRFactorial 4
printfn "%d" r
for KeyValue(k,v) in facCache do
printfn "%d: %d" k v
printfn "---"
let r2 = memoizedTRFactorial 5
printfn "%d" r2
printfn "---"
// comment out *** line, then run this
//let r3 = memoizedTRFactorial 100000
//printfn "%d" r3
let TRFibGuts n k memoGuts =
if n=0 || n=1 then
k 1
else
memoGuts (n-1) (fun r1 ->
memoGuts (n-2) (fun r2 ->
printfn "adding %d+%d" r1 r2 //%%%
let r = r1+r2
k r))
let fibCache, memoizedTRFib = memoize TRFibGuts
printfn "---"
let r5 = memoizedTRFib 4
printfn "%d" r5
for KeyValue(k,v) in fibCache do
printfn "%d: %d" k v
printfn "---"
let r6 = memoizedTRFib 5
printfn "%d" r6
printfn "---"
// comment out %%% line, then run this
//let r7 = memoizedTRFib 100000
//printfn "%d" r7
The predicament of memoizing tail-recursive functions is, of course, that when tail-recursive function
let f x =
......
f x1
calls itself, it is not allowed to do anything with a result of the recursive call, including putting it into cache. Tricky; so what can we do?
The critical insight here is that since the recursive function is not allowed to do anything with a result of recursive call, the result for all arguments to recursive calls will be the same! Therefore if recursion call trace is this
f x0 -> f x1 -> f x2 -> f x3 -> ... -> f xN -> res
then for all x in x0,x1,...,xN the result of f x will be the same, namely res. So the last invocation of a recursive function, the non-recursive call, knows the results for all the previous values - it is in a position to cache them. The only thing you need to do is to pass a list of visited values to it. Here is what it might look for factorial:
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>()
let rec fact0 l ((n,res) as arg) =
let commitToCache r =
l |> List.iter (fun a -> cache.Add(a,r))
match cache.TryGetValue(arg) with
| true, cachedResult -> commitToCache cachedResult; cachedResult
| false, _ ->
if n = 1 then
commitToCache res
cache.Add(arg, res)
res
else
fact0 (arg::l) (n-1, n*res)
let fact n = fact0 [] (n,1)
But wait! Look - l parameter of fact0 contains all the arguments to recursive calls to fact0 - just like the stack would in a non-tail-recursive version! That is exactly right. Any non-tail recursive algorithm can be converted to a tail-recursive one by moving the "list of stack frames" from stack to heap and converting the "postprocessing" of recursive call result into a walk over that data structure.
Pragmatic note: The factorial example above illustrates a general technique. It is quite useless as is - for factorial function it is quite enough to cache the top-level fact n result, because calculation of fact n for a particular n only hits a unique series of (n,res) pairs of arguments to fact0 - if (n,1) is not cached yet, then none of the pairs fact0 is going to be called on are.
Note that in this example, when we went from non-tail-recursive factorial to a tail-recursive factorial, we exploited the fact that multiplication is associative and commutative - tail-recursive factorial execute a different set of multiplications than a non-tail-recursive one.
In fact, a general technique exists for going from non-tail-recursive to tail-recursive algorithm, which yields an algorithm equivalent to a tee. This technique is called "continuatuion-passing transformation". Going that route, you can take a non-tail-recursive memoizing factorial and get a tail-recursive memoizing factorial by pretty much a mechanical transformation. See Brian's answer for exposition of this method.
I'm not sure if there's a simpler way to do this, but one approach would be to create a memoizing y-combinator:
let memoY f =
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>()
let rec fn x =
match cache.TryGetValue(x) with
| true,y -> y
| _ -> let v = f fn x
cache.Add(x,v)
v
fn
Then, you can use this combinator in lieu of "let rec", with the first argument representing the function to call recursively:
let tailRecFact =
let factHelper fact (x, res) =
printfn "%i,%i" x res
if x = 0 then res
else fact (x-1, x*res)
let memoized = memoY factHelper
fun x -> memoized (x,1)
EDIT
As Mitya pointed out, memoY doesn't preserve the tail recursive properties of the memoee. Here's a revised combinator which uses exceptions and mutable state to memoize any recursive function without overflowing the stack (even if the original function is not itself tail recursive!):
let memoY f =
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>()
fun x ->
let l = ResizeArray([x])
while l.Count <> 0 do
let v = l.[l.Count - 1]
if cache.ContainsKey(v) then l.RemoveAt(l.Count - 1)
else
try
cache.[v] <- f (fun x ->
if cache.ContainsKey(x) then cache.[x]
else
l.Add(x)
failwith "Need to recurse") v
with _ -> ()
cache.[x]
Unfortunately, the machinery which is inserted into each recursive call is somewhat heavy, so performance on un-memoized inputs requiring deep recursion can be a bit slow. However, compared to some other solutions, this has the benefit that it requires fairly minimal changes to the natural expression of recursive functions:
let fib = memoY (fun fib n ->
printfn "%i" n;
if n <= 1 then n
else (fib (n-1)) + (fib (n-2)))
let _ = fib 5000
EDIT
I'll expand a bit on how this compares to other solutions. This technique takes advantage of the fact that exceptions provide a side channel: a function of type 'a -> 'b doesn't actually need to return a value of type 'b, but can instead exit via an exception. We wouldn't need to use exceptions if the return type explicitly contained an additional value indicating failure. Of course, we could use the 'b option as the return type of the function for this purpose. This would lead to the following memoizing combinator:
let memoO f =
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>()
fun x ->
let l = ResizeArray([x])
while l.Count <> 0 do
let v = l.[l.Count - 1]
if cache.ContainsKey v then l.RemoveAt(l.Count - 1)
else
match f(fun x -> if cache.ContainsKey x then Some(cache.[x]) else l.Add(x); None) v with
| Some(r) -> cache.[v] <- r;
| None -> ()
cache.[x]
Previously, our memoization process looked like:
fun fib n ->
printfn "%i" n;
if n <= 1 then n
else (fib (n-1)) + (fib (n-2))
|> memoY
Now, we need to incorporate the fact that fib should return an int option instead of an int. Given a suitable workflow for option types, this could be written as follows:
fun fib n -> option {
printfn "%i" n
if n <= 1 then return n
else
let! x = fib (n-1)
let! y = fib (n-2)
return x + y
} |> memoO
However, if we're willing to change the return type of the first parameter (from int to int option in this case), we may as well go all the way and just use continuations in the return type instead, as in Brian's solution. Here's a variation on his definitions:
let memoC f =
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>()
let rec fn n k =
match cache.TryGetValue(n) with
| true, r -> k r
| _ ->
f fn n (fun r ->
cache.Add(n,r)
k r)
fun n -> fn n id
And again, if we have a suitable computation expression for building CPS functions, we can define our recursive function like this:
fun fib n -> cps {
printfn "%i" n
if n <= 1 then return n
else
let! x = fib (n-1)
let! y = fib (n-2)
return x + y
} |> memoC
This is exactly the same as what Brian has done, but I find the syntax here is easier to follow. To make this work, all we need are the following two definitions:
type CpsBuilder() =
member this.Return x k = k x
member this.Bind(m,f) k = m (fun a -> f a k)
let cps = CpsBuilder()
I wrote a test to visualize the memoization. Each dot is a recursive call.
......720 // factorial 6
......720 // factorial 6
.....120 // factorial 5
......720 // memoizedFactorial 6
720 // memoizedFactorial 6
120 // memoizedFactorial 5
......720 // tailRecFact 6
720 // tailRecFact 6
.....120 // tailRecFact 5
......720 // tailRecursiveMemoizedFactorial 6
720 // tailRecursiveMemoizedFactorial 6
.....120 // tailRecursiveMemoizedFactorial 5
kvb's solution returns the same results are straight memoization like this function.
let tailRecursiveMemoizedFactorial =
memoize
(fun x ->
let rec factorialUtil x res =
if x = 0 then
res
else
printf "."
let newRes = x * res
factorialUtil (x - 1) newRes
factorialUtil x 1
)
Test source code.
open System.Collections.Generic
let memoize f =
let cache = new Dictionary<_, _>()
(fun x ->
match cache.TryGetValue(x) with
| true, y -> y
| _ ->
let v = f(x)
cache.Add(x, v)
v)
let rec factorial(x) =
if (x = 0) then
1
else
printf "."
x * factorial(x - 1)
let rec memoizedFactorial =
memoize (
fun x ->
if (x = 0) then
1
else
printf "."
x * memoizedFactorial(x - 1))
let memoY f =
let cache = Dictionary<_,_>()
let rec fn x =
match cache.TryGetValue(x) with
| true,y -> y
| _ -> let v = f fn x
cache.Add(x,v)
v
fn
let tailRecFact =
let factHelper fact (x, res) =
if x = 0 then
res
else
printf "."
fact (x-1, x*res)
let memoized = memoY factHelper
fun x -> memoized (x,1)
let tailRecursiveMemoizedFactorial =
memoize
(fun x ->
let rec factorialUtil x res =
if x = 0 then
res
else
printf "."
let newRes = x * res
factorialUtil (x - 1) newRes
factorialUtil x 1
)
factorial 6 |> printfn "%A"
factorial 6 |> printfn "%A"
factorial 5 |> printfn "%A\n"
memoizedFactorial 6 |> printfn "%A"
memoizedFactorial 6 |> printfn "%A"
memoizedFactorial 5 |> printfn "%A\n"
tailRecFact 6 |> printfn "%A"
tailRecFact 6 |> printfn "%A"
tailRecFact 5 |> printfn "%A\n"
tailRecursiveMemoizedFactorial 6 |> printfn "%A"
tailRecursiveMemoizedFactorial 6 |> printfn "%A"
tailRecursiveMemoizedFactorial 5 |> printfn "%A\n"
System.Console.ReadLine() |> ignore
That should work if mutual tail recursion through y are not creating stack frames:
let rec y f x = f (y f) x
let memoize (d:System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<_,_>) f n =
if d.ContainsKey n then d.[n]
else d.Add(n, f n);d.[n]
let rec factorialucps factorial' n cont =
if n = 0I then cont(1I) else factorial' (n-1I) (fun k -> cont (n*k))
let factorialdpcps =
let d = System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<_, _>()
fun n -> y (factorialucps >> fun f n -> memoize d f n ) n id
factorialdpcps 15I //1307674368000