Skip to main content

list manipulation - Generating Tuples with restrictions


I am interested in a certain subset of all tuples. Generating all with Tuples and then filtering is wasteful, and will "blow up" very quickly.


For a concrete example, let's say I want to find all 8-tuples of {1,2,3,4,5} such that: the ordering does not matter, i.e. {1,2,3,4,5} is the same as {5,4,3,2,1}; the sum of all elements is constrained, say 24; the sum of squares is constrained, say 86. I can do it like this.


candidates = Tuples[Range[5], 8];


candidates = Sort /@ candidates;

candidates = DeleteDuplicates@candidates;

f[x_] := If[Total[x] == 24, x, 0 ];

candidates = DeleteCases[f /@ candidates, 0];

g[x_] := If[Total[x^2] == 86, x, 0 ];


candidates = DeleteCases[g /@ candidates, 0];

Starting from 5^8 elements generated by Tuples, the final step leaves me with just 5 elements. Even if I could just directly generate the different combinations without reorderings that would already be a huge improvement (495 elements in this particular case). I should emphasize that repetition of the same number is allowed.


EDIT


Thanks for all who have answered so far. I was able to find a fast way for larger lists by modifying the answer by Kuba. The basic idea is to still use IntegerPartitions but enforce the sum of squares rather than the sum of elements and then filtering with Select. The code that can do this is below.


rN = 8;
rD = 24;
rA = 86;
dmin = 1;
dmax = 5;


candidates =
Round@Sqrt[
Select[
Developer`ToPackedArray[
IntegerPartitions[rA,{rN},Range[dmin,dmax]^2],
Complex],
Total[Sqrt[#]] == rD&]
];


In the code above, packed array coercion is used to speed up the Sqrt and Round is used on the result to get rid of the auxiliary imaginary part. While this appears to be the fastest approach at least for now, the answer by qwr is more memory efficient, based on values given by MaxMemoryUsed[].


For a power test, I used rN=40, rD=188, rA=1020, dmin=1 and dmax=9, with the code above doing the job in 3 seconds while the answer by qwr took 4.3 seconds. On the other hand, MaxMemoryUsed[] gave a result almost 5 times bigger with the fast code than with the answer by qwr.



Answer



Select[
IntegerPartitions[24, {8}, Range[5]],
#.# == 86 &
]


{{5, 5, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2}, {5, 5, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 1}, 

{5, 4, 4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 1}, {5, 4, 4, 3, 3, 3, 1, 1}, {4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 2, 1, 1}}



Slightly more general approach (in case where IntegerPartitions is not what we need):


ClearAll[ar, a];
ar = Array[a, 8]

ar /. Solve[Flatten@{
Tr[ar] == 24,
ar.ar == 86,

Thread[1 <= ar <= 5],
LessEqual @@ ar (* this part takes care about
droping equivalent permutations*)
},
ar,
Integers
]


{{1, 1, 2, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4}, {1, 1, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5}, 

{1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 4, 5}, {1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 5, 5}, {2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 5}}

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1....