Skip to main content

mathematical optimization - Find the maximum Z in {(X + Y)==Z} using all the digits 0-9 only once


II want to add two integers with different digits to get a third integer with different digits. At the end, all 10 digits have to be different. So there should be 10 digits in total. How you distribute them is your (or Mathematica's) decision.


Lets say these numbers are X, Y and Z, so that X+Y=Z. There is no rule how many digits a number should have. For example X can have two digits or it can have three digits. What is the maximum possible value for Z?


How can I tell Mathematica to chose such two numbers in order to get a third one which satisfies the conditions I impose above? Please explain your answer in simple terms. I am a beginner, and I want to understand the code in the answer so I could do it on my own at some later time.



Answer



Brute forcing it: (The edit at the end is a much faster alternative)



n = 9;
IntegerPartitions[n + 1, {3}]
(* {{8, 1, 1}, {7, 2, 1}, {6, 3, 1}, {6, 2, 2}, {5, 4, 1}, 
    {5, 3, 2}, {4, 4, 2}, {4, 3, 3}}*)

are the ways to split ten digits.
The numbers on the first row can't produce viable sums, so we need to check only the partitions on the bottom row.
Then:


k = {{5, 3, 2}, {4, 4, 2}, {4, 3, 3}};


and we run (due to memory constraints) the following for each k (x = 1 ...3) (you may use Map instead of Outer)


nums = Union @@ 
   Outer[((If[#[[1]] == #[[2]] + #[[3]], #, ## &[]]) &@(FromDigits /@ 
         Internal`PartitionRagged[##])) &, Permutations[Range[0, n]], 
         k[[x ;; x]], 1];

The first k returns no results and the other two return a bunch.


The larger Z returned is 6021 made by:


{{6021, 5934, 87}, {6021, 5937, 84}, {6021, 5943, 78}, {6021, 5948, 73}, 
 {6021, 5973, 48}, {6021, 5978, 43}, {6021, 5984, 37}, {6021, 5987, 34}}



Edit, much faster and less memory usage: (uses this FromDigits syntax )


n = 9;
k = IntegerPartitions[n + 1, {3}];
pn = Permutations[Range[0, n]];
res = {};
Monitor[For[i = 6, i <= Length@k, i++,
  aa = Internal`PartitionRagged[Transpose@pn, k[[i]]];
  bb = FromDigits /@ 

       (If[Length@#< 3, Prepend[#, r@@ConstantArray[0, {3-Length@#, (n + 1)!}]], #]/. 
                                                              r -> Sequence & /@ aa);
  AppendTo[ res, (If[#[[1]] == #[[2]] + #[[3]], -#, ## &[]] & /@    Transpose@bb)]];
 (* Memory recovery *)
 aa =.; bb =.; Share[];, i]
final = Flatten[-Union[Sort /@ res], 1]

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more