C# 0-1 Knapsack Problem with known sum and number of zeros in set
I have a 5x5 table of values from 0 to 3 inclusive with all values unknown. I know both the sum of the values and the number of zeros for each row and column. How would I go about solving this 0-1 knapsack problem using C# and retrieving the possible solutions that satisfy the known sums and number of zeros? The tables will always be five rows and five columns, 开发者_Python百科so it's not quite a traditional knapsack.
For example, say we input:
Row[0]: Sum=4, Zeros=1
[1]: Sum=5, Zeros=1
[2]: Sum=4, Zeros=2
[3]: Sum=8, Zeros=0
[4]: Sum=3, Zeros=2
Col[0]: Sum=5, Zeros=1
[1]: Sum=3, Zeros=2
[2]: Sum=4, Zeros=2
[3]: Sum=5, Zeros=1
[4]: Sum=7, Zeros=0
We would get this as a possible solution:
[[ 0 1 1 1 1 ]
[ 1 0 2 1 1 ]
[ 2 1 0 0 1 ]
[ 1 1 1 2 3 ]
[ 1 0 0 1 1 ]]
What type of algorithm should I employ in this rather strange situation? Would I also have to write a class just to enumerate the permutations?
Edit for clarification: the problem isn't that I can't enumerate the possibilities; it's that I have no clue how to go about efficiently determining the permutations adding to an arbitrary sum while containing the specified number of zeros and a maximum of 5 items.
Here there is the code. If you need any comment feel free to ask:
using System;
using System.Diagnostics;
namespace ConsoleApplication15
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
RowOrCol[] rows = new RowOrCol[] {
new RowOrCol(4, 1),
new RowOrCol(5, 1),
new RowOrCol(4, 2),
new RowOrCol(8, 0),
new RowOrCol(3, 2),
};
RowOrCol[] cols = new RowOrCol[] {
new RowOrCol(5, 1),
new RowOrCol(3, 2),
new RowOrCol(4, 2),
new RowOrCol(5, 1),
new RowOrCol(7, 0),
};
int[,] table = new int[5, 5];
Stopwatch sw = Stopwatch.StartNew();
int solutions = Do(table, rows, cols, 0, 0);
sw.Stop();
Console.WriteLine();
Console.WriteLine("Found {0} solutions in {1}ms", solutions, sw.ElapsedMilliseconds);
Console.ReadKey();
}
public static int Do(int[,] table, RowOrCol[] rows, RowOrCol[] cols, int row, int col)
{
int solutions = 0;
int oldValueRowSum = rows[row].Sum;
int oldValueRowZero = rows[row].Zeros;
int oldValueColSum = cols[col].Sum;
int oldValueColZero = cols[col].Zeros;
int nextCol = col + 1;
int nextRow;
bool last = false;
if (nextCol == cols.Length)
{
nextCol = 0;
nextRow = row + 1;
if (nextRow == rows.Length)
{
last = true;
}
}
else
{
nextRow = row;
}
int i;
for (i = 0; i <= 3; i++)
{
table[row, col] = i;
if (i == 0)
{
rows[row].Zeros--;
cols[col].Zeros--;
if (rows[row].Zeros < 0)
{
continue;
}
if (cols[col].Zeros < 0)
{
continue;
}
}
else
{
if (i == 1)
{
rows[row].Zeros++;
cols[col].Zeros++;
}
rows[row].Sum--;
cols[col].Sum--;
if (rows[row].Sum < 0)
{
break;
}
else if (cols[col].Sum < 0)
{
break;
}
}
if (col == cols.Length - 1)
{
if (rows[row].Sum != 0 || rows[row].Zeros != 0)
{
continue;
}
}
if (row == rows.Length - 1)
{
if (cols[col].Sum != 0 || cols[col].Zeros != 0)
{
continue;
}
}
if (!last)
{
solutions += Do(table, rows, cols, nextRow, nextCol);
}
else
{
solutions++;
Console.WriteLine("Found solution:");
var sums = new int[cols.Length];
var zeross = new int[cols.Length];
for (int j = 0; j < rows.Length; j++)
{
int sum = 0;
int zeros = 0;
for (int k = 0; k < cols.Length; k++)
{
Console.Write("{0,2} ", table[j, k]);
if (table[j, k] == 0)
{
zeros++;
zeross[k]++;
}
else
{
sum += table[j, k];
sums[k] += table[j, k];
}
}
Console.WriteLine("| Sum {0,2} | Zeros {1}", sum, zeros);
Debug.Assert(sum == rows[j].OriginalSum);
Debug.Assert(zeros == rows[j].OriginalZeros);
}
Console.WriteLine("---------------");
for (int j = 0; j < cols.Length; j++)
{
Console.Write("{0,2} ", sums[j]);
Debug.Assert(sums[j] == cols[j].OriginalSum);
}
Console.WriteLine();
for (int j = 0; j < cols.Length; j++)
{
Console.Write("{0,2} ", zeross[j]);
Debug.Assert(zeross[j] == cols[j].OriginalZeros);
}
Console.WriteLine();
}
}
// The for cycle was broken at 0. We have to "readjust" the zeros.
if (i == 0)
{
rows[row].Zeros++;
cols[col].Zeros++;
}
// The for cycle exited "normally". i is too much big because the true last cycle was at 3.
if (i == 4)
{
i = 3;
}
// We readjust the sums.
rows[row].Sum += i;
cols[col].Sum += i;
Debug.Assert(oldValueRowSum == rows[row].Sum);
Debug.Assert(oldValueRowZero == rows[row].Zeros);
Debug.Assert(oldValueColSum == cols[col].Sum);
Debug.Assert(oldValueColZero == cols[col].Zeros);
return solutions;
}
}
public class RowOrCol
{
public readonly int OriginalSum;
public readonly int OriginalZeros;
public int Sum;
public int Zeros;
public RowOrCol(int sum, int zeros)
{
this.Sum = this.OriginalSum = sum;
this.Zeros = this.OriginalZeros = zeros;
}
}
}
How fast does it have to be? I just tested a naive "try pretty much anything" with some early aborts but less than would be possible, and it was pretty fast (less than a millisecond). It gave the solution:
[[ 0 1 1 1 1 ]
[ 1 0 1 1 2 ]
[ 1 0 0 1 2 ]
[ 2 1 2 2 1 ]
[ 1 1 0 0 1 ]]
If that's an acceptable solution to you, I can post the code (or just discuss it, it's quite verbose but the underlying idea is trivial)
edit: it is also trivially extendable to enumerating all solutions. It found 400 of them in 15 milliseconds, and claims that there are no more than that. Is that correct?
What I did, was start at 0,0 and try all values I could fill in at that place (0 though min(3, rowsum[0])), fill it it (subtracting it from rowsum[y] and colsum[x] and subtracting one from rowzero[y] and colzero[x] if the value was zero), then recursively do this for 0,1; 0,2; 0,3; then at 0,4 I have a special case where I just fill in the remaining rowsum if it is non-negative (otherwise, abort the current try - ie go up in the recursion tree), and something similar for when y=4. In the mean time, I abort when any rowsum colsum colzero or rowzero becomes negative.
The current board is a solution if and only if all remaining rowsums columnsums colzero's and rowzero's are zero. So I just test for that, and add it to the solutions if it is one. It won't have any negative entries by construction.
精彩评论