Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks Cowboy Neal with Hat
Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Challenge: Optimal Animals/Pangolins Strategy

by Limbic~Region (Chancellor)
on May 02, 2013 at 17:35 UTC ( #1031787=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Challenge: Optimal Animals/Pangolins Strategy
in thread Challenge: Optimal Animals/Pangolins Strategy

BrowserUk,
You just end up with a really lopsided tree

Then I must have made a mistake in my explanation because the solution should be closer to Huffman coding as roboticus astutely concluded above. Since I can't explain why what I am trying to accomplish is slightly different, I guess I am stuck.

Cheers - L~R


Comment on Re^2: Challenge: Optimal Animals/Pangolins Strategy
Re^3: Challenge: Optimal Animals/Pangolins Strategy
by BrowserUk (Pope) on May 02, 2013 at 23:18 UTC

    Well, you mentioned proportional which I interpreted to mean that higher frequencies should take longer to reach than lower frequencies, which barring the possibility of equal frequencies, a lop-sided tree achieves.

    (Albeit you said inversely proportional which would mean reversing the order of the sort from what I posted.)

    The only other sense I can get from the information provided -- brought on by the mention of Huffman -- is that you are perhaps looking to minimise the depth of the tree. This does that by building a heap and then converting it to a tree rather clumbsily. Though that could be fixed if the idea is right:

    #! perl -slw use strict; use Data::Dump qw[ pp ]; use List::Util qw[ reduce ]; use enum qw[ NAME FREQ LEFT RIGHT ]; our $N //= 1; my$n = 0; my @heap = map{ $_->[LEFT] = ++$n; $_->[RIGHT] = ++$n; $_; } sort { $a->[FREQ] <=> $b->[FREQ] } map[ $_ , int( rand 1000 ) ], 'A'x$N .. 'Z'x$N;; my @tree = map { $_->[LEFT] = $heap[ $_->[LEFT] ], $_->[RIGHT] = $heap[ $_->[RIGHT] ] } @heap; pp \@tree;

    Output:

    C:\test>1031775.pl do { my $a = [ [ "Y", 1, [ "G", 4, [ "D", 166, ["X", 245, ["I", 516, undef, undef], ["O", 563, undef, undef +]], ["K", 315, ["M", 628, undef, undef], ["R", 710, undef, undef +]], ], [ "A", 218, ["P", 324, ["T", 731, undef, undef], ["Q", 732, undef, undef +]], ["J", 374, ["V", 735, undef, undef], ["C", 835, undef, undef +]], ], ], [ "E", 33, [ "U", 220, ["L", 393, ["S", 845, undef, undef], ["F", 930, undef, undef +]], ["W", 471, ["Z", 944, undef, undef], undef], ], ["H", 228, ["B", 507, undef, undef], ["N", 515, undef, undef]] +, ], ], 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', 'fix', ]; $a->[1] = $a->[0][2]; $a->[2] = $a->[0][3]; $a->[3] = $a->[0][2][2]; $a->[4] = $a->[0][2][3]; $a->[5] = $a->[0][3][2]; $a->[6] = $a->[0][3][3]; $a->[7] = $a->[0][2][2][2]; $a->[8] = $a->[0][2][2][3]; $a->[9] = $a->[0][2][3][2]; $a->[10] = $a->[0][2][3][3]; $a->[11] = $a->[0][3][2][2]; $a->[12] = $a->[0][3][2][3]; $a->[13] = $a->[0][3][3][2]; $a->[14] = $a->[0][3][3][3]; $a->[15] = $a->[0][2][2][2][2]; $a->[16] = $a->[0][2][2][2][3]; $a->[17] = $a->[0][2][2][3][2]; $a->[18] = $a->[0][2][2][3][3]; $a->[19] = $a->[0][2][3][2][2]; $a->[20] = $a->[0][2][3][2][3]; $a->[21] = $a->[0][2][3][3][2]; $a->[22] = $a->[0][2][3][3][3]; $a->[23] = $a->[0][3][2][2][2]; $a->[24] = $a->[0][3][2][2][3]; $a->[25] = $a->[0][3][2][3][2]; $a; }

    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
    /div
      BrowserUk,
      By inversely proportional, I meant that the number of questions asked to identify an animal (Q) multiplied by how many times the animal is chosen (C) should be constant. If a goat appears a hundred times more often than a unicorn then it should take a hundred times more questions to identify the unicorn than the goat.

      I apologize for not seeing it before hand, but I am pretty sure the optimal strategy for my problem is in fact Huffman Coding. To get a better idea of the fuzzy problem I am dealing with in my head, see Re^4: Challenge: Optimal Animals/Pangolins Strategy

      Cheers - L~R

        By inversely proportional, I meant that the number of questions asked to identify an animal (Q) multiplied by how many times the animal is chosen (C) should be constant. If a goat appears a hundred times more often than a unicorn then it should take a hundred times more questions to identify the unicorn than the goat.

        In roboticus' example, which you seem to be endorsing, this is the tree produced:

        Q ___________________/ \___________________ / \ Q __________________Q / \ / \ Q fish Q _________Q / \ / \ / +\ __________Q cow dog cat Q + Q / \ / \ +/ \ Q Q Q wolf sheep + horse / \ / \ / \ walrus badger seal Q________________ wolverine frog / \ Q Q / \ / \ Q hampster ocolot Q / \ / \ pegasus Q gerbil platypus / \ axolotl unicorn

        The fish with a frequency of 150 requires 2 questions; the unicorn with a frequency of 1, required 9. And it puts walrus(15), badger(17), seal(18), wolverine(22) & frog(28) at the same level.

        So the inverse proportionality is relative rather than mathematically absolute. It would require the insertion of 291 additional questions above the unicorn to achieve the math you describe, and in the process, throws away the "compressive" attribute that defines Huffman.

        If non-compressive, relative inverse proportionality is sufficient, then my original reading of your question would be more accurate:

        Q / \ fish Q / \ cat Q / \ dog Q / \ cow Q / \ horse Q / \ sheep Q / \ wolf Q / \ frog Q / \ wolverine Q / \ seal Q / \ badger Q / \ walrus Q / \ ocelot Q / \ hamster Q / \ gerbil Q / \ platypus Q / \ unicorn Q / \ pegasus axolotl

        Which brings me back to the idea that what roboticus' use of Huffman does, is minimise the depth of the tree.

        But if that were the goal, then its maximum depth of 9 is 3 more than is required:

        __________Q__________ / \ fish ____________________Q______________________ / \ Q _________________________Q_________________ +__________ / \ / + \ cat dog _________Q__________ __ +___________Q_______________ / \ / + \ ____Q____ _____Q______ _____Q___ +___ ______Q______ / \ / \ / + \ / \ Q Q Q Q Q + Q Q Q / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ + / \ / \ / \ cow horse sheep wolf frog wolverine seal badger walrus ocelot ham +ster gerbil platypus unicorn pegasus axolotl

        All of which I guess means, that I have no idea what you set out to achieve :(


        With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
        Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
        "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
Re^3: Challenge: Optimal Animals/Pangolins Strategy
by jakeease (Friar) on May 05, 2013 at 04:43 UTC

    Aren't Huffman trees generally expected to be lop-sided?

      jakeease,
      I think that depends heavily on the frequency distribution.

      Cheers - L~R

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1031787]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others perusing the Monastery: (3)
As of 2014-04-21 02:03 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    April first is:







    Results (489 votes), past polls