Wednesday, March 21, 2018

You are not logged in.

## #26 2015-06-30 02:38:41 pm

McUsrII
Member
Registered: 2012-11-21
Posts: 3046
Website

### Re: Effective way of finding the median in a list of numbers

Hello Nigel.

Your last version, looks interesting too.  I think that there is something proportional to log n, that makes the difference kick in noticably at 3000 items.

Well, I didn't come around to it today, but I'm going to present two O(n) versions, at least over some days, so it works properly when I post it. The first is a cheat, and based on CountingSort above, the other is the median of medians algorithm, which is the real deal, that also has a worstcase of O(n). The problem with that solution as I see it, is that you have to calibrate the algorithm with the number of items, as I think you need at least 25 elements for the median of medians to work. Well, N.Wirths says that if you have less than or equal to 10 items  then you should sort and pick the median from the sorted elements. I am also a bit eager to use the median for building a complete binary tree, but I haven't figured yet, if that is possible or a feasible way to do it. (But then I really need the list to be sorted anyway.)

Offline

## #27 2015-07-01 01:31:40 am

McUsrII
Member
Registered: 2012-11-21
Posts: 3046
Website

### Re: Effective way of finding the median in a list of numbers

Hello.

I came by this little random number generator, that promises to generate random numbers, perceived as random by humans, (not totally uniformly distributed). Which may be a technique suitable sometimes, when needing random number s for something. This random number generator, have been suitable for doom, so it should be suitable for small AppleScript games. You can read all about it in the links in the code.

#### Applescript:

script perlinsRand
-- [url]https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM/blob/master/linuxdoom-1.10/m_random.c[/url]
-- [url]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9809998[/url]
property randInts : {0, 8, 109, 220, 222, 241, 149, 107, 75, 248, 254, 140, 16, 66, Â¬
74, 21, 211, 47, 80, 242, 154, 27, 205, 128, 161, 89, 77, 36, Â¬
95, 110, 85, 48, 212, 140, 211, 249, 22, 79, 200, 50, 28, 188, Â¬
52, 140, 202, 120, 68, 145, 62, 70, 184, 190, 91, 197, 152, 224, Â¬
149, 104, 25, 178, 252, 182, 202, 182, 141, 197, 4, 81, 181, 242, Â¬
145, 42, 39, 227, 156, 198, 225, 193, 219, 93, 122, 175, 249, 0, Â¬
175, 143, 70, 239, 46, 246, 163, 53, 163, 109, 168, 135, 2, 235, Â¬
25, 92, 20, 145, 138, 77, 69, 166, 78, 176, 173, 212, 166, 113, Â¬
94, 161, 41, 50, 239, 49, 111, 164, 70, 60, 2, 37, 171, 75, Â¬
136, 156, 11, 56, 42, 146, 138, 229, 73, 146, 77, 61, 98, 196, Â¬
135, 106, 63, 197, 195, 86, 96, 203, 113, 101, 170, 247, 181, 113, Â¬
80, 250, 108, 7, 255, 237, 129, 226, 79, 107, 112, 166, 103, 241, Â¬
24, 223, 239, 120, 198, 58, 60, 82, 128, 3, 184, 66, 143, 224, Â¬
145, 224, 81, 206, 163, 45, 63, 90, 168, 114, 59, 33, 159, 95, Â¬
28, 139, 123, 98, 125, 196, 15, 70, 194, 253, 54, 14, 109, 226, Â¬
71, 17, 161, 93, 186, 87, 244, 138, 20, 52, 123, 251, 26, 36, Â¬
17, 46, 52, 231, 232, 76, 31, 221, 84, 37, 216, 165, 212, 106, Â¬
197, 242, 98, 43, 39, 175, 254, 145, 190, 84, 118, 222, 187, 136, Â¬
120, 163, 236, 249}
property randEntries : length of randInts
property curRand : 0
on clearRnd()
set curRand to 0
end clearRnd
on next()
if curRand < randEntries then
set curRand to curRand + 1
else
set curRand to 1
end if
return item curRand of randInts
end next
end script

perlinsRand's next()

Offline

## #28 2015-07-01 03:01:05 am

Nigel Garvey
Moderator
From:: Warwickshire, England
Registered: 2002-11-20
Posts: 4507

### Re: Effective way of finding the median in a list of numbers

McUsrII wrote:

Hello Nigel.

Your last version, looks interesting too.Â  I think that there is something proportional to log n, that makes the difference kick in noticably at 3000 items.

Thanks, McUsrII. I must admit that, despite having implemented many sorts in AppleScript over the years, I've never got the hang of expressions like "log n" and "O(n)". I think it's because they didn't convey (to me) why things behaved they way they did â€” especially in a high-level language like AppleScript, where as much depends on individual command implementations and data characteristics as on the algorithms themselves. But I think it's about time I looked into "n" notation more thoroughly!

NG

Offline

## #29 2015-07-01 03:47:38 am

DJ Bazzie Wazzie
Member
From:: the Netherlands
Registered: 2004-10-20
Posts: 2740
Website

### Re: Effective way of finding the median in a list of numbers

Nigel Garvey wrote:

I think it's because they didn't convey (to me) why things behaved they way they did â€” especially in a high-level language like AppleScript, where as much depends on individual command implementations and data characteristics as on the algorithms themselves.

True, something that keeps AppleScript reminding me every day. It's never the obvious solution which in some sort of way AppleScript completely misses its targets.

Online

## #30 2015-07-01 06:31:33 am

McUsrII
Member
Registered: 2012-11-21
Posts: 3046
Website

### Re: Effective way of finding the median in a list of numbers

Hello Nigel.

I don't really ever saw Big O, or Big Theta or Omega as anything but as  a proportion as to how the processing time increases, as the dataset evolves. It is a very coarse measure in itself, just giving the order of magnitude, and it really isn't anything to worry that much about. It is really just one of the trade-off factors. Readability, maintainability, sheer size of the code and so on, being others. Correctness is of course not a trade-off. I seldom do work on so big datasets in AppleScript, that I have to worry about it, since it doesn't make sense, unless you vary wildly in the size of the datasets.

In this particular case, it may slow down because the handlers has a complexity of  n log n  that is, that the processing time increases more than the number of elements (linearly). Then the second handler may be slower  in a part of the algorithm, which maybe has a log N complexity by itself, (the inner loop), that makes up for the slow increase in time. I guess this since the time doesn't increase noticably before 3000 items. Your last algorithm is just a fraction slower, than your previous, and that fraction adds up over time, I actually don't think it is even a log N  increase that is involved, but something that adds up slower, maybe log 1/N, as just a wild guess, not having really calculated anything, not even timed it.  Just timing both for say 1000, 2000, and 3000 items, and comparing the differences, should give a good clue as to how they develop in propertions, as the number of items increases.

@DJ Bazzie Wazzie. That is also a good point, But big O notation, and complexity analysis, still gives a little hint about thing may progress, or how they should have progressed, hadn't the number of items in the list started to degenerate performance by itself for instance, due to number of items in a list larger than some treshold. At least we are more informed when we look it up, than not. -Big Oh notation, provides some guidance, nothing more, but some guidance, is better than none. The more info, the more educated the guess.

Complexity analysis is a huge subject, I personally think it is ok, to be familiar with, but not dwell to deep into, because not before long, you are reading up on finite fields, and the law of total probability, (besides starting to remember arithmetic and geometric progressions, and so on). But well, it has it's charm as well I guess.

Edit

They say that the longer you write about something, the less you really know about it. At least I know that MIT has an open courseware class on the net in Discrete Mathematics, which is a precursor to their open courseware class "Introduction to Algorithms". You really need to know the Discrete Mathematics, to get something out of that Algorithms course. Lots of video lectures, and readings online, and even notes at least from the recitations. You can pick and choose from whatever lectures you want to watch. The lectureres, are really aces, but I tend to shrink a little in my chair, when they enthusiastically talks about "very cool mathematics".

Last edited by McUsrII (2015-07-01 07:43:29 am)

Offline

## #31 2015-07-01 12:54:52 pm

McUsrII
Member
Registered: 2012-11-21
Posts: 3046
Website

### Re: Effective way of finding the median in a list of numbers

Hello.

Here is the "cheat" version for finding the median, the reason for this, is that I actually work with a lot of lists those day, where the max element is bounded by the length of the  list. That justifies this very special version, -that performs in linear time. O(N). It also sorts the list, which is a necessity, when finding the median with this version.

#### Applescript:

set thel to {4, 1, 3, 4, 3, 5, 1}
set soughtK to 4 -- median for 7 items is ceil (7 / 2 ) = 4
countingsortAndMedian(thel, 5, soughtK)
on countingsortAndMedian(|L|, maxval, k)
-- countingsort: origin unknown. found it in an algorithms lecture from MIT
-- Implemented in AppleScript by McUsr 2015/6/24
script o
property L : |L|
property C : missing value
property Cp : missing value
property B : missing value
end script
set ll to length of o's L
copy |L| to o's C
repeat with i from 1 to ll
set item i of o's C to 0
end repeat

repeat with i from 1 to ll
set item (item i of o's L) of o's C to (item (item i of o's L) of o's C) + 1
end repeat
copy o's C to o's Cp

repeat with i from 2 to maxval
set item i of o's Cp to (item (i - 1) of o's Cp) + (item i of o's C)
end repeat
copy o's C to o's B

repeat with j from ll to 1 by -1
tell item j of o's L
set item (item it of o's Cp) of o's B to it
set item it of o's Cp to (item it of o's Cp) - 1
end tell
end repeat
return {o's B, item k of o's B}
end countingsortAndMedian

I should also be able to build a complete binary tree, while looping over length/2 elements of the sorted array, after having inserted the root element as its root, and populated it with the elements on each side of the median as its children so that I can end up with a complete binary tree, should I wish to. (I see no use for this at the moment, but it may come in handy). The binaray tree, would however be a "read-only" binary tree, in that it would be quite costly to maintain, compared to the cost of re-building it, which should be almost as fast with a small number of items.

Last edited by McUsrII (2015-07-01 12:59:41 pm)

Offline