We Keep Coding

Basic Prime Factorization with Exponents in Java

The Problem:
Any positive integer can be expressed as a unique product of prime numbers, also know as its prime factorization. For example:
60 = 2^2 * 3 * 5
Write a program to compute the prime factorization of a positive integer.
Input: A single integer, n, where n ≥ 2.
Output: A string with the format: “p^a * q^b * ...”, where p and q are primes, and a and b are exponents. If an exponent is 1, then it should be omitted.
I've got everything else down, I just need to find a way to put it into “p^a * q^b * ...” form.
Here is my code:
import java.util.Scanner;
public class PrimeFactorization {
public static void main(String[] args) {
// Input: A single integer, n, where n is greater than or equal to 2.
System.out.println("Please input an integer greater than or equal to two!");
System.out.println("This number will be factored.");
Scanner inputNum = new Scanner(System.in);
int toBFactored = inputNum.nextInt();
// If the input does not fit the requirements, ask again for an input.
while (toBFactored < 2) {
System.out.println("Please input an integer greater than or equal to two.");
toBFactored = inputNum.nextInt();
}
// Output: A string with the format: "p^a * q^b * ...", where p and q are
// primes, and a and b are exponents.
// Decide first if a number (testNum) is prime.
int primedecider = 0;
for (int testNum = 2; testNum < toBFactored; testNum ++) {
for (int factor = 2; factor < testNum; factor ++) {
if (testNum % factor != 0 || testNum == 2) {
// Do nothing if prime.
} else {
primedecider += 1;
// Add if composite.
}
}
// If testNum is prime, if primedecider = 0, test if testNum divides
// evenly into toBFactored.
while (primedecider == 0 && toBFactored % testNum == 0 {
System.out.print(testNum + " ");
toBFactored /= testNum;
}
}
System.out.print(toBFactored);
inputNum.close();
}
}
My output for 120 is "2 2 2 3 5". How do I make it into 2^3 * 3 * 5?

If instead of printing the factors with System.out.println,
if you put them in a list,
then these functions will format them in the way you described.
This is of course just one of the many ways of doing this.
private String formatFactors(List<Integer> factors) {
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
int prev = factors.get(0);
int power = 1;
int factor = prev;
for (int i = 1; i < factors.size(); ++i) {
factor = factors.get(i);
if (factor == prev) {
++power;
} else {
appendFactor(builder, prev, power);
prev = factor;
power = 1;
}
}
appendFactor(builder, factor, power);
return builder.substring(3);
}
private void appendFactor(StringBuilder builder, int factor, int power) {
builder.append(" * ").append(factor);
if (power > 1) {
builder.append("^").append(power);
}
}

How does this prime number test in Java work?

The code snippet below checks whether a given number is a prime number. Can someone explain to me why this works? This code was on a study guide given to us for a Java exam.
public static void main(String[] args)
{
int j = 2;
int result = 0;
int number = 0;
Scanner reader = new Scanner(System.in);
System.out.println("Please enter a number: ");
number = reader.nextInt();
while (j <= number / 2)
{
if (number % j == 0)
{
result = 1;
}
j++;
}
if (result == 1)
{
System.out.println("Number: " + number + " is Not Prime.");
}
else
{
System.out.println("Number: " + number + " is Prime. ");
}
}

Overall theory
The condition if (number % j == 0) asks if number is exactly divisible by j
The definition of a prime is
a number divisible by only itself and 1
so if you test all numbers between 2 and number, and none of them are exactly divisible then it is a prime, otherwise it is not.
Of course you don't actually have to go all way to the number, because number cannot be exactly divisible by anything above half number.
Specific sections
While loop
This section runs through values of increasing j, if we pretend that number = 12 then it will run through j = 2,3,4,5,6
int j = 2;
.....
while (j <= number / 2)
{
........
j++;
}
If statement
This section sets result to 1, if at any point number is exactly divisible by j. result is never reset to 0 once it has been set to 1.
......
if (number % j == 0)
{
result = 1;
}
.....
Further improvements
Of course you can improve that even more because you actually need go no higher than sqrt(number) but this snippet has decided not to do that; the reason you need go no higher is because if (for example) 40 is exactly divisible by 4 it is 4*10, you don't need to test for both 4 and 10. And of those pairs one will always be below sqrt(number).
It's also worth noting that they appear to have intended to use result as a boolean, but actually used integers 0 and 1 to represent true and false instead. This is not good practice.

I've tried to comment each line to explain the processes going on, hope it helps!
int j = 2; //variable
int result = 0; //variable
int number = 0; //variable
Scanner reader = new Scanner(System.in); //Scanner object
System.out.println("Please enter a number: "); //Instruction
number = reader.nextInt(); //Get the number entered
while (j <= number / 2) //start loop, during loop j will become each number between 2 and
{ //the entered number divided by 2
if (number % j == 0) //If their is no remainder from your number divided by j...
{
result = 1; //Then result is set to 1 as the number divides equally by another number, hergo
} //it is not a prime number
j++; //Increment j to the next number to test against the number you entered
}
if (result == 1) //check the result from the loop
{
System.out.println("Number: " + number + " is Not Prime."); //If result 1 then a prime
}
else
{
System.out.println("Number: " + number + " is Prime. "); //If result is not 1 it's not a prime
}

It works by iterating over all number between 2 and half of the number entered (since any number greater than the input/2 (but less than the input) would yield a fraction). If the number input divided by j yields a 0 remainder (if (number % j == 0)) then the number input is divisible by a number other than 1 or itself. In this case result is set to 1 and the number is not a prime number.

Java java.math.BigInteger class contains a method isProbablePrime(int certainty) to check the primality of a number.
isProbablePrime(int certainty): A method in BigInteger class to check if a given number is prime.
For certainty = 1, it return true if BigInteger is prime and false if BigInteger is composite.
Miller–Rabin primality algorithm is used to check primality in this method.
import java.math.BigInteger;
public class TestPrime {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int number = 83;
boolean isPrime = testPrime(number);
System.out.println(number + " is prime : " + isPrime);
}
/**
* method to test primality
* #param number
* #return boolean
*/
private static boolean testPrime(int number) {
BigInteger bValue = BigInteger.valueOf(number);
/**
* isProbablePrime method used to check primality.
* */
boolean result = bValue.isProbablePrime(1);
return result;
}
}
Output: 83 is prime : true
For more information, see my blog.

Do try
public class PalindromePrime {
private static int g ,k ,n =0,i,m ;
static String b ="";
private static Scanner scanner = new Scanner( System.in );
public static void main(String [] args) throws IOException {
System.out.print(" Please Inter Data : ");
g = scanner.nextInt();
System.out.print(" Please Inter Data 2 : ");
m = scanner.nextInt();
count(g,m);
}
//
//********************************************************************************
private static int count(int L, int R)
for( i= L ; i<= R ;i++){
int count = 0 ;
for( n = i ; n >=1 ;n -- ){
if(i%n==0){
count = count + 1 ;
}
}
if(count == 2)
{
b = b +i + "" ;
}
}
System.out.print(" Data : ");
System.out.print(" Data : \n " +b );
return R;
}
}

Project Euler p14, stackoverflowerror java (in bluej)

I'm working on euler problem 14 (http://projecteuler.net/problem=14). I've tried to tackle it by having a method which runs through the collatz equations, and returns the number of steps taken. If it's higher then the current record it overwrites it, otherwise it moves on to the next integer. It was giving stack overflow errors so I added the system.out.println messages to try and identify where it was stalling, and currently it dies whenever it reaches 5200~, I'm confused as to why, because as far as i can tell no values encountered at this point should go over the int limit, and the error persisted even if i changed "numberStorage" from int to long.
Here is my current code:
/**
* Write a description of class calculator here.
*
* #author (your name)
* #version (a version number or a date)
*/
public class Calculator
{
// instance variables - replace the example below with your own
private int x;
private int startingNumber = 1;
private int stepCount;
private int numberStorage;
private int currentRecordStart;
private int currentRecordSteps = 0;
/**
* a string and int value to track multiple starting numbers with the same number of steps
*/
private String tieNote = "no ties";
private int multiTie = 0;
/**
* Constructor for objects of class calculator
*/
public Calculator()
{
x = 0;
}
/**
* begins function
*/
public void initiater()
{
numberStorage = 0;
stepCount = 0;
startingNumber = 1;
currentRecordStart = 1;
currentRecordSteps = 0;
stepCount = 0;
recordHolder(1,1);
}
/**
* starts next rotation
*/
public void steprunner()
{
++startingNumber;
System.out.println("starting rotation " + startingNumber + " current record " + currentRecordSteps);
stepCount = 0;
numberStorage = 0;
recordHolder(startingNumber, collatzSequence(startingNumber));
}
/**
* Runs collatz sequence and updates a variable with the number of steps.
*/
public int collatzSequence(int N)
{
numberStorage = 0;
numberStorage = N;
if (N == 1)
{
return stepCount;
}
else if ( (N & 1) == 0)
{
numberStorage = numberStorage / 2;
++stepCount;
return collatzSequence(numberStorage);
}
else if ( (N & 1) != 0)
{
numberStorage = 3 * numberStorage + 1;
++stepCount;
numberStorage = numberStorage / 2;
++stepCount;
return collatzSequence(numberStorage);
}
return stepCount;
}
/**
* stores record and starts next cycle
*/
public void recordHolder(int startingnumber, int stepcount)
{
if (startingNumber <= 999999)
{
if (stepcount > currentRecordSteps)
{
currentRecordSteps = stepcount;
currentRecordStart = startingnumber;
tieNote = "no ties";
multiTie = 0;
System.out.println("a tie occured!");
}
else if (stepcount == currentRecordSteps)
{
tieNote = ("starting number " + startingnumber + " also had " + stepcount + "steps");
++multiTie;
System.out.println("a secondary tie occured!");
}
steprunner();
}
if (startingNumber == 999999)
{
simulationEnder();
}
}
/**
* ends simulation
*/
public void simulationEnder()
{
System.out.println("the number with the highest number of steps was " + currentRecordStart +
" with " + currentRecordSteps + " steps!");
}
}

I'm not going to read your code. But I can show you a solution, written in pseudocode, that is simple and quick:
function euler14(n):
cs := makeArray(1..n)
maxX, maxLen, cs[1] := 1, 1, 1
for k from 2 to n
c, s := 0, k
while k <= s
if s % 2 == 0
s := s / 2
else
s := 3 * s + 1
c := c + 1
cs[k] := cs[s] + c
if maxLen < xs[k]
maxX, maxLen := k, cs[k]
return maxX
The trick is to calculate and save the values of the lengths of the collatz chain, in order starting from 1; then, if a future sequence drops below its starting point, calculation stops in favor of a simple lookup. Here the cs array is the cache, k is the index of the chain that is currently being computed, s is the current item in the chain, and c is the current length of the chain. Computing euler14(1000000) should take no more than a second or two.

Find the largest palindrome made from the product of two 3-digit numbers

package testing.project;
public class PalindromeThreeDigits {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int value = 0;
for(int i = 100;i <=999;i++)
{
for(int j = i;j <=999;j++)
{
int value1 = i * j;
StringBuilder sb1 = new StringBuilder(""+value1);
String sb2 = ""+value1;
sb1.reverse();
if(sb2.equals(sb1.toString()) && value<value1) {
value = value1;
}
}
}
System.out.println(value);
}
}
This is the code that I wrote in Java... Is there any efficient way other than this.. And can we optimize this code more??

We suppose the largest such palindrome will have six digits rather than five, because 143*777 = 111111 is a palindrome.
As noted elsewhere, a 6-digit base-10 palindrome abccba is a multiple of 11. This is true because a*100001 + b*010010 + c*001100 is equal to 11*a*9091 + 11*b*910 + 11*c*100. So, in our inner loop we can decrease n by steps of 11 if m is not a multiple of 11.
We are trying to find the largest palindrome under a million that is a product of two 3-digit numbers. To find a large result, we try large divisors first:
We step m downwards from 999, by 1's;
Run n down from 999 by 1's (if 11 divides m, or 9% of the time) or from 990 by 11's (if 11 doesn't divide m, or 91% of the time).
We keep track of the largest palindrome found so far in variable q. Suppose q = r·s with r <= s. We usually have m < r <= s. We require m·n > q or n >= q/m. As larger palindromes are found, the range of n gets more restricted, for two reasons: q gets larger, m gets smaller.
The inner loop of attached program executes only 506 times, vs the ~ 810000 times the naive program used.
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
enum { A=100000, B=10000, C=1000, c=100, b=10, a=1, T=10 };
int m, n, p, q=111111, r=143, s=777;
int nDel, nLo, nHi, inner=0, n11=(999/11)*11;
for (m=999; m>99; --m) {
nHi = n11; nDel = 11;
if (m%11==0) {
nHi = 999; nDel = 1;
}
nLo = q/m-1;
if (nLo < m) nLo = m-1;
for (n=nHi; n>nLo; n -= nDel) {
++inner;
// Check if p = product is a palindrome
p = m * n;
if (p%T==p/A && (p/B)%T==(p/b)%T && (p/C)%T==(p/c)%T) {
q=p; r=m; s=n;
printf ("%d at %d * %d\n", q, r, s);
break; // We're done with this value of m
}
}
}
printf ("Final result: %d at %d * %d inner=%d\n", q, r, s, inner);
return 0;
}
Note, the program is in C but same techniques will work in Java.

What I would do:
Start at 999, working my way backwards to 998, 997, etc
Create the palindrome for my current number.
Determine the prime factorization of this number (not all that expensive if you have a pre-generated list of primes.
Work through this prime factorization list to determine if I can use a combination of the factors to make 2 3 digit numbers.
Some code:
int[] primes = new int[] {2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23,29,31,37,41,43,47,53,59,61,67,71,
73,79,83,89,97,101,103,107,109,113,,127,131,137,139,149,151,157,163,167,173,
179,181,191,193,197,199,211,223,227,229,233,239,241,251,257,263,269,271,277,281,
283,293,307,311,313,317,331,337,347,349,353,359,367,373,379,383,389,397,401,409,
419,421,431,433,439,443,449,457,461,463,467,479,487,491,499,503,509,521,523,541,
547,557,563,569,571,577,587,593,599,601,607,613,617,619,631,641,643,647,653,659,
661,673,677,683,691,701,709,719,727,733,739,743,751,757,761,769,773,787,797,809,
811,821,823,827,829,839,853,857,859,863,877,881,883,887,907,911,919,929,937,941,
947,953,967,971,977,983,991,997};
for(int i = 999; i >= 100; i--) {
String palstr = String.valueOf(i) + (new StringBuilder().append(i).reverse());
int pal = Integer.parseInt(pal);
int[] factors = new int[20]; // cannot have more than 20 factors
int remainder = pal;
int facpos = 0;
primeloop:
for(int p = 0; p < primes.length; i++) {
while(remainder % p == 0) {
factors[facpos++] = p;
remainder /= p;
if(remainder < p) break primeloop;
}
}
// now to do the combinations here
}

We can translate the task into the language of mathematics.
For a short start, we use characters as digits:
abc * xyz = n
abc is a 3-digit number, and we deconstruct it as 100*a+10*b+c
xyz is a 3-digit number, and we deconstruct it as 100*x+10*y+z
Now we have two mathematical expressions, and can define a,b,c,x,y,z as € of {0..9}.
It is more precise to define a and x as of element from {1..9}, not {0..9}, because 097 isn't really a 3-digit number, is it?
Ok.
If we want to produce a big number, we should try to reach a 9......-Number, and since it shall be palindromic, it has to be of the pattern 9....9. If the last digit is a 9, then from
(100*a + 10*b + c) * (100*x + 10*y + z)
follows that z*c has to lead to a number, ending in digit 9 - all other calculations don't infect the last digit.
So c and z have to be from (1,3,7,9) because (1*9=9, 9*1=9, 3*3=9, 7*7=49).
Now some code (Scala):
val n = (0 to 9)
val m = n.tail // 1 to 9
val niners = Seq (1, 3, 7, 9)
val highs = for (a <- m;
b <- n;
c <- niners;
x <- m;
y <- n;
z <- niners) yield ((100*a + 10*b + c) * (100*x + 10*y + z))
Then I would sort them by size, and starting with the biggest one, test them for being palindromic. So I would omit to test small numbers for being palindromic, because that might not be so cheap.
For aesthetic reasons, I wouldn't take a (toString.reverse == toString) approach, but a recursive divide and modulo solution, but on todays machines, it doesn't make much difference, does it?
// Make a list of digits from a number:
def digitize (z: Int, nums : List[Int] = Nil) : List[Int] =
if (z == 0) nums else digitize (z/10, z%10 :: nums)
/* for 342243, test 3...==...3 and then 4224.
Fails early for 123329 */
def palindromic (nums : List[Int]) : Boolean = nums match {
case Nil => true
case x :: Nil => true
case x :: y :: Nil => x == y
case x :: xs => x == xs.last && palindromic (xs.init) }
def palindrom (z: Int) = palindromic (digitize (z))
For serious performance considerations, I would test it against a toString/reverse/equals approach. Maybe it is worse. It shall fail early, but division and modulo aren't known to be the fastest operations, and I use them to make a List from the Int. It would work for BigInt or Long with few redeclarations, and works nice with Java; could be implemented in Java but look different there.
Okay, putting the things together:
highs.filter (_ > 900000) .sortWith (_ > _) find (palindrom)
res45: Option[Int] = Some(906609)
There where 835 numbers left > 900000, and it returns pretty fast, but I guess even more brute forcing isn't much slower.
Maybe there is a much more clever way to construct the highest palindrom, instead of searching for it.
One problem is: I didn't knew before, that there is a solution > 900000.
A very different approach would be, to produce big palindromes, and deconstruct their factors.

public class Pin
{
public static boolean isPalin(int num)
{
char[] val = (""+num).toCharArray();
for(int i=0;i<val.length;i++)
{
if(val[i] != val[val.length - i - 1])
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
for(int i=999;i>100;i--)
for(int j=999;j>100;j--)
{
int mul = j*i;
if(isPalin(mul))
{
System.out.printf("%d * %d = %d",i,j,mul);
return;
}
}
}
}

package ex;
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int i = 0, j = 0, k = 0, l = 0, m = 0, n = 0, flag = 0;
for (i = 999; i >= 100; i--) {
for (j = i; j >= 100; j--) {
k = i * j;
// System.out.println(k);
m = 0;
n = k;
while (n > 0) {
l = n % 10;
m = m * 10 + l;
n = n / 10;
}
if (m == k) {
System.out.println("pal " + k + " of " + i + " and" + j);
flag = 1;
break;
}
}
if (flag == 1) {
// System.out.println(k);
break;
}
}
}
}

A slightly different approach that can easily calculate the largest palindromic number made from the product of up to two 6-digit numbers.
The first part is to create a generator of palindrome numbers. So there is no need to check if a number is palindromic, the second part is a simple loop.
#include <memory>
#include <iostream>
#include <cmath>
using namespace std;
template <int N>
class PalindromeGenerator {
unique_ptr <int []> m_data;
bool m_hasnext;
public :
PalindromeGenerator():m_data(new int[N])
{
for(auto i=0;i<N;i++)
m_data[i]=9;
m_hasnext=true;
}
bool hasNext() const {return m_hasnext;}
long long int getnext()
{
long long int v=0;
long long int b=1;
for(int i=0;i<N;i++){
v+=m_data[i]*b;
b*=10;
}
for(int i=N-1;i>=0;i--){
v+=m_data[i]*b;
b*=10;
}
auto i=N-1;
while (i>=0)
{
if(m_data[i]>=1) {
m_data[i]--;
return v;
}
else
{
m_data[i]=9;
i--;
}
}
m_hasnext=false;
return v;
}
};
template<int N>
void findmaxPalindrome()
{
PalindromeGenerator<N> gen;
decltype(gen.getnext()) minv=static_cast<decltype(gen.getnext())> (pow(10,N-1));
decltype(gen.getnext()) maxv=static_cast<decltype(gen.getnext())> (pow(10,N)-1);
decltype(gen.getnext()) start=11*(maxv/11);
while(gen.hasNext())
{
auto v=gen.getnext();
for (decltype(gen.getnext()) i=start;i>minv;i-=11)
{
if (v%i==0)
{
auto r=v/i;
if (r>minv && r<maxv ){
cout<<"done:"<<v<<" "<<i<< "," <<r <<endl;
return ;
}
}
}
}
return ;
}
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
findmaxPalindrome<6>();
return 0;
}

You can use the fact that 11 is a multiple of the palindrome to cut down on the search space. We can get this since we can assume the palindrome will be 6 digits and >= 111111.
e.g. ( from projecteuler ;) )
P= xyzzyx = 100000x + 10000y + 1000z + 100z + 10y +x
P=100001x+10010y+1100z
P=11(9091x+910y+100z)
Check if i mod 11 != 0, then the j loop can be subtracted by 11 (starting at 990) since at least one of the two must be divisible by 11.

You can try the following which prints
999 * 979 * 989 = 967262769
largest palindrome= 967262769 took 0.015
public static void main(String... args) throws IOException, ParseException {
long start = System.nanoTime();
int largestPalindrome = 0;
for (int i = 999; i > 100; i--) {
LOOP:
for (int j = i; j > 100; j--) {
for (int k = j; k > 100; k++) {
int n = i * j * k;
if (n < largestPalindrome) continue LOOP;
if (isPalindrome(n)) {
System.out.println(i + " * " + j + " * " + k + " = " + n);
largestPalindrome = n;
}
}
}
}
long time = System.nanoTime() - start;
System.out.printf("largest palindrome= %d took %.3f seconds%n", largestPalindrome, time / 1e9);
}
private static boolean isPalindrome(int n) {
if (n >= 100 * 1000 * 1000) {
// 9 digits
return n % 10 == n / (100 * 1000 * 1000)
&& (n / 10 % 10) == (n / (10 * 1000 * 1000) % 10)
&& (n / 100 % 10) == (n / (1000 * 1000) % 10)
&& (n / 1000 % 10) == (n / (100 * 1000) % 10);
} else if (n >= 10 * 1000 * 1000) {
// 8 digits
return n % 10 == n / (10 * 1000 * 1000)
&& (n / 10 % 10) == (n / (1000 * 1000) % 10)
&& (n / 100 % 10) == (n / (100 * 1000) % 10)
&& (n / 1000 % 10) == (n / (10 * 1000) % 10);
} else if (n >= 1000 * 1000) {
// 7 digits
return n % 10 == n / (1000 * 1000)
&& (n / 10 % 10) == (n / (100 * 1000) % 10)
&& (n / 100 % 10) == (n / (10 * 1000) % 10);
} else throw new AssertionError();
}

i did this my way , but m not sure if this is the most efficient way of doing this .
package problems;
import java.io.BufferedReader;
import java.io.IOException;
import java.io.InputStreamReader;
public class P_4 {
/**
* #param args
* #throws IOException
*/
static int[] arry = new int[6];
static int[] arry2 = new int[6];
public static boolean chk()
{
for(int a=0;a<arry.length;a++)
if(arry[a]!=arry2[a])
return false;
return true;
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
InputStreamReader ir = new InputStreamReader(System.in);
BufferedReader br = new BufferedReader(ir);
int temp,z,i;
for(int x=999;x>100;x--)
for(int y=999;y>100;y--)
{
i=0;
z=x*y;
while(z>0)
{
temp=z%10;
z=z/10;
arry[i]=temp;
i++;
}
for(int k = arry.length;k>0;k--)
arry2[arry.length- k]=arry[k-1];
if(chk())
{
System.out.print("pelindrome = ");
for(int l=0;l<arry2.length;l++)
System.out.print(arry2[l]);
System.out.println(x);
System.out.println(y);
}
}
}
}

This is code in C, a little bit long, but gets the job done.:)
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
/*
A palindromic number reads the same both ways. The largest palindrome made from the product of two
2-digit numbers is 9009 = 91 99.
Find the largest palindrome made from the product of two 3-digit numbers.*/
int palndr(int b)
{
int *x,*y,i=0,j=0,br=0;
int n;
n=b;
while(b!=0)
{
br++;
b/=10;
}
x=(int *)malloc(br*sizeof(int));
y=(int *)malloc(br*sizeof(int));
int br1=br;
while(n!=0)
{
x[i++]=y[--br]=n%10;
n/=10;
}
int ind = 1;
for(i=0;i<br1;i++)
if(x[i]!=y[i])
ind=0;
free(x);
free(y);
return ind;
}
int main()
{
int i,cek,cekmax=1;
int j;
for(i=100;i<=999;i++)
{
for(j=i;j<=999;j++)
{
cek=i*j;
if(palndr(cek))
{
if(pp>cekmax)
cekmax=cek;
}
}
}
printf("The largest palindrome is: %d\n\a",cekmax);
}

You can actually do it with Python, it's easy just take a look:
actualProduct = 0
highestPalindrome = 0
# Setting the numbers. In case it's two digit 10 and 99, in case is three digit 100 and 999, etc.
num1 = 100
num2 = 999
def isPalindrome(number):
number = str(number)
reversed = number[::-1]
if number==reversed:
return True
else:
return False
a = 0
b = 0
for i in range(num1,num2+1):
for j in range(num1,num2+1):
actualProduct = i * j
if (isPalindrome(actualProduct) and (highestPalindrome < actualProduct)):
highestPalindrome = actualProduct
a = i
b = j
print "Largest palindrome made from the product of two %d-digit numbers is [ %d ] made of %d * %d" % (len(str(num1)), highestPalindrome, a, b)

Since we are not cycling down both iterators (num1 and num2) at the same time, the first palindrome number we find will be the largest. We don’t need to test to see if the palindrome we found is the largest. This significantly reduces the time it takes to calculate.
package testing.project;
public class PalindromeThreeDigits {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int limit = 99;
int max = 999;
int num1 = max, num2, prod;
while(num1 > limit)
{
num2 = num1;
while(num2 > limit)
{
total = num1 * num2;
StringBuilder sb1 = new StringBuilder(""+prod);
String sb2 = ""+prod;
sb1.reverse();
if( sb2.equals(sb1.toString()) ) { //optimized here
//print and exit
}
num2--;
}
num1--;
}
}//end of main
}//end of class PalindromeThreeDigits

I tried the solution by Tobin joy and vickyhacks and both of them produce the result 580085 which is wrong here is my solution, though very clumsy:
import java.util.*;
class ProjEu4
{
public static void main(String [] args) throws Exception
{
int n=997;
ArrayList<Integer> al=new ArrayList<Integer>();
outerloop:
while(n>100){
int k=reverse(n);
int fin=n*1000+k;
al=findfactors(fin);
if(al.size()>=2)
{
for(int i=0;i<al.size();i++)
{
if(al.contains(fin/al.get(i))){
System.out.println(fin+" factors are:"+al.get(i)+","+fin/al.get(i));
break outerloop;}
}
}
n--;
}
}
private static ArrayList<Integer> findfactors(int fin)
{
ArrayList<Integer> al=new ArrayList<Integer>();
for(int i=100;i<=999;i++)
{
if(fin%i==0)
al.add(i);
}
return al;
}
private static int reverse(int number)
{
int reverse = 0;
while(number != 0){
reverse = (reverse*10)+(number%10);
number = number/10;
}
return reverse;
}
}

Most probably it is replication of one of the other solution but it looks simple owing to pythonified code ,even it is a bit brute-force.
def largest_palindrome():
largest_palindrome = 0;
for i in reversed(range(1,1000,1)):
for j in reversed(range(1, i+1, 1)):
num = i*j
if check_palindrome(str(num)) and num > largest_palindrome :
largest_palindrome = num
print "largest palindrome ", largest_palindrome
def check_palindrome(term):
rev_term = term[::-1]
return rev_term == term

What about : in python
>>> for i in range((999*999),(100*100), -1):
... if str(i) == str(i)[::-1]:
... print i
... break
...
997799
>>>

I believe there is a simpler approach: Examine palindromes descending from the largest product of two three digit numbers, selecting the first palindrome with two three digit factors.
Here is the Ruby code:
require './palindrome_range'
require './prime'
def get_3_digit_factors(n)
prime_factors = Prime.factors(n)
rf = [prime_factors.pop]
rf << prime_factors.shift while rf.inject(:*) < 100 || prime_factors.inject(:*) > 999
lf = prime_factors.inject(:*)
rf = rf.inject(:*)
lf < 100 || lf > 999 || rf < 100 || rf > 999 ? [] : [lf, rf]
end
def has_3_digit_factors(n)
return !get_3_digit_factors(n).empty?
end
pr = PalindromeRange.new(0, 999 * 999)
n = pr.downto.find {|n| has_3_digit_factors(n)}
puts "Found #{n} - Factors #{get_3_digit_factors(n).inspect}, #{Prime.factors(n).inspect}"
prime.rb:
class Prime
class<<self
# Collect all prime factors
# -- Primes greater than 3 follow the form of (6n +/- 1)
# Being of the form 6n +/- 1 does not mean it is prime, but all primes have that form
# See http://primes.utm.edu/notes/faq/six.html
# -- The algorithm works because, while it will attempt non-prime values (e.g., (6 *4) + 1 == 25),
# they will fail since the earlier repeated division (e.g., by 5) means the non-prime will fail.
# Put another way, after repeatedly dividing by a known prime, the remainder is itself a prime
# factor or a multiple of a prime factor not yet tried (e.g., greater than 5).
def factors(n)
square_root = Math.sqrt(n).ceil
factors = []
while n % 2 == 0
factors << 2
n /= 2
end
while n % 3 == 0
factors << 3
n /= 3
end
i = 6
while i < square_root
[(i - 1), (i + 1)].each do |f|
while n % f == 0
factors << f
n /= f
end
end
i += 6
end
factors << n unless n == 1
factors
end
end
end
palindrome_range.rb:
class PalindromeRange
FIXNUM_MAX = (2**(0.size * 8 -2) -1)
def initialize(min = 0, max = FIXNUM_MAX)
#min = min
#max = max
end
def downto
return enum_for(:downto) unless block_given?
n = #max
while n >= #min
yield n if is_palindrome(n)
n -= 1
end
nil
end
def each
return upto
end
def upto
return enum_for(:downto) unless block_given?
n = #min
while n <= #max
yield n if is_palindrome(n)
n += 1
end
nil
end
private
def is_palindrome(n)
s = n.to_s
i = 0
j = s.length - 1
while i <= j
break if s[i] != s[j]
i += 1
j -= 1
end
i > j
end
end

public class ProjectEuler4 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int x = 999; // largest 3-digit number
int largestProduct = 0;
for(int y=x; y>99; y--){
int product = x*y;
if(isPalindormic(x*y)){
if(product>largestProduct){
largestProduct = product;
System.out.println("3-digit numbers product palindormic number : " + x + " * " + y + " : " + product);
}
}
if(y==100 || product < largestProduct){y=x;x--;}
}
}
public static boolean isPalindormic(int n){
int palindormic = n;
int reverse = 0;
while(n>9){
reverse = (reverse*10) + n%10;
n=n/10;
}
reverse = (reverse*10) + n;
return (reverse == palindormic);
}
}

What would be the fastest method to test for primality in Java?

I am trying to find the fastest way to check whether a given number is prime or not (in Java). Below are several primality testing methods I came up with. Is there any better way than the second implementation(isPrime2)?
public class Prime {
public static boolean isPrime1(int n) {
if (n <= 1) {
return false;
}
if (n == 2) {
return true;
}
for (int i = 2; i <= Math.sqrt(n) + 1; i++) {
if (n % i == 0) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
public static boolean isPrime2(int n) {
if (n <= 1) {
return false;
}
if (n == 2) {
return true;
}
if (n % 2 == 0) {
return false;
}
for (int i = 3; i <= Math.sqrt(n) + 1; i = i + 2) {
if (n % i == 0) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
}
public class PrimeTest {
public PrimeTest() {
}
#Test
public void testIsPrime() throws IllegalArgumentException, IllegalAccessException, InvocationTargetException {
Prime prime = new Prime();
TreeMap<Long, String> methodMap = new TreeMap<Long, String>();
for (Method method : Prime.class.getDeclaredMethods()) {
long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
int primeCount = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
if ((Boolean) method.invoke(prime, i)) {
primeCount++;
}
}
long endTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
Assert.assertEquals(method.getName() + " failed ", 78498, primeCount);
methodMap.put(endTime - startTime, method.getName());
}
for (Entry<Long, String> entry : methodMap.entrySet()) {
System.out.println(entry.getValue() + " " + entry.getKey() + " Milli seconds ");
}
}
}

Here's another way:
boolean isPrime(long n) {
if(n < 2) return false;
if(n == 2 || n == 3) return true;
if(n%2 == 0 || n%3 == 0) return false;
long sqrtN = (long)Math.sqrt(n)+1;
for(long i = 6L; i <= sqrtN; i += 6) {
if(n%(i-1) == 0 || n%(i+1) == 0) return false;
}
return true;
}
and BigInteger's isProbablePrime(...) is valid for all 32 bit int's.
EDIT
Note that isProbablePrime(certainty) does not always produce the correct answer. When the certainty is on the low side, it produces false positives, as #dimo414 mentioned in the comments.
Unfortunately, I could not find the source that claimed isProbablePrime(certainty) is valid for all (32-bit) int's (given enough certainty!).
So I performed a couple of tests. I created a BitSet of size Integer.MAX_VALUE/2 representing all uneven numbers and used a prime sieve to find all primes in the range 1..Integer.MAX_VALUE. I then looped from i=1..Integer.MAX_VALUE to test that every new BigInteger(String.valueOf(i)).isProbablePrime(certainty) == isPrime(i).
For certainty 5 and 10, isProbablePrime(...) produced false positives along the line. But with isProbablePrime(15), no test failed.
Here's my test rig:
import java.math.BigInteger;
import java.util.BitSet;
public class Main {
static BitSet primes;
static boolean isPrime(int p) {
return p > 0 && (p == 2 || (p%2 != 0 && primes.get(p/2)));
}
static void generatePrimesUpTo(int n) {
primes = new BitSet(n/2);
for(int i = 0; i < primes.size(); i++) {
primes.set(i, true);
}
primes.set(0, false);
int stop = (int)Math.sqrt(n) + 1;
int percentageDone = 0, previousPercentageDone = 0;
System.out.println("generating primes...");
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for(int i = 0; i <= stop; i++) {
previousPercentageDone = percentageDone;
percentageDone = (int)((i + 1.0) / (stop / 100.0));
if(percentageDone <= 100 && percentageDone != previousPercentageDone) {
System.out.println(percentageDone + "%");
}
if(primes.get(i)) {
int number = (i * 2) + 1;
for(int p = number * 2; p < n; p += number) {
if(p < 0) break; // overflow
if(p%2 == 0) continue;
primes.set(p/2, false);
}
}
}
long elapsed = System.currentTimeMillis() - start;
System.out.println("finished generating primes ~" + (elapsed/1000) + " seconds");
}
private static void test(final int certainty, final int n) {
int percentageDone = 0, previousPercentageDone = 0;
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("testing isProbablePrime(" + certainty + ") from 1 to " + n);
for(int i = 1; i < n; i++) {
previousPercentageDone = percentageDone;
percentageDone = (int)((i + 1.0) / (n / 100.0));
if(percentageDone <= 100 && percentageDone != previousPercentageDone) {
System.out.println(percentageDone + "%");
}
BigInteger bigInt = new BigInteger(String.valueOf(i));
boolean bigIntSays = bigInt.isProbablePrime(certainty);
if(isPrime(i) != bigIntSays) {
System.out.println("ERROR: isProbablePrime(" + certainty + ") returns "
+ bigIntSays + " for i=" + i + " while it " + (isPrime(i) ? "is" : "isn't" ) +
" a prime");
return;
}
}
long elapsed = System.currentTimeMillis() - start;
System.out.println("finished testing in ~" + ((elapsed/1000)/60) +
" minutes, no false positive or false negative found for isProbablePrime(" + certainty + ")");
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
int certainty = Integer.parseInt(args[0]);
int n = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
generatePrimesUpTo(n);
test(certainty, n);
}
}
which I ran by doing:
java -Xmx1024m -cp . Main 15
The generating of the primes took ~30 sec on my machine. And the actual test of all i in 1..Integer.MAX_VALUE took around 2 hours and 15 minutes.

This is the most elegant way:
public static boolean isPrime(int n) {
return !new String(new char[n]).matches(".?|(..+?)\\1+");
}
Java 1.4+. No imports needed.
So short. So beautiful.

You took the first step in eliminating all multiples of 2.
However, why did you stop there? you could have eliminated all multiples of 3 except for 3, all multiples of 5 except for 5, etc.
When you follow this reasoning to its conclusion, you get the Sieve of Eratosthenes.

Take a look at the AKS primality test (and its various optimizations). It is a deterministic primality test that runs in polynomial time.
There is an implementation of the algorithm in Java from the University of Tuebingen (Germany) here

i think this method is best. at least for me-
public static boolean isPrime(int num)
{
for (int i = 2; i<= num/i; i++)
{
if (num % i == 0)
{
return false;
}
}
return num > 1;
}

Your algorithm will work well for reasonably small numbers. For big numbers, advanced algorithms should be used (based for example on elliptic curves). Another idea will be to use some "pseuso-primes" test. These will test quickly that a number is a prime, but they aren't 100% accurate. However, they can help you rule out some numbers quicker than with your algorithm.
Finally, although the compiler will probably optimise this for you, you should write:
int max = (int) (Math.sqrt(n) + 1);
for (int i = 3; i <= max; i = i + 2) {
}

A fast test due to Jaeschke (1993) is a deterministic version of the Miller-Rabin test, which has no false positives below 4,759,123,141 and hence can be applied to Java ints.
// Given a positive number n, find the largest number m such
// that 2^m divides n.
private static int val2(int n) {
int m = 0;
if ((n&0xffff) == 0) {
n >>= 16;
m += 16;
}
if ((n&0xff) == 0) {
n >>= 8;
m += 8;
}
if ((n&0xf) == 0) {
n >>= 4;
m += 4;
}
if ((n&0x3) == 0) {
n >>= 2;
m += 2;
}
if (n > 1) {
m++;
}
return m;
}
// For convenience, handle modular exponentiation via BigInteger.
private static int modPow(int base, int exponent, int m) {
BigInteger bigB = BigInteger.valueOf(base);
BigInteger bigE = BigInteger.valueOf(exponent);
BigInteger bigM = BigInteger.valueOf(m);
BigInteger bigR = bigB.modPow(bigE, bigM);
return bigR.intValue();
}
// Basic implementation.
private static boolean isStrongProbablePrime(int n, int base) {
int s = val2(n-1);
int d = modPow(base, n>>s, n);
if (d == 1) {
return true;
}
for (int i = 1; i < s; i++) {
if (d+1 == n) {
return true;
}
d = d*d % n;
}
return d+1 == n;
}
public static boolean isPrime(int n) {
if ((n&1) == 0) {
return n == 2;
}
if (n < 9) {
return n > 1;
}
return isStrongProbablePrime(n, 2) && isStrongProbablePrime(n, 7) && isStrongProbablePrime(n, 61);
}
This doesn't work for long variables, but a different test does: the BPSW test has no counterexamples up to 2^64. This basically consists of a 2-strong probable prime test like above followed by a strong Lucas test which is a bit more complicated but not fundamentally different.
Both of these tests are vastly faster than any kind of trial division.

If you are just trying to find if a number is prime or not it's good enough, but if you're trying to find all primes from 0 to n a better option will be the Sieve of Eratosthenes
But it will depend on limitations of java on array sizes etc.

There are of course hundreds of primality tests, all with various advantages and disadvantages based on size of number, special forms, factor size, etc.
However, in java I find the most useful one to be this:
BigInteger.valueOf(long/int num).isProbablePrime(int certainty);
Its already implemented, and is quite fast (I find it takes ~6 seconds for a 1000x1000 matrix filled with longs 0–2^64 and a certainty of 15) and probably better optimized than anything we mortals could come up with.
It uses a version of the Baillie–PSW primality test, which has no know counterexamples. (though it might use a slightly weaker version of the test, which may err sometimes. maybe)

What you have written is what most common programmers do and which should be sufficient most of the time.
However, if you are after the "best scientific algorithm" there are many variations (with varying levels of certainty) documented http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_number.
For example, if you have a 70 digit number JVM's physical limitations can prevent your code from running in which case you can use "Sieves" etc.
Again, like I said if this was a programming question or a general question of usage in software your code should be perfect :)

Dependent on the length of the number you need to test you could precompute a list of prime numbers for small values (n < 10^6), which is used first, if the asked number is within this range. This is of course the fastest way.
Like mentioned in other answers the Sieve of Eratosthenes is the preferred method to generate such a precomputed list.
If your numbers are larger than this, you can use the primality test of Rabin.
Rabin primality test

Algorithm Efficiency : O( n^(1/2)) Algorithm
Note: This sample code below contains count variables and calls to a print function for the purposes of printing the results :
import java.util.*;
class Primality{
private static void printStats(int count, int n, boolean isPrime) {
System.err.println( "Performed " + count + " checks, determined " + n
+ ( (isPrime) ? " is PRIME." : " is NOT PRIME." ) );
}
/**
* Improved O( n^(1/2)) ) Algorithm
* Checks if n is divisible by 2 or any odd number from 3 to sqrt(n).
* The only way to improve on this is to check if n is divisible by
* all KNOWN PRIMES from 2 to sqrt(n).
*
* #param n An integer to be checked for primality.
* #return true if n is prime, false if n is not prime.
**/
public static boolean primeBest(int n){
int count = 0;
// check lower boundaries on primality
if( n == 2 ){
printStats(++count, n, true);
return true;
} // 1 is not prime, even numbers > 2 are not prime
else if( n == 1 || (n & 1) == 0){
printStats(++count, n, false);
return false;
}
double sqrtN = Math.sqrt(n);
// Check for primality using odd numbers from 3 to sqrt(n)
for(int i = 3; i <= sqrtN; i += 2){
count++;
// n is not prime if it is evenly divisible by some 'i' in this range
if( n % i == 0 ){
printStats(++count, n, false);
return false;
}
}
// n is prime
printStats(++count, n, true);
return true;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Scanner scan = new Scanner(System.in);
while(scan.hasNext()) {
int n = scan.nextInt();
primeBest(n);
System.out.println();
}
scan.close();
}
}
When the prime number 2147483647 is entered, it produces the following output:
Performed 23170 checks, determined 2147483647 is PRIME.

tested in a Intel Atom # 1.60GHz, 2GB RAM, 32-bit Operating System
test result:
largest prime number below Long.MAX_VALUE=9223372036854775807 is 9223372036854775783
elapsed time is 171499 milliseconds or 2 minutes and 51 seconds
public class PrimalityTest
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
long current_local_time = System.currentTimeMillis();
long long_number = 9223372036854775783L;
long long_a;
long long_b;
if (long_number < 2)
{
System.out.println(long_number + " is not a prime number");
}
else if (long_number < 4)
{
System.out.println(long_number + " is a prime number");
}
else if (long_number % 2 == 0)
{
System.out.println(long_number + " is not a prime number and is divisible by 2");
}
else
{
long_a = (long) (Math.ceil(Math.sqrt(long_number)));
terminate_loop:
{
for (long_b = 3; long_b <= long_a; long_b += 2)
{
if (long_number % long_b == 0)
{
System.out.println(long_number + " is not a prime number and is divisible by " + long_b);
break terminate_loop;
}
}
System.out.println(long_number + " is a prime number");
}
}
System.out.println("elapsed time: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - current_local_time) + " millisecond/s");
}
}

First and foremost, primes start from 2. 2 and 3 are primes. Prime should not be dividable by 2 or 3. The rest of the primes are in the form of 6k-1 and 6k+1. Note that you should check the numbers up to SQRT(input). This approach is very efficient. I hope it helps.
public class Prime {
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.format("%d is prime: %s.\n", 199, isPrime(199)); // Prime
System.out.format("%d is prime: %s.\n", 198, isPrime(198)); // Not prime
System.out.format("%d is prime: %s.\n", 104729, isPrime(104729)); // Prime
System.out.format("%d is prime: %s.\n", 104727, isPrime(982443529)); // Prime
}
/**
* Tells if a number is prime or not.
*
* #param input the input
* #return If the input is prime or not
*/
private boolean isPrime(long input) {
if (input <= 1) return false; // Primes start from 2
if (input <= 3) return true; // 2 and 3 are primes
if (input % 2 == 0 || input % 3 == 0) return false; // Not prime if dividable by 2 or 3
// The rest of the primes are in the shape of 6k-1 and 6k+1
for (long i = 5; i <= Math.sqrt(input); i += 6) if (input % i == 0 || input % (i + 2) == 0) return false;
return true;
}
}

In general, all primes greater than some Primorial integer C is of the form Ck+i for i < C where i and k are integers and i represents the numbers that are coprime to C
Here is an example with C=30, it should work faster than Bart Kiers answer for C=6 and you can improve it by computing C=210
boolean isPrime(long n) {
if(n < 2){
return false;
}
if(n == 2 || n == 3 || n == 5 || n == 7 || n == 11 || n == 13 || n == 17 || n == 19 || n == 23 || n == 29){
return true;
}
long sqrtN = (long) Math.sqrt(n) + 1;
int[] mods = {1, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29};
for (long i = 30L; i <= sqrtN; i += 30) {
for (int mod : mods) {
if(n % (i + mod) == 0){
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}