We Keep Coding

How to find the 5th perfect number (which is 33550336)? The problem is taking forever to run

I am trying to write a Java method that checks whether a number is a perfect number or not.
A perfect number is a number that is equal to the sum of all its divisor (excluding itself).
For example, 6 is a perfect number because 1+2+3=6. Then, I have to write a Java program to use the method to display the first 5 perfect numbers.
I have no problem with this EXCEPT that it is taking forever to get the 5th perfect number which is 33550336.
I am aware that this is because of the for loop in my isPerfectNumber() method. However, I am very new to coding and I do not know how to come up with a better code.
public class Labreport2q1 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
//Display the 5 first perfect numbers
int counter = 0,
i = 0;
while (counter != 5) {
i++;
isPerfectNumber(i);
if (isPerfectNumber(i)) {
counter++;
System.out.println(i + " ");
}
}
}
public static boolean isPerfectNumber(int a) {
int divisor = 0;
int sum = 0;
for (int i = 1; i < a; i++) {
if (a % i == 0) {
divisor = i;
sum += divisor;
}
}
return sum == a;
}
}
This is the output that is missing the 5th perfect number

Let's check the properties of a perfect number. This Math Overflow question tells us two very interesting things:
A perfect number is never a perfect square.
A perfect number is of the form (2k-1)×(2k-1).
The 2nd point is very interesting because it reduces our search field to barely nothing. An int in Java is 32 bits. And here we see a direct correlation between powers and bit positions. Thanks to this, instead of making millions and millions of calls to isPerfectNumber, we will be making less than 32 to find the 5th perfect number.
So we can already change the search field, that's your main loop.
int count = 0;
for (int k = 1; count < 5; k++) {
// Compute candidates based on the formula.
int candidate = (1L << (k - 1)) * ((1L << k) - 1);
// Only test candidates, not all the numbers.
if (isPerfectNumber(candidate)) {
count++;
System.out.println(candidate);
}
}
This here is our big win. No other optimization will beat this: why test for 33 million numbers, when you can test less than 100?
But even though we have a tremendous improvement, your application as a whole can still be improved, namely your method isPerfectNumber(int).
Currently, you are still testing way too many numbers. A perfect number is the sum of all proper divisors. So if d divides n, n/d also divides n. And you can add both divisors at once. But the beauty is that you can stop at sqrt(n), because sqrt(n)*sqrt(n) = n, mathematically speaking. So instead of testing n divisors, you will only test sqrt(n) divisors.
Also, this means that you have to start thinking about corner cases. The corner cases are 1 and sqrt(n):
1 is a corner case because you if you divide n by 1, you get n but you don't add n to check if n is a perfect number. You only add 1. So we'll probably start our sum with 1 just to avoid too many ifs.
sqrt(n) is a corner case because we'd have to check whether sqrt(n) is an integer or not and it's tedious. BUT the Math Overflow question I referenced says that no perfect number is a perfect square, so that eases our loop condition.
Then, if at some point sum becomes greater than n, we can stop. The sum of proper divisors being greater than n indicates that n is abundant, and therefore not perfect. It's a small improvement, but a lot of candidates are actually abundant. So you'll probably save a few cycles if you keep it.
Finally, we have to take care of a slight issue: the number 1 as candidate. 1 is the first candidate, and will pass all our tests, so we have to make a special case for it. We'll add that test at the start of the method.
We can now write the method as follow:
static boolean isPerfectNumber(int n) {
// 1 would pass the rest because it has everything of a perfect number
// except that its only divisor is itself, and we need at least 2 divisors.
if (n < 2) return false;
// divisor 1 is such a corner case that it's very easy to handle:
// just start the sum with it already.
int sum = 1;
// We can stop the divisors at sqrt(n), but this is floored.
int sqrt = (int)Math.sqrt(n);
// A perfect number is never a square.
// It's useful to make this test here if we take the function
// without the context of the sparse candidates, because we
// might get some weird results if this method is simply
// copy-pasted and tested on all numbers.
// This condition can be removed in the final program because we
// know that no numbers of the form indicated above is a square.
if (sqrt * sqrt == n) {
return false;
}
// Since sqrt is floored, some values can still be interesting.
// For instance if you take n = 6, floor(sqrt(n)) = 2, and
// 2 is a proper divisor of 6, so we must keep it, we do it by
// using the <= operator.
// Also, sqrt * sqrt != n, so we can safely loop to sqrt
for (int div = 2; div <= sqrt; div++) {
if (n % div == 0) {
// Add both the divisor and n / divisor.
sum += div + n / div;
// Early fail if the number is abundant.
if (sum > n) return false;
}
}
return n == sum;
}
These are such optimizations that you can even find the 7th perfect number under a second, on the condition that you adapt the code for longs instead of ints. And you could still find the 8th within 30 seconds.
So here's that program (test it online). I removed the comments as the explanations are here above.
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int count = 0;
for (int k = 1; count < 8; k++) {
long candidate = (1L << (k - 1)) * ((1L << k) - 1);
if (isPerfectNumber(candidate)) {
count++;
System.out.println(candidate);
}
}
}
static boolean isPerfectNumber(long n) {
if (n < 2) return false;
long sum = 1;
long sqrt = (long)Math.sqrt(n);
for (long div = 2; div <= sqrt; div++) {
if (n % div == 0) {
sum += div + n / div;
if (sum > n) return false;
}
}
return n == sum;
}
}
The result of the above program is the list of the first 8 perfect numbers:
6
28
496
8128
33550336
8589869056
137438691328
2305843008139952128
You can find further optimization, notably in the search if you check whether 2k-1 is prime or not as Eran says in their answer, but given that we have less than 100 candidates for longs, I don't find it useful to potentially gain a few milliseconds because computing primes can also be expensive in this program. If you want to check for bigger perfect primes, it makes sense, but here? No: it adds complexity and I tried to keep these optimization rather simple and straight to the point.

There are some heuristics to break early from the loops, but finding the 5th perfect number still took me several minutes (I tried similar heuristics to those suggested in the other answers).
However, you can rely on Euler's proof that all even perfect numbers (and it is still unknown if there are any odd perfect numbers) are of the form:
2i-1(2i-1)
where both i and 2i-1 must be prime.
Therefore, you can write the following loop to find the first 5 perfect numbers very quickly:
int counter = 0,
i = 0;
while (counter != 5) {
i++;
if (isPrime (i)) {
if (isPrime ((int) (Math.pow (2, i) - 1))) {
System.out.println ((int) (Math.pow (2, i -1) * (Math.pow (2, i) - 1)));
counter++;
}
}
}
Output:
6
28
496
8128
33550336
You can read more about it here.
If you switch from int to long, you can use this loop to find the first 7 perfect numbers very quickly:
6
28
496
8128
33550336
8589869056
137438691328
The isPrime method I'm using is:
public static boolean isPrime (int a)
{
if (a == 1)
return false;
else if (a < 3)
return true;
else {
for (int i = 2; i * i <= a; i++) {
if (a % i == 0)
return false;
}
}
return true;
}

Magic Number - The Quest for the Simplest

Is there any better logic that can be applied to magic numbers?
Or is there a magic number that I am missing out on?
Please help me out with this simplest working code!
A Magic number is a number whose sum of digits eventually leads to 1.
Example#1: 19 ; 1+9 =10 ; 1+0 = 1. Hence a magic number.
Example#2: 226; 2+2+6=10; 1+0 =1. Hence a magic number.
Example#3: 874; 8+7+4=19; 1+9=10; 1+0=1. Hence a magic number.
boolean isMagic ( int n ) {
return n % 9 == 1;
}

Well, I'm not 100% that the code you placed would work to get a "magic number", but my approach to the problem would be different.
First, I'd receive a String, so that I can get the different digits of the number with a String.charat.
Then I'd use a while cycle to sum the numbers until it gets a single digit number, then check if it's 1.
The code would be
boolean isMagicNumber(String number) {
int[] digits = new int[number.length()];
int sum = 99;
while(sum/10 >= 1) {
sum = 0;
for(int i = 0; i < number.length(); i++) {
sum += Integer.parseInt(""+number.charAt(i));
}
if(sum == 1) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
There might be a better solution, but this is what I'd do to solve the problem.

Checking whether a number is in Fibonacci Sequence?

It was asked to find a way to check whether a number is in the Fibonacci Sequence or not.
The constraints are
1≤T≤10^5
1≤N≤10^10
where the T is the number of test cases,
and N is the given number, the Fibonacci candidate to be tested.
I wrote it the following using the fact a number is Fibonacci if and only if one or both of (5*n2 + 4) or (5*n2 – 4) is a perfect square :-
import java.io.*;
import java.util.*;
public class Solution {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Scanner sc = new Scanner(System.in);
int n = sc.nextInt();
for(int i = 0 ; i < n; i++){
int cand = sc.nextInt();
if(cand < 0){System.out.println("IsNotFibo"); return; }
int aTest =(5 * (cand *cand)) + 4;
int bTest = (5 * (cand *cand)) - 4;
int sqrt1 = (int)Math.sqrt(aTest);// Taking square root of aTest, taking into account only the integer part.
int sqrt2 = (int)Math.sqrt(bTest);// Taking square root of bTest, taking into account only the integer part.
if((sqrt1 * sqrt1 == aTest)||(sqrt2 * sqrt2 == bTest)){
System.out.println("IsFibo");
}else{
System.out.println("IsNotFibo");
}
}
}
}
But its not clearing all the test cases? What bug fixes I can do ?

A much simpler solution is based on the fact that there are only 49 Fibonacci numbers below 10^10.
Precompute them and store them in an array or hash table for existency checks.
The runtime complexity will be O(log N + T):
Set<Long> nums = new HashSet<>();
long a = 1, b = 2;
while (a <= 10000000000L) {
nums.add(a);
long c = a + b;
a = b;
b = c;
}
// then for each query, use nums.contains() to check for Fibonacci-ness
If you want to go down the perfect square route, you might want to use arbitrary-precision arithmetics:
// find ceil(sqrt(n)) in O(log n) steps
BigInteger ceilSqrt(BigInteger n) {
// use binary search to find smallest x with x^2 >= n
BigInteger lo = BigInteger.valueOf(1),
hi = BigInteger.valueOf(n);
while (lo.compareTo(hi) < 0) {
BigInteger mid = lo.add(hi).divide(2);
if (mid.multiply(mid).compareTo(x) >= 0)
hi = mid;
else
lo = mid.add(BigInteger.ONE);
}
return lo;
}
// checks if n is a perfect square
boolean isPerfectSquare(BigInteger n) {
BigInteger x = ceilSqrt(n);
return x.multiply(x).equals(n);
}

Your tests for perfect squares involve floating point calculations. That is liable to give you incorrect answers because floating point calculations typically give you inaccurate results. (Floating point is at best an approximate to Real numbers.)
In this case sqrt(n*n) might give you n - epsilon for some small epsilon and (int) sqrt(n*n) would then be n - 1 instead of the expected n.
Restructure your code so that the tests are performed using integer arithmetic. But note that N < 1010 means that N2 < 1020. That is bigger than a long ... so you will need to use ...
UPDATE
There is more to it than this. First, Math.sqrt(double) is guaranteed to give you a double result that is rounded to the closest double value to the true square root. So you might think we are in the clear (as it were).
But the problem is that N multiplied by N has up to 20 significant digits ... which is more than can be represented when you widen the number to a double in order to make the sqrt call. (A double has 15.95 decimal digits of precision, according to Wikipedia.)
On top of that, the code as written does this:
int cand = sc.nextInt();
int aTest = (5 * (cand * cand)) + 4;
For large values of cand, that is liable to overflow. And it will even overflow if you use long instead of int ... given that the cand values may be up to 10^10. (A long can represent numbers up to +9,223,372,036,854,775,807 ... which is less than 1020.) And then we have to multiply N2 by 5.
In summary, while the code should work for small candidates, for really large ones it could either break when you attempt to read the candidate (as an int) or it could give the wrong answer due to integer overflow (as a long).
Fixing this requires a significant rethink. (Or deeper analysis than I have done to show that the computational hazards don't result in an incorrect answer for any large N in the range of possible inputs.)

According to this link a number is Fibonacci if and only if one or both of (5*n2 + 4) or (5*n2 – 4) is a perfect square so you can basically do this check.
Hope this helps :)

Use binary search and the Fibonacci Q-matrix for a O((log n)^2) solution per test case if you use exponentiation by squaring.
Your solution does not work because it involves rounding floating point square roots of large numbers (potentially large enough not to even fit in a long), which sometimes will not be exact.
The binary search will work like this: find Q^m: if the m-th Fibonacci number is larger than yours, set right = m, if it is equal return true, else set left = m + 1.

As it was correctly said, sqrt could be rounded down. So:
Even if you use long instead of int, it has 18 digits.
even if you use Math.round(), not simply (int) or (long). Notice, your function wouldn't work correctly even on small numbers because of that.
double have 14 digits, long has 18, so you can't work with squares, you need 20 digits.
BigInteger and BigDecimal have no sqrt() function.
So, you have three ways:
write your own sqrt for BigInteger.
check all numbers around the found unprecise double sqrt() for being a real sqrt. That means also working with numbers and their errors simultaneously. (it's horror!)
count all Fibonacci numbers under 10^10 and compare against them.
The last variant is by far the simplest one.

Looks like to me the for-loop doesn't make any sense ?
When you remove the for-loop for me the program works as advertised:
import java.io.*;
import java.util.*;
public class Solution {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Scanner sc = new Scanner(System.in);
int cand = sc.nextInt();
if(cand < 0){System.out.println("IsNotFibo"); return; }
int aTest = 5 * cand *cand + 4;
int bTest = 5 * cand *cand - 4;
int sqrt1 = (int)Math.sqrt(aTest);
int sqrt2 = (int)Math.sqrt(bTest);
if((sqrt1 * sqrt1 == aTest)||(sqrt2 * sqrt2 == bTest)){
System.out.println("IsFibo");
}else{
System.out.println("IsNotFibo");
}
}
}

You only need to test for a given candidate, yes? What is the for loop accomplishing? Could the results of the loop be throwing your testing program off?
Also, there is a missing } in the code. It will not run as posted without adding another } at the end, after which it runs fine for the following input:
10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
IsFibo
IsFibo
IsFibo
IsNotFibo
IsFibo
IsNotFibo
IsNotFibo
IsFibo
IsNotFibo
IsNotFibo

Taking into account all the above suggestions I wrote the following which passed all test cases
import java.io.*;
import java.util.*;
public class Solution {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Scanner sc = new Scanner(System.in);
long[] fib = new long[52];
Set<Long> fibSet = new HashSet<>(52);
fib[0] = 0L;
fib[1] = 1L;
for(int i = 2; i < 52; i++){
fib[i] = fib[i-1] + fib[i - 2];
fibSet.add(fib[i]);
}
int n = sc.nextInt();
long cand;
for(int i = 0; i < n; i++){
cand = sc.nextLong();
if(cand < 0){System.out.println("IsNotFibo");continue;}
if(fibSet.contains(cand)){
System.out.println("IsFibo");
}else{
System.out.println("IsNotFibo");
}
}
}
}
I wanted to be on the safer side hence I choose 52 as the number of elements in the Fibonacci sequence under consideration.

In Java finding numbers that are both a Triangle Number and a Star Number

This is the question I've been assigned:
A so-called “star number”, s, is a number defined by the formula:
s = 6n(n-1) + 1
where n is the index of the star number.
Thus the first six (i.e. for n = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6) star numbers are: 1, 13, 37,
73, 121, 181
In contrast a so-called “triangle number”, t, is the sum of the numbers from 1 to n: t = 1 + 2 + … + (n-1) + n.
Thus the first six (i.e. for n = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6) triangle numbers are: 1, 3, 6, 10, 15, 21
Write a Java application that produces a list of all the values of type int that are both star number and triangle numbers.
When solving this problem you MUST write and use at least one function (such as isTriangeNumber() or isStarNumber()
or determineTriangeNumber() or determineStarNumber()). Also you MUST only use the formulas provided here to solve the problem.
tl;dr: Need to output values that are both Star Numbers and Triangle Numbers.
Unfortunately, I can only get the result to output the value '1' in an endless loop, even though I am incrementing by 1 in the while loop.
public class TriangularStars {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int n=1;
int starNumber = starNumber(n);
int triangleNumber = triangleNumber(n);
while ((starNumber<Integer.MAX_VALUE)&&(n<=Integer.MAX_VALUE))
{
if ((starNumber==triangleNumber)&& (starNumber<Integer.MAX_VALUE))
{
System.out.println(starNumber);
}
n++;
}
}
public static int starNumber( int n)
{
int starNumber;
starNumber= (((6*n)*(n-1))+1);
return starNumber;
}
public static int triangleNumber( int n)
{
int triangleNumber;
triangleNumber =+ n;
return triangleNumber;
}
}

Here's a skeleton. Finish the rest yourself:
Questions to ask yourself:
How do I make a Triangle number?
How do I know if something is a Star number?
Why do I only need to proceed until triangle is negative? How can triangle ever be negative?
Good luck!
public class TriangularStars {
private static final double ERROR = 1e-7;
public static void main(String args[]) {
int triangle = 0;
for (int i = 0; triangle >= 0; i++) {
triangle = determineTriangleNumber(i, triangle);
if (isStarNumber(triangle)) {
System.out.println(triangle);
}
}
}
public static boolean isStarNumber(int possibleStar) {
double test = (possibleStar - 1) / 6.;
int reduce = (int) (test + ERROR);
if (Math.abs(test - reduce) > ERROR)
return false;
int sqrt = (int) (Math.sqrt(reduce) + ERROR);
return reduce == sqrt * (sqrt + 1);
}
public static int determineTriangleNumber(int i, int previous) {
return previous + i;
}
}
Output:
1
253
49141
9533161
1849384153

You need to add new calls to starNumber() and triangleNumber() inside the loop. You get the initial values but never re-call them with the updated n values.
As a first cut, I would put those calls immediatly following the n++, so
n++;
starNumber = starNumber(n);
triangleNumber = triangleNumber(n);
}
}

The question here is that "N" neednt be the same for both star and triangle numbers. So you can increase "n" when computing both star and triangle numbers, rather keep on increasing the triangle number as long as its less the current star number. Essentially you need to maintain two variable "n" and "m".

The first problem is that you only call the starNumber() method once, outside the loop. (And the same with triangleNumber().)
A secondary problem is that unless Integer.MAX_VALUE is a star number, your loop will run forever. The reason being that Java numerical operations overflow silently, so if your next star number would be bigger than Integer.MAX_VALUE, the result would just wrap around. You need to use longs to detect if a number is bigger than Integer.MAX_VALUE.
The third problem is that even if you put all the calls into the loop, it would only display star number/triangle number pairs that share the same n value. You need to have two indices in parallel, one for star number and another for triangle numbers and increment one or the other depending on which function returns the smaller number. So something along these lines:
while( starNumber and triangleNumber are both less than or equal to Integer.MAX_VALUE) {
while( starNumber < triangleNumber ) {
generate next starnumber;
}
while( triangleNumber < starNumber ) {
generate next triangle number;
}
if( starNumber == triangleNumber ) {
we've found a matching pair
}
}
And the fourth problem is that your triangleNumber() method is wrong, I wonder how it even compiles.

I think your methodology is flawed. You won't be able to directly make a method of isStarNumber(n) without, inside that method, testing every possible star number. I would take a slightly different approach: pre-computation.
first, find all the triangle numbers:
List<Integer> tris = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for(int i = 2, t = 1; t > 0; i++) { // loop ends after integer overflow
tris.add(t);
t += i; // compute the next triangle value
}
we can do the same for star numbers:
consider the following -
star(n) = 6*n*(n-1) + 1 = 6n^2 - 6n + 1
therefore, by extension
star(n + 1) = 6*(n+1)*n + 1 = 6n^2 + 6n +1
and, star(n + 1) - star(n - 1), with some algebra, is 12n
star(n+1) = star(n) + 12* n
This leads us to the following formula
List<Integer> stars = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for(int i = 1, s = 1; s > 0; i++) {
stars.add(s);
s += (12 * i);
}
The real question is... do we really need to search every number? The answer is no! We only need to search numbers that are actually one or the other. So we could easily use the numbers in the stars (18k of them) and find the ones of those that are also tris!
for(Integer star : stars) {
if(tris.contains(star))
System.out.println("Awesome! " + star + " is both star and tri!");
}
I hope this makes sense to you. For your own sake, don't blindly move these snippets into your code. Instead, learn why it does what it does, ask questions where you're not sure. (Hopefully this isn't due in two hours!)
And good luck with this assignment.
Here's something awesome that will return the first 4 but not the last one. I don't know why the last won't come out. Have fun with this :
class StarAndTri2 {
public static void main(String...args) {
final double q2 = Math.sqrt(2);
out(1);
int a = 1;
for(int i = 1; a > 0; i++) {
a += (12 * i);
if(x((int)(Math.sqrt(a)*q2))==a)out(a);
}
}
static int x(int q) { return (q*(q+1))/2; }
static void out(int i) {System.out.println("found: " + i);}
}

Iterative Version of Modified Fibonacci Sequence

I was just going through the iterative version of fibonacci series algorithm. I found this following code
int Fibonacci(int n)
{
int f1 = 0;
int f2 = 1;
int fn;
for ( int i = 2; i < n; i++ )
{
fn = f1 + f2;
f1 = f2;
f2 = fn;
}
}
A silly question just raised in my mind. The function above adds two previous numbers and returns the third one and then get variables ready for the next iteration. What if it would be something like this. "Return a number of series which is the sum of previous three numbers" how we can change the above code to find such a number.u

As a hint, notice that the above algorithm works by "cycling" the numbers through some variables. In the above code, at each point you are storing
F_0 F_1
a b
You then "shift" them over by one step in the loop:
F_1 F_2
a b
You then "shift" them again in the next loop iteration:
F_2 F_3
a b
If you want to update the algorithm sum the last three values, think about storing them like this:
T_0 T_1 T_2
a b c
Then shift them again:
T_1 T_2 T_3
a b c
Then shift them again:
T_2 T_3 T_4
a b c
Converting this intuition into code is a good exercise, so I'll leave those details to you.
That said - there is a much, much faster way to compute the nth term of the Fibonacci and "Tribonacci" sequences. This article describes a very clever trick using matrix multiplication to compute terms more quickly than the above loop, and there is code available here that implements this algorithm.
Hope this helps!

I like recursion. Call me a sadist.
static int rTribonacci (int n, int a, int b, int c) {
if (n == 0) return a;
return rTribonacci (n-1, b, c, a + b + c);
}
int Tribonacci (int n) { return rTribonacci(n, 0, 0, 1); }

I don't normally answer questions that "smell" like homework, but since someone else already replied this is what I would do:
int Tribonacci(int n)
{
int last[3] = { 0, 0, 1 }; // the start of our sequence
for(int i = 3; i <= n; i++)
last[i % 3] = last[i % 3] + last[(i + 1) % 3] + last[(i + 2) % 3];
return last[n % 3];
}
It can be improved a bit to avoid all the ugly modular arithmetic (which I left in to make the circular nature of the last[] array clear) by changing the loop to this:
for(int i = 3; i <= n; i++)
last[i % 3] = last[0] + last[1] + last[2];
It can be optimized a bit more and frankly, there are much better ways to calculate such sequences, as templatetypedef said.

If you want to use recursion, you don't need any other parameters:
int FibonacciN(int position)
{ if(position<0) throw new ArgumentException("invalid position");
if(position==0 || position ==1) return position;
return FibonacciN(position-1) + FibonacciN(position-2);
}