Project Euler #60 Prime pair sets












0












$begingroup$


The problem is as below:




The primes 3, 7, 109, and 673, are quite remarkable. By taking any two primes and concatenating them in any order the result will always be prime. For example, taking 7 and 109, both 7109 and 1097 are prime. The sum of these four primes, 792, represents the lowest sum for a set of four primes with this property.



Find the lowest sum for a set of five primes for which any two primes concatenate to produce another prime.




%%time
import itertools
import time

t1 = time.time()

def prime():

yield 3
yield 7

for i in itertools.count(11, 2):
e = int(i ** .5) + 1
for j in range(2, e + 1):
if i % j == 0:
break
else:
yield i


def is_prime(n):
if n < 2:
return False
if n == 2:
return True
e = int(n ** .5) + 1
for i in range(2, e + 1):
if n % i == 0:
return False
else:
return True


def power_up(n):
# helper function return the next 10 power
i = 1
while 1:
if n < i:
return i
i*=10


def conc(x,y):
# helper function check if xy and yz is prime
if not is_prime((x*power_up(y))+y):
return False
else:
return is_prime(y*power_up(x)+x)

def conc3(x,y,z): # not use, it did not improve the performance
a = conc(x,y)
if not a:
return False
b = conc(x,z)
if not b:
return False
c = conc(y,z)
if not c:
return False
return True




one =
two =
three =
four =
found = 0

for i in prime():
if found:
break
try:
if i > sum_:
break
except:
pass
one += [i]
for j in one[:-1]: # on the fly list
if conc(i,j):
two += [[i, j]]
for _, k in two: # check against k only if it is in a two pair
if _ == j:
for x in [i, j]:
if not conc(x,k):
break
else:
three += [[i, j, k]]
for _, __, l in three:
if _ == j and __ == k:

for x in [i, j, k]:
if not conc(x,l):
break
else:
four += [[i, j, k, l]]
# print(i, j, k, l)
for _, __, ___, m in four:
if _ == j and __ == k and ___ == l:
for x in [i, j, k, l]:
if not conc(x,m):
break
else:
a = [i, j, k, l, m]
t2 = time.time()
try:
if (
sum(a) < sum_
): # assign sum_ with the first value found
sum_ = sum(a)
except:
sum_ = sum(a)
print(
f"the sum now is {sum(a)}, the sum of [{i}, {j}, {k}, {l}, {m}], found in {t2-t1:.2f}sec"
)
if i > sum_:
# if the first element checked is greater than the found sum, then we are sure we found it,
# this is the only way we can be sure we found it.
# it took 1 and a half min to find the first one, and confirm that after 42min.
# my way is not fast, but what I practised here is to find the number without a guessed boundary

found = 1
print(
f"the final result is {sum_}"
)


I found the first candidate in 75 sec which I think is to long. I want to see if anyone can give me some suggestion on how to improve the performance.









share









$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    The problem is as below:




    The primes 3, 7, 109, and 673, are quite remarkable. By taking any two primes and concatenating them in any order the result will always be prime. For example, taking 7 and 109, both 7109 and 1097 are prime. The sum of these four primes, 792, represents the lowest sum for a set of four primes with this property.



    Find the lowest sum for a set of five primes for which any two primes concatenate to produce another prime.




    %%time
    import itertools
    import time

    t1 = time.time()

    def prime():

    yield 3
    yield 7

    for i in itertools.count(11, 2):
    e = int(i ** .5) + 1
    for j in range(2, e + 1):
    if i % j == 0:
    break
    else:
    yield i


    def is_prime(n):
    if n < 2:
    return False
    if n == 2:
    return True
    e = int(n ** .5) + 1
    for i in range(2, e + 1):
    if n % i == 0:
    return False
    else:
    return True


    def power_up(n):
    # helper function return the next 10 power
    i = 1
    while 1:
    if n < i:
    return i
    i*=10


    def conc(x,y):
    # helper function check if xy and yz is prime
    if not is_prime((x*power_up(y))+y):
    return False
    else:
    return is_prime(y*power_up(x)+x)

    def conc3(x,y,z): # not use, it did not improve the performance
    a = conc(x,y)
    if not a:
    return False
    b = conc(x,z)
    if not b:
    return False
    c = conc(y,z)
    if not c:
    return False
    return True




    one =
    two =
    three =
    four =
    found = 0

    for i in prime():
    if found:
    break
    try:
    if i > sum_:
    break
    except:
    pass
    one += [i]
    for j in one[:-1]: # on the fly list
    if conc(i,j):
    two += [[i, j]]
    for _, k in two: # check against k only if it is in a two pair
    if _ == j:
    for x in [i, j]:
    if not conc(x,k):
    break
    else:
    three += [[i, j, k]]
    for _, __, l in three:
    if _ == j and __ == k:

    for x in [i, j, k]:
    if not conc(x,l):
    break
    else:
    four += [[i, j, k, l]]
    # print(i, j, k, l)
    for _, __, ___, m in four:
    if _ == j and __ == k and ___ == l:
    for x in [i, j, k, l]:
    if not conc(x,m):
    break
    else:
    a = [i, j, k, l, m]
    t2 = time.time()
    try:
    if (
    sum(a) < sum_
    ): # assign sum_ with the first value found
    sum_ = sum(a)
    except:
    sum_ = sum(a)
    print(
    f"the sum now is {sum(a)}, the sum of [{i}, {j}, {k}, {l}, {m}], found in {t2-t1:.2f}sec"
    )
    if i > sum_:
    # if the first element checked is greater than the found sum, then we are sure we found it,
    # this is the only way we can be sure we found it.
    # it took 1 and a half min to find the first one, and confirm that after 42min.
    # my way is not fast, but what I practised here is to find the number without a guessed boundary

    found = 1
    print(
    f"the final result is {sum_}"
    )


    I found the first candidate in 75 sec which I think is to long. I want to see if anyone can give me some suggestion on how to improve the performance.









    share









    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0





      $begingroup$


      The problem is as below:




      The primes 3, 7, 109, and 673, are quite remarkable. By taking any two primes and concatenating them in any order the result will always be prime. For example, taking 7 and 109, both 7109 and 1097 are prime. The sum of these four primes, 792, represents the lowest sum for a set of four primes with this property.



      Find the lowest sum for a set of five primes for which any two primes concatenate to produce another prime.




      %%time
      import itertools
      import time

      t1 = time.time()

      def prime():

      yield 3
      yield 7

      for i in itertools.count(11, 2):
      e = int(i ** .5) + 1
      for j in range(2, e + 1):
      if i % j == 0:
      break
      else:
      yield i


      def is_prime(n):
      if n < 2:
      return False
      if n == 2:
      return True
      e = int(n ** .5) + 1
      for i in range(2, e + 1):
      if n % i == 0:
      return False
      else:
      return True


      def power_up(n):
      # helper function return the next 10 power
      i = 1
      while 1:
      if n < i:
      return i
      i*=10


      def conc(x,y):
      # helper function check if xy and yz is prime
      if not is_prime((x*power_up(y))+y):
      return False
      else:
      return is_prime(y*power_up(x)+x)

      def conc3(x,y,z): # not use, it did not improve the performance
      a = conc(x,y)
      if not a:
      return False
      b = conc(x,z)
      if not b:
      return False
      c = conc(y,z)
      if not c:
      return False
      return True




      one =
      two =
      three =
      four =
      found = 0

      for i in prime():
      if found:
      break
      try:
      if i > sum_:
      break
      except:
      pass
      one += [i]
      for j in one[:-1]: # on the fly list
      if conc(i,j):
      two += [[i, j]]
      for _, k in two: # check against k only if it is in a two pair
      if _ == j:
      for x in [i, j]:
      if not conc(x,k):
      break
      else:
      three += [[i, j, k]]
      for _, __, l in three:
      if _ == j and __ == k:

      for x in [i, j, k]:
      if not conc(x,l):
      break
      else:
      four += [[i, j, k, l]]
      # print(i, j, k, l)
      for _, __, ___, m in four:
      if _ == j and __ == k and ___ == l:
      for x in [i, j, k, l]:
      if not conc(x,m):
      break
      else:
      a = [i, j, k, l, m]
      t2 = time.time()
      try:
      if (
      sum(a) < sum_
      ): # assign sum_ with the first value found
      sum_ = sum(a)
      except:
      sum_ = sum(a)
      print(
      f"the sum now is {sum(a)}, the sum of [{i}, {j}, {k}, {l}, {m}], found in {t2-t1:.2f}sec"
      )
      if i > sum_:
      # if the first element checked is greater than the found sum, then we are sure we found it,
      # this is the only way we can be sure we found it.
      # it took 1 and a half min to find the first one, and confirm that after 42min.
      # my way is not fast, but what I practised here is to find the number without a guessed boundary

      found = 1
      print(
      f"the final result is {sum_}"
      )


      I found the first candidate in 75 sec which I think is to long. I want to see if anyone can give me some suggestion on how to improve the performance.









      share









      $endgroup$




      The problem is as below:




      The primes 3, 7, 109, and 673, are quite remarkable. By taking any two primes and concatenating them in any order the result will always be prime. For example, taking 7 and 109, both 7109 and 1097 are prime. The sum of these four primes, 792, represents the lowest sum for a set of four primes with this property.



      Find the lowest sum for a set of five primes for which any two primes concatenate to produce another prime.




      %%time
      import itertools
      import time

      t1 = time.time()

      def prime():

      yield 3
      yield 7

      for i in itertools.count(11, 2):
      e = int(i ** .5) + 1
      for j in range(2, e + 1):
      if i % j == 0:
      break
      else:
      yield i


      def is_prime(n):
      if n < 2:
      return False
      if n == 2:
      return True
      e = int(n ** .5) + 1
      for i in range(2, e + 1):
      if n % i == 0:
      return False
      else:
      return True


      def power_up(n):
      # helper function return the next 10 power
      i = 1
      while 1:
      if n < i:
      return i
      i*=10


      def conc(x,y):
      # helper function check if xy and yz is prime
      if not is_prime((x*power_up(y))+y):
      return False
      else:
      return is_prime(y*power_up(x)+x)

      def conc3(x,y,z): # not use, it did not improve the performance
      a = conc(x,y)
      if not a:
      return False
      b = conc(x,z)
      if not b:
      return False
      c = conc(y,z)
      if not c:
      return False
      return True




      one =
      two =
      three =
      four =
      found = 0

      for i in prime():
      if found:
      break
      try:
      if i > sum_:
      break
      except:
      pass
      one += [i]
      for j in one[:-1]: # on the fly list
      if conc(i,j):
      two += [[i, j]]
      for _, k in two: # check against k only if it is in a two pair
      if _ == j:
      for x in [i, j]:
      if not conc(x,k):
      break
      else:
      three += [[i, j, k]]
      for _, __, l in three:
      if _ == j and __ == k:

      for x in [i, j, k]:
      if not conc(x,l):
      break
      else:
      four += [[i, j, k, l]]
      # print(i, j, k, l)
      for _, __, ___, m in four:
      if _ == j and __ == k and ___ == l:
      for x in [i, j, k, l]:
      if not conc(x,m):
      break
      else:
      a = [i, j, k, l, m]
      t2 = time.time()
      try:
      if (
      sum(a) < sum_
      ): # assign sum_ with the first value found
      sum_ = sum(a)
      except:
      sum_ = sum(a)
      print(
      f"the sum now is {sum(a)}, the sum of [{i}, {j}, {k}, {l}, {m}], found in {t2-t1:.2f}sec"
      )
      if i > sum_:
      # if the first element checked is greater than the found sum, then we are sure we found it,
      # this is the only way we can be sure we found it.
      # it took 1 and a half min to find the first one, and confirm that after 42min.
      # my way is not fast, but what I practised here is to find the number without a guessed boundary

      found = 1
      print(
      f"the final result is {sum_}"
      )


      I found the first candidate in 75 sec which I think is to long. I want to see if anyone can give me some suggestion on how to improve the performance.







      python





      share












      share










      share



      share










      asked 9 mins ago









      Matt CaoMatt Cao

      11




      11






















          0






          active

          oldest

          votes











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          });
          });
          }, "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "196"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f211520%2fproject-euler-60-prime-pair-sets%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          0






          active

          oldest

          votes








          0






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes
















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f211520%2fproject-euler-60-prime-pair-sets%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          404 Error Contact Form 7 ajax form submitting

          How to know if a Active Directory user can login interactively

          TypeError: fit_transform() missing 1 required positional argument: 'X'