Optimizing solution for Project Euler Problem #23 (non-abundant sums)












9












$begingroup$


Project Euler Problem 23 asks:




A perfect number is a number for which the sum of its proper divisors
is exactly equal to the number. For example, the sum of the proper
divisors of 28 would be 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 14 = 28, which means that 28
is a perfect number.



A number n is called deficient if the sum of its proper divisors is
less than n and it is called abundant if this sum exceeds n.



As 12 is the smallest abundant number, 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 6 = 16, the
smallest number that can be written as the sum of two abundant numbers
is 24. By mathematical analysis, it can be shown that all integers
greater than 28123 can be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.
However, this upper limit cannot be reduced any further by analysis
even though it is known that the greatest number that cannot be
expressed as the sum of two abundant numbers is less than this limit.



Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as
the sum of two abundant numbers.




I have been trying to optimize my solution for almost a day now but my program is not ready to get small and optimized. Can anyone please tell me how I can do that?





def isabundant(n): return sum(list(x for x in range(1, int(n/2)+1) if n % x == 0)) > n
abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True)
sums = 0
for i in range(12, 28123):
for abundant in abundants:
if abundant >= i and isabundant(i+abundant) == True: sums += i
print(sums)









share|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    9












    $begingroup$


    Project Euler Problem 23 asks:




    A perfect number is a number for which the sum of its proper divisors
    is exactly equal to the number. For example, the sum of the proper
    divisors of 28 would be 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 14 = 28, which means that 28
    is a perfect number.



    A number n is called deficient if the sum of its proper divisors is
    less than n and it is called abundant if this sum exceeds n.



    As 12 is the smallest abundant number, 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 6 = 16, the
    smallest number that can be written as the sum of two abundant numbers
    is 24. By mathematical analysis, it can be shown that all integers
    greater than 28123 can be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.
    However, this upper limit cannot be reduced any further by analysis
    even though it is known that the greatest number that cannot be
    expressed as the sum of two abundant numbers is less than this limit.



    Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as
    the sum of two abundant numbers.




    I have been trying to optimize my solution for almost a day now but my program is not ready to get small and optimized. Can anyone please tell me how I can do that?





    def isabundant(n): return sum(list(x for x in range(1, int(n/2)+1) if n % x == 0)) > n
    abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True)
    sums = 0
    for i in range(12, 28123):
    for abundant in abundants:
    if abundant >= i and isabundant(i+abundant) == True: sums += i
    print(sums)









    share|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      9












      9








      9


      2



      $begingroup$


      Project Euler Problem 23 asks:




      A perfect number is a number for which the sum of its proper divisors
      is exactly equal to the number. For example, the sum of the proper
      divisors of 28 would be 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 14 = 28, which means that 28
      is a perfect number.



      A number n is called deficient if the sum of its proper divisors is
      less than n and it is called abundant if this sum exceeds n.



      As 12 is the smallest abundant number, 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 6 = 16, the
      smallest number that can be written as the sum of two abundant numbers
      is 24. By mathematical analysis, it can be shown that all integers
      greater than 28123 can be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.
      However, this upper limit cannot be reduced any further by analysis
      even though it is known that the greatest number that cannot be
      expressed as the sum of two abundant numbers is less than this limit.



      Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as
      the sum of two abundant numbers.




      I have been trying to optimize my solution for almost a day now but my program is not ready to get small and optimized. Can anyone please tell me how I can do that?





      def isabundant(n): return sum(list(x for x in range(1, int(n/2)+1) if n % x == 0)) > n
      abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True)
      sums = 0
      for i in range(12, 28123):
      for abundant in abundants:
      if abundant >= i and isabundant(i+abundant) == True: sums += i
      print(sums)









      share|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Project Euler Problem 23 asks:




      A perfect number is a number for which the sum of its proper divisors
      is exactly equal to the number. For example, the sum of the proper
      divisors of 28 would be 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 14 = 28, which means that 28
      is a perfect number.



      A number n is called deficient if the sum of its proper divisors is
      less than n and it is called abundant if this sum exceeds n.



      As 12 is the smallest abundant number, 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 6 = 16, the
      smallest number that can be written as the sum of two abundant numbers
      is 24. By mathematical analysis, it can be shown that all integers
      greater than 28123 can be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.
      However, this upper limit cannot be reduced any further by analysis
      even though it is known that the greatest number that cannot be
      expressed as the sum of two abundant numbers is less than this limit.



      Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as
      the sum of two abundant numbers.




      I have been trying to optimize my solution for almost a day now but my program is not ready to get small and optimized. Can anyone please tell me how I can do that?





      def isabundant(n): return sum(list(x for x in range(1, int(n/2)+1) if n % x == 0)) > n
      abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True)
      sums = 0
      for i in range(12, 28123):
      for abundant in abundants:
      if abundant >= i and isabundant(i+abundant) == True: sums += i
      print(sums)






      python optimization programming-challenge python-3.x






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Aug 24 '14 at 19:47









      Jamal

      30.3k11116226




      30.3k11116226










      asked Jan 24 '14 at 9:50









      Mohammad Areeb SiddiquiMohammad Areeb Siddiqui

      20459




      20459






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          13












          $begingroup$

          Your first problem is that you're trying to cram too much information onto one line. As a result, you loose the overview. Here is a simple refactoring:



          def is_abundant(n):
          max_divisor = int(n / 2) + 1
          sum = 0
          for x in range(1, max_divisor):
          if n % x == 0:
          sum += x
          return sum > n

          abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if is_abundant(x))

          sums = 0
          for i in range(12, 28123):
          for abundant in abundants:
          if abundant >= i and is_abundant(i + abundant):
          sums += i
          print(sums)



          • The == True tests are unecessary and were removed.

          • Naming was improved: isabundantis_abundant.

          • The long statement in is_abundant was split up.


          Now we can think about how this could be optimized.



          One subproblem is calculating all divisors of a number. We could put the relevant code into its own function. We can furthermore exploit that if n % i == 0, then there must be another integer k so that n == i * k. This means that we only have to look at a lot less numbers: only the range(2, 1 + int(sqrt(n))) is interesting.



          def divisors(n):
          """
          Returns all nontrivial divisors of an integer, but makes no guarantees on the order.
          """
          # "1" is always a divisor (at least for our purposes)
          yield 1

          largest = int(math.sqrt(n))

          # special-case square numbers to avoid yielding the same divisor twice
          if largest * largest == n:
          yield largest
          else:
          largest += 1

          # all other divisors
          for i in range(2, largest):
          if n % i == 0:
          yield i
          yield n / i


          We can now rewrite our is_abundant to the simpler:



          def is_abundant(n):
          if n < 12:
          return False
          return sum(divisors(n)) > n


          Later, in your main loop, you are doing a rather weird calculation. What were we supposed to do?




          Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.




          We furthermore know that all integers above 28123 can be written as such a sum. Thus we have to look at the range(1, 28123 + 1)! How can we decide if a number n can be written as a sum of abundant numbers i and k? There exists any abundant number i with the constraint i < n, and another abundant number with the constraints k < n and n - i == k. Here is one clever way to write this:



          def is_abundant_sum(n):
          for i in abundants_smaller_than_n:
          if (n - i) in abundants_smaller_than_n:
          return True
          return False


          Because we don't want to calculate the abundants_smaller_than_n each time, we just take all possible abundants and bail out if we get larger than n:



          def is_abundant_sum(n):
          for i in abundants:
          if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
          return False
          if (n - i) in abundants:
          return True
          return False


          where abundants = [x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if is_abundant(x)].



          Now, all that is left to do is to sum those numbers where this condition does not hold true:



          sum_of_non_abundants = sum(x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if not is_abundant_sum(x))


          We could perform one optimization: abundants is a list, which is an ordered data structure. If we search for an element that is not contained in the list, all elements would have to be searched. The set() data structure is faster, so:



          abundants_set = set(abundants)
          def is_abundant_sum(n):
          for i in abundants:
          if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
          return False
          if (n - i) in abundants_set:
          return True
          return False





          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Your code is not working.
            $endgroup$
            – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
            Aug 24 '14 at 18:25










          • $begingroup$
            @MohammadAreebSiddiqui Thanks for pointing that out. It seems I was too distracted by interesting number theory to write a correct divisors() implementation. That's kind of embarrassing. Anyway, it's fixed now and passed the projecteuler.net test.
            $endgroup$
            – amon
            Aug 24 '14 at 19:44










          • $begingroup$
            you could've just added a check to yield n / i only if i < n / i :)
            $endgroup$
            – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
            Aug 24 '14 at 19:48



















          3












          $begingroup$

          A simple optimization would be to do this instead of iterating trough every single division:



          def GetSumOfDivs(n):
          i = 2
          upper = n
          total = 1
          while i < upper:
          if n%i == 0:
          upper = n/i
          total += upper
          if upper != i: total += i
          i += 1
          return total


          then you can check if the returned value is greater than the actual number to populate your list.



          this works like this:
          lets say you want to get the sum of the divisors of 28...
          instead of iterating through each number:
          +1, +2, +4, +7, +14 it will add 2 numbers at once like this:
          3, +4+7, +14 because you keep decreasing the upper limit for the loop for each divisor.



          keep in mind that for low numbers it will actually take more time to run through, but for big number you have a massive improvement.



          Time difference: (19.381) - (11.419) = 7.962 seconds faster while generating the abundant list



          another optimization is to search in the already generated list of abundants instead of checking if the number is abundant all over again, but you should use a dictionary instead of a list to make the search substantially faster.



          My solution to your problem:



          def GetSumOfDivs(n):
          i = 2
          upper = n
          total = 1
          while i < upper:
          if n%i == 0:
          upper = n/i
          total += upper
          if upper != i: total += i
          i += 1
          return total


          def isabundant(n): return GetSumOfDivs(n) > n
          lAbundants = [x for x in range(12, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True]
          dAbundants = {x:x for x in lAbundants}

          sums = 1
          for i in range(2, 28123):
          boo = True
          for k in lAbundants:
          if k < i:
          if (i-k) in dAbundants:
          boo = False
          break
          else : break
          if boo == True: sums += i

          print(sums)


          Why a list and a dictionary? the list is ordered and the dictionary for fast indexing.



          Total execution time: 12.08 seconds



          now try it in C++... I'm sure its under 2 seconds... XD good luck






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$





















            0












            $begingroup$

            Nayuki's method of calculating the abundants is twice as fast. However Mohammeds method of calculating the sums is much faster than Nayuki's. Putting both of these together my time for the calculation was ~ 0.5 secs.






            share|improve this answer








            New contributor




            Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$













              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%2f39946%2foptimizing-solution-for-project-euler-problem-23-non-abundant-sums%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              13












              $begingroup$

              Your first problem is that you're trying to cram too much information onto one line. As a result, you loose the overview. Here is a simple refactoring:



              def is_abundant(n):
              max_divisor = int(n / 2) + 1
              sum = 0
              for x in range(1, max_divisor):
              if n % x == 0:
              sum += x
              return sum > n

              abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if is_abundant(x))

              sums = 0
              for i in range(12, 28123):
              for abundant in abundants:
              if abundant >= i and is_abundant(i + abundant):
              sums += i
              print(sums)



              • The == True tests are unecessary and were removed.

              • Naming was improved: isabundantis_abundant.

              • The long statement in is_abundant was split up.


              Now we can think about how this could be optimized.



              One subproblem is calculating all divisors of a number. We could put the relevant code into its own function. We can furthermore exploit that if n % i == 0, then there must be another integer k so that n == i * k. This means that we only have to look at a lot less numbers: only the range(2, 1 + int(sqrt(n))) is interesting.



              def divisors(n):
              """
              Returns all nontrivial divisors of an integer, but makes no guarantees on the order.
              """
              # "1" is always a divisor (at least for our purposes)
              yield 1

              largest = int(math.sqrt(n))

              # special-case square numbers to avoid yielding the same divisor twice
              if largest * largest == n:
              yield largest
              else:
              largest += 1

              # all other divisors
              for i in range(2, largest):
              if n % i == 0:
              yield i
              yield n / i


              We can now rewrite our is_abundant to the simpler:



              def is_abundant(n):
              if n < 12:
              return False
              return sum(divisors(n)) > n


              Later, in your main loop, you are doing a rather weird calculation. What were we supposed to do?




              Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.




              We furthermore know that all integers above 28123 can be written as such a sum. Thus we have to look at the range(1, 28123 + 1)! How can we decide if a number n can be written as a sum of abundant numbers i and k? There exists any abundant number i with the constraint i < n, and another abundant number with the constraints k < n and n - i == k. Here is one clever way to write this:



              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants_smaller_than_n:
              if (n - i) in abundants_smaller_than_n:
              return True
              return False


              Because we don't want to calculate the abundants_smaller_than_n each time, we just take all possible abundants and bail out if we get larger than n:



              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants:
              if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
              return False
              if (n - i) in abundants:
              return True
              return False


              where abundants = [x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if is_abundant(x)].



              Now, all that is left to do is to sum those numbers where this condition does not hold true:



              sum_of_non_abundants = sum(x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if not is_abundant_sum(x))


              We could perform one optimization: abundants is a list, which is an ordered data structure. If we search for an element that is not contained in the list, all elements would have to be searched. The set() data structure is faster, so:



              abundants_set = set(abundants)
              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants:
              if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
              return False
              if (n - i) in abundants_set:
              return True
              return False





              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$









              • 2




                $begingroup$
                Your code is not working.
                $endgroup$
                – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
                Aug 24 '14 at 18:25










              • $begingroup$
                @MohammadAreebSiddiqui Thanks for pointing that out. It seems I was too distracted by interesting number theory to write a correct divisors() implementation. That's kind of embarrassing. Anyway, it's fixed now and passed the projecteuler.net test.
                $endgroup$
                – amon
                Aug 24 '14 at 19:44










              • $begingroup$
                you could've just added a check to yield n / i only if i < n / i :)
                $endgroup$
                – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
                Aug 24 '14 at 19:48
















              13












              $begingroup$

              Your first problem is that you're trying to cram too much information onto one line. As a result, you loose the overview. Here is a simple refactoring:



              def is_abundant(n):
              max_divisor = int(n / 2) + 1
              sum = 0
              for x in range(1, max_divisor):
              if n % x == 0:
              sum += x
              return sum > n

              abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if is_abundant(x))

              sums = 0
              for i in range(12, 28123):
              for abundant in abundants:
              if abundant >= i and is_abundant(i + abundant):
              sums += i
              print(sums)



              • The == True tests are unecessary and were removed.

              • Naming was improved: isabundantis_abundant.

              • The long statement in is_abundant was split up.


              Now we can think about how this could be optimized.



              One subproblem is calculating all divisors of a number. We could put the relevant code into its own function. We can furthermore exploit that if n % i == 0, then there must be another integer k so that n == i * k. This means that we only have to look at a lot less numbers: only the range(2, 1 + int(sqrt(n))) is interesting.



              def divisors(n):
              """
              Returns all nontrivial divisors of an integer, but makes no guarantees on the order.
              """
              # "1" is always a divisor (at least for our purposes)
              yield 1

              largest = int(math.sqrt(n))

              # special-case square numbers to avoid yielding the same divisor twice
              if largest * largest == n:
              yield largest
              else:
              largest += 1

              # all other divisors
              for i in range(2, largest):
              if n % i == 0:
              yield i
              yield n / i


              We can now rewrite our is_abundant to the simpler:



              def is_abundant(n):
              if n < 12:
              return False
              return sum(divisors(n)) > n


              Later, in your main loop, you are doing a rather weird calculation. What were we supposed to do?




              Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.




              We furthermore know that all integers above 28123 can be written as such a sum. Thus we have to look at the range(1, 28123 + 1)! How can we decide if a number n can be written as a sum of abundant numbers i and k? There exists any abundant number i with the constraint i < n, and another abundant number with the constraints k < n and n - i == k. Here is one clever way to write this:



              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants_smaller_than_n:
              if (n - i) in abundants_smaller_than_n:
              return True
              return False


              Because we don't want to calculate the abundants_smaller_than_n each time, we just take all possible abundants and bail out if we get larger than n:



              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants:
              if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
              return False
              if (n - i) in abundants:
              return True
              return False


              where abundants = [x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if is_abundant(x)].



              Now, all that is left to do is to sum those numbers where this condition does not hold true:



              sum_of_non_abundants = sum(x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if not is_abundant_sum(x))


              We could perform one optimization: abundants is a list, which is an ordered data structure. If we search for an element that is not contained in the list, all elements would have to be searched. The set() data structure is faster, so:



              abundants_set = set(abundants)
              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants:
              if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
              return False
              if (n - i) in abundants_set:
              return True
              return False





              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$









              • 2




                $begingroup$
                Your code is not working.
                $endgroup$
                – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
                Aug 24 '14 at 18:25










              • $begingroup$
                @MohammadAreebSiddiqui Thanks for pointing that out. It seems I was too distracted by interesting number theory to write a correct divisors() implementation. That's kind of embarrassing. Anyway, it's fixed now and passed the projecteuler.net test.
                $endgroup$
                – amon
                Aug 24 '14 at 19:44










              • $begingroup$
                you could've just added a check to yield n / i only if i < n / i :)
                $endgroup$
                – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
                Aug 24 '14 at 19:48














              13












              13








              13





              $begingroup$

              Your first problem is that you're trying to cram too much information onto one line. As a result, you loose the overview. Here is a simple refactoring:



              def is_abundant(n):
              max_divisor = int(n / 2) + 1
              sum = 0
              for x in range(1, max_divisor):
              if n % x == 0:
              sum += x
              return sum > n

              abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if is_abundant(x))

              sums = 0
              for i in range(12, 28123):
              for abundant in abundants:
              if abundant >= i and is_abundant(i + abundant):
              sums += i
              print(sums)



              • The == True tests are unecessary and were removed.

              • Naming was improved: isabundantis_abundant.

              • The long statement in is_abundant was split up.


              Now we can think about how this could be optimized.



              One subproblem is calculating all divisors of a number. We could put the relevant code into its own function. We can furthermore exploit that if n % i == 0, then there must be another integer k so that n == i * k. This means that we only have to look at a lot less numbers: only the range(2, 1 + int(sqrt(n))) is interesting.



              def divisors(n):
              """
              Returns all nontrivial divisors of an integer, but makes no guarantees on the order.
              """
              # "1" is always a divisor (at least for our purposes)
              yield 1

              largest = int(math.sqrt(n))

              # special-case square numbers to avoid yielding the same divisor twice
              if largest * largest == n:
              yield largest
              else:
              largest += 1

              # all other divisors
              for i in range(2, largest):
              if n % i == 0:
              yield i
              yield n / i


              We can now rewrite our is_abundant to the simpler:



              def is_abundant(n):
              if n < 12:
              return False
              return sum(divisors(n)) > n


              Later, in your main loop, you are doing a rather weird calculation. What were we supposed to do?




              Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.




              We furthermore know that all integers above 28123 can be written as such a sum. Thus we have to look at the range(1, 28123 + 1)! How can we decide if a number n can be written as a sum of abundant numbers i and k? There exists any abundant number i with the constraint i < n, and another abundant number with the constraints k < n and n - i == k. Here is one clever way to write this:



              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants_smaller_than_n:
              if (n - i) in abundants_smaller_than_n:
              return True
              return False


              Because we don't want to calculate the abundants_smaller_than_n each time, we just take all possible abundants and bail out if we get larger than n:



              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants:
              if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
              return False
              if (n - i) in abundants:
              return True
              return False


              where abundants = [x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if is_abundant(x)].



              Now, all that is left to do is to sum those numbers where this condition does not hold true:



              sum_of_non_abundants = sum(x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if not is_abundant_sum(x))


              We could perform one optimization: abundants is a list, which is an ordered data structure. If we search for an element that is not contained in the list, all elements would have to be searched. The set() data structure is faster, so:



              abundants_set = set(abundants)
              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants:
              if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
              return False
              if (n - i) in abundants_set:
              return True
              return False





              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$



              Your first problem is that you're trying to cram too much information onto one line. As a result, you loose the overview. Here is a simple refactoring:



              def is_abundant(n):
              max_divisor = int(n / 2) + 1
              sum = 0
              for x in range(1, max_divisor):
              if n % x == 0:
              sum += x
              return sum > n

              abundants = list(x for x in range(1, 28123) if is_abundant(x))

              sums = 0
              for i in range(12, 28123):
              for abundant in abundants:
              if abundant >= i and is_abundant(i + abundant):
              sums += i
              print(sums)



              • The == True tests are unecessary and were removed.

              • Naming was improved: isabundantis_abundant.

              • The long statement in is_abundant was split up.


              Now we can think about how this could be optimized.



              One subproblem is calculating all divisors of a number. We could put the relevant code into its own function. We can furthermore exploit that if n % i == 0, then there must be another integer k so that n == i * k. This means that we only have to look at a lot less numbers: only the range(2, 1 + int(sqrt(n))) is interesting.



              def divisors(n):
              """
              Returns all nontrivial divisors of an integer, but makes no guarantees on the order.
              """
              # "1" is always a divisor (at least for our purposes)
              yield 1

              largest = int(math.sqrt(n))

              # special-case square numbers to avoid yielding the same divisor twice
              if largest * largest == n:
              yield largest
              else:
              largest += 1

              # all other divisors
              for i in range(2, largest):
              if n % i == 0:
              yield i
              yield n / i


              We can now rewrite our is_abundant to the simpler:



              def is_abundant(n):
              if n < 12:
              return False
              return sum(divisors(n)) > n


              Later, in your main loop, you are doing a rather weird calculation. What were we supposed to do?




              Find the sum of all the positive integers which cannot be written as the sum of two abundant numbers.




              We furthermore know that all integers above 28123 can be written as such a sum. Thus we have to look at the range(1, 28123 + 1)! How can we decide if a number n can be written as a sum of abundant numbers i and k? There exists any abundant number i with the constraint i < n, and another abundant number with the constraints k < n and n - i == k. Here is one clever way to write this:



              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants_smaller_than_n:
              if (n - i) in abundants_smaller_than_n:
              return True
              return False


              Because we don't want to calculate the abundants_smaller_than_n each time, we just take all possible abundants and bail out if we get larger than n:



              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants:
              if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
              return False
              if (n - i) in abundants:
              return True
              return False


              where abundants = [x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if is_abundant(x)].



              Now, all that is left to do is to sum those numbers where this condition does not hold true:



              sum_of_non_abundants = sum(x for x in range(1, 28123 + 1) if not is_abundant_sum(x))


              We could perform one optimization: abundants is a list, which is an ordered data structure. If we search for an element that is not contained in the list, all elements would have to be searched. The set() data structure is faster, so:



              abundants_set = set(abundants)
              def is_abundant_sum(n):
              for i in abundants:
              if i > n: # assume "abundants" is ordered
              return False
              if (n - i) in abundants_set:
              return True
              return False






              share|improve this answer














              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer








              edited Aug 24 '14 at 19:41

























              answered Jan 24 '14 at 10:42









              amonamon

              11.9k3066




              11.9k3066








              • 2




                $begingroup$
                Your code is not working.
                $endgroup$
                – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
                Aug 24 '14 at 18:25










              • $begingroup$
                @MohammadAreebSiddiqui Thanks for pointing that out. It seems I was too distracted by interesting number theory to write a correct divisors() implementation. That's kind of embarrassing. Anyway, it's fixed now and passed the projecteuler.net test.
                $endgroup$
                – amon
                Aug 24 '14 at 19:44










              • $begingroup$
                you could've just added a check to yield n / i only if i < n / i :)
                $endgroup$
                – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
                Aug 24 '14 at 19:48














              • 2




                $begingroup$
                Your code is not working.
                $endgroup$
                – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
                Aug 24 '14 at 18:25










              • $begingroup$
                @MohammadAreebSiddiqui Thanks for pointing that out. It seems I was too distracted by interesting number theory to write a correct divisors() implementation. That's kind of embarrassing. Anyway, it's fixed now and passed the projecteuler.net test.
                $endgroup$
                – amon
                Aug 24 '14 at 19:44










              • $begingroup$
                you could've just added a check to yield n / i only if i < n / i :)
                $endgroup$
                – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
                Aug 24 '14 at 19:48








              2




              2




              $begingroup$
              Your code is not working.
              $endgroup$
              – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
              Aug 24 '14 at 18:25




              $begingroup$
              Your code is not working.
              $endgroup$
              – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
              Aug 24 '14 at 18:25












              $begingroup$
              @MohammadAreebSiddiqui Thanks for pointing that out. It seems I was too distracted by interesting number theory to write a correct divisors() implementation. That's kind of embarrassing. Anyway, it's fixed now and passed the projecteuler.net test.
              $endgroup$
              – amon
              Aug 24 '14 at 19:44




              $begingroup$
              @MohammadAreebSiddiqui Thanks for pointing that out. It seems I was too distracted by interesting number theory to write a correct divisors() implementation. That's kind of embarrassing. Anyway, it's fixed now and passed the projecteuler.net test.
              $endgroup$
              – amon
              Aug 24 '14 at 19:44












              $begingroup$
              you could've just added a check to yield n / i only if i < n / i :)
              $endgroup$
              – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
              Aug 24 '14 at 19:48




              $begingroup$
              you could've just added a check to yield n / i only if i < n / i :)
              $endgroup$
              – Mohammad Areeb Siddiqui
              Aug 24 '14 at 19:48













              3












              $begingroup$

              A simple optimization would be to do this instead of iterating trough every single division:



              def GetSumOfDivs(n):
              i = 2
              upper = n
              total = 1
              while i < upper:
              if n%i == 0:
              upper = n/i
              total += upper
              if upper != i: total += i
              i += 1
              return total


              then you can check if the returned value is greater than the actual number to populate your list.



              this works like this:
              lets say you want to get the sum of the divisors of 28...
              instead of iterating through each number:
              +1, +2, +4, +7, +14 it will add 2 numbers at once like this:
              3, +4+7, +14 because you keep decreasing the upper limit for the loop for each divisor.



              keep in mind that for low numbers it will actually take more time to run through, but for big number you have a massive improvement.



              Time difference: (19.381) - (11.419) = 7.962 seconds faster while generating the abundant list



              another optimization is to search in the already generated list of abundants instead of checking if the number is abundant all over again, but you should use a dictionary instead of a list to make the search substantially faster.



              My solution to your problem:



              def GetSumOfDivs(n):
              i = 2
              upper = n
              total = 1
              while i < upper:
              if n%i == 0:
              upper = n/i
              total += upper
              if upper != i: total += i
              i += 1
              return total


              def isabundant(n): return GetSumOfDivs(n) > n
              lAbundants = [x for x in range(12, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True]
              dAbundants = {x:x for x in lAbundants}

              sums = 1
              for i in range(2, 28123):
              boo = True
              for k in lAbundants:
              if k < i:
              if (i-k) in dAbundants:
              boo = False
              break
              else : break
              if boo == True: sums += i

              print(sums)


              Why a list and a dictionary? the list is ordered and the dictionary for fast indexing.



              Total execution time: 12.08 seconds



              now try it in C++... I'm sure its under 2 seconds... XD good luck






              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$


















                3












                $begingroup$

                A simple optimization would be to do this instead of iterating trough every single division:



                def GetSumOfDivs(n):
                i = 2
                upper = n
                total = 1
                while i < upper:
                if n%i == 0:
                upper = n/i
                total += upper
                if upper != i: total += i
                i += 1
                return total


                then you can check if the returned value is greater than the actual number to populate your list.



                this works like this:
                lets say you want to get the sum of the divisors of 28...
                instead of iterating through each number:
                +1, +2, +4, +7, +14 it will add 2 numbers at once like this:
                3, +4+7, +14 because you keep decreasing the upper limit for the loop for each divisor.



                keep in mind that for low numbers it will actually take more time to run through, but for big number you have a massive improvement.



                Time difference: (19.381) - (11.419) = 7.962 seconds faster while generating the abundant list



                another optimization is to search in the already generated list of abundants instead of checking if the number is abundant all over again, but you should use a dictionary instead of a list to make the search substantially faster.



                My solution to your problem:



                def GetSumOfDivs(n):
                i = 2
                upper = n
                total = 1
                while i < upper:
                if n%i == 0:
                upper = n/i
                total += upper
                if upper != i: total += i
                i += 1
                return total


                def isabundant(n): return GetSumOfDivs(n) > n
                lAbundants = [x for x in range(12, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True]
                dAbundants = {x:x for x in lAbundants}

                sums = 1
                for i in range(2, 28123):
                boo = True
                for k in lAbundants:
                if k < i:
                if (i-k) in dAbundants:
                boo = False
                break
                else : break
                if boo == True: sums += i

                print(sums)


                Why a list and a dictionary? the list is ordered and the dictionary for fast indexing.



                Total execution time: 12.08 seconds



                now try it in C++... I'm sure its under 2 seconds... XD good luck






                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$
















                  3












                  3








                  3





                  $begingroup$

                  A simple optimization would be to do this instead of iterating trough every single division:



                  def GetSumOfDivs(n):
                  i = 2
                  upper = n
                  total = 1
                  while i < upper:
                  if n%i == 0:
                  upper = n/i
                  total += upper
                  if upper != i: total += i
                  i += 1
                  return total


                  then you can check if the returned value is greater than the actual number to populate your list.



                  this works like this:
                  lets say you want to get the sum of the divisors of 28...
                  instead of iterating through each number:
                  +1, +2, +4, +7, +14 it will add 2 numbers at once like this:
                  3, +4+7, +14 because you keep decreasing the upper limit for the loop for each divisor.



                  keep in mind that for low numbers it will actually take more time to run through, but for big number you have a massive improvement.



                  Time difference: (19.381) - (11.419) = 7.962 seconds faster while generating the abundant list



                  another optimization is to search in the already generated list of abundants instead of checking if the number is abundant all over again, but you should use a dictionary instead of a list to make the search substantially faster.



                  My solution to your problem:



                  def GetSumOfDivs(n):
                  i = 2
                  upper = n
                  total = 1
                  while i < upper:
                  if n%i == 0:
                  upper = n/i
                  total += upper
                  if upper != i: total += i
                  i += 1
                  return total


                  def isabundant(n): return GetSumOfDivs(n) > n
                  lAbundants = [x for x in range(12, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True]
                  dAbundants = {x:x for x in lAbundants}

                  sums = 1
                  for i in range(2, 28123):
                  boo = True
                  for k in lAbundants:
                  if k < i:
                  if (i-k) in dAbundants:
                  boo = False
                  break
                  else : break
                  if boo == True: sums += i

                  print(sums)


                  Why a list and a dictionary? the list is ordered and the dictionary for fast indexing.



                  Total execution time: 12.08 seconds



                  now try it in C++... I'm sure its under 2 seconds... XD good luck






                  share|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  A simple optimization would be to do this instead of iterating trough every single division:



                  def GetSumOfDivs(n):
                  i = 2
                  upper = n
                  total = 1
                  while i < upper:
                  if n%i == 0:
                  upper = n/i
                  total += upper
                  if upper != i: total += i
                  i += 1
                  return total


                  then you can check if the returned value is greater than the actual number to populate your list.



                  this works like this:
                  lets say you want to get the sum of the divisors of 28...
                  instead of iterating through each number:
                  +1, +2, +4, +7, +14 it will add 2 numbers at once like this:
                  3, +4+7, +14 because you keep decreasing the upper limit for the loop for each divisor.



                  keep in mind that for low numbers it will actually take more time to run through, but for big number you have a massive improvement.



                  Time difference: (19.381) - (11.419) = 7.962 seconds faster while generating the abundant list



                  another optimization is to search in the already generated list of abundants instead of checking if the number is abundant all over again, but you should use a dictionary instead of a list to make the search substantially faster.



                  My solution to your problem:



                  def GetSumOfDivs(n):
                  i = 2
                  upper = n
                  total = 1
                  while i < upper:
                  if n%i == 0:
                  upper = n/i
                  total += upper
                  if upper != i: total += i
                  i += 1
                  return total


                  def isabundant(n): return GetSumOfDivs(n) > n
                  lAbundants = [x for x in range(12, 28123) if isabundant(x) == True]
                  dAbundants = {x:x for x in lAbundants}

                  sums = 1
                  for i in range(2, 28123):
                  boo = True
                  for k in lAbundants:
                  if k < i:
                  if (i-k) in dAbundants:
                  boo = False
                  break
                  else : break
                  if boo == True: sums += i

                  print(sums)


                  Why a list and a dictionary? the list is ordered and the dictionary for fast indexing.



                  Total execution time: 12.08 seconds



                  now try it in C++... I'm sure its under 2 seconds... XD good luck







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Sep 20 '16 at 20:38

























                  answered Sep 20 '16 at 19:42









                  WCamposWCampos

                  312




                  312























                      0












                      $begingroup$

                      Nayuki's method of calculating the abundants is twice as fast. However Mohammeds method of calculating the sums is much faster than Nayuki's. Putting both of these together my time for the calculation was ~ 0.5 secs.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      $endgroup$


















                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        Nayuki's method of calculating the abundants is twice as fast. However Mohammeds method of calculating the sums is much faster than Nayuki's. Putting both of these together my time for the calculation was ~ 0.5 secs.






                        share|improve this answer








                        New contributor




                        Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                        $endgroup$
















                          0












                          0








                          0





                          $begingroup$

                          Nayuki's method of calculating the abundants is twice as fast. However Mohammeds method of calculating the sums is much faster than Nayuki's. Putting both of these together my time for the calculation was ~ 0.5 secs.






                          share|improve this answer








                          New contributor




                          Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






                          $endgroup$



                          Nayuki's method of calculating the abundants is twice as fast. However Mohammeds method of calculating the sums is much faster than Nayuki's. Putting both of these together my time for the calculation was ~ 0.5 secs.







                          share|improve this answer








                          New contributor




                          Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.









                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer






                          New contributor




                          Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.









                          answered 16 mins ago









                          ArnoldArnold

                          1




                          1




                          New contributor




                          Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.





                          New contributor





                          Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






                          Arnold is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






























                              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%2f39946%2foptimizing-solution-for-project-euler-problem-23-non-abundant-sums%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'