|
Actually i want detailed stuff i.e. theory, Calculating order etc. I've to implement it in my project.
|
|
|
|
|
And none of the 6360 hits for bin packing algorithm that come up on Google helped you any?
If you don't have the data, you're just another a**hole with an opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I've found some good stuff but all are paid.
1
2
3
I want some free stuff for study purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
Does this [^] help?
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
2489128 wrote: I want some free stuff for study purpose.
Then you needed to be more specific in your question. Your question essentially came across as I have a homework assignment that involves the bin packing algorithm and you're too lazy to even look it up. You didn't tell us what you knew or didn't know. There was no specific question.
If you don't have the data, you're just another a**hole with an opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
You may also try to implement it using Simulated Annealing [^].
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Craig wrote: none of the 6360 hits for bin packing algorithm that come up on Google helped you any?
Certainly there has to be something useful in those 6360 results 
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Conrad wrote: Certainly there has to be something useful in those 6360 results
I learned more about it than I wanted to from the first one, the Wikipedia article. 
If you don't have the data, you're just another a**hole with an opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Which part? Where it says that it is a combinatorial NP-hard problem?
OT: Now only if google could help me figure out why Access won't work with a .dll I registered grrrrrrrrr
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Conrad wrote: Where it says that it is a combinatorial NP-hard problem?
Pretty much. I actually worked on a project that did order picking of product from a carousel system to bins about 20 or so years ago. Fortunately, I got to work on more interesting parts of it and then went off to better problems.
Paul Conrad wrote: why Access won't work
Microsoft? 
If you don't have the data, you're just another a**hole with an opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Craig wrote: Microsoft? [Poke tongue]
Uh huh. The bastard works locally, but once I try to run the database over the network, it freaks out over the .dll, registered and everything. Nothing like doing a demo to the client, selling them on it, and now it craps.
They heard plenty of ranting and raving about Access today before this project 
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
The way the searching goes these days, maybe the cure for cancer... Or one of those fake websites that plauge google and pops up with people offering to pack your bins. Who knows? Google doesn't .
He who asks a question is a fool for five minutes. He who does not ask a question remains a fool forever. [Chineese Proverb]
Jonathan C Dickinson (C# Software Engineer)
|
|
|
|
|
I have solved FDIST in C#. now I have to find FINV
Which Returns the inverse of the F probability distribution. If p = FDIST(x,...), then FINV(p,...) = x.
Any idea about this. how to find inverse of the F probability distribution
Syntax
FINV(probability,degrees_freedom1,degrees_freedom2)
Probability is a probability associated with the F cumulative distribution.
Degrees_freedom1 is the numerator degrees of freedom.
Degrees_freedom2 is the denominator degrees of freedom.
thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
Follow the same steps you did before with the FDIST. Research for the algorithm how to do it, find code implementing the algorithm, and code yours.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
I Didn't Find any algorithm related to finv anywhere.
except that
FINV depends on precision of FDIST. FINV uses an iterative search technique. If the search has not converged after 100 iterations, the function returns the #N/A error value.
now i dont know how to do these iterations using FDIST?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does it work as well as the one in Excel?
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Very nice. Have you considered writing an article about what you have been doing lately with all of these statistics problem you have been encountering?
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I've a problem with the proper conversion of double to it's string representation.
For example.
If I've in the code some double value:
double a = 69000.015;
the debugger in debug window will show 69000.014999999999 but not 69000.015
Generally I need the precision and number of significant digits for the conversion.
For sprintf(...) I have to specify the precision and specifier.
How can I get the correct precision of the double value?
Is there any solution/clases for this type of conversion?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
there is simply no solution to your problem. Floating point numbers, by their very nature, cannot always represent the intended value.
The simplest example is the outcome of 1.0/3.0
humans write it down as 0.333333..., computers perform the division in binary and get a reasonably
accurate quotient (say off by no more than 1 of the lowest bit position), which is after all
an approximation.
The binary approximation of 1/3 is something like 1/4 + 1/16 + 1/64 + 1/256 + ...
and it has to stop somewhere since there are only so many bits reserved for the mantissa.
Similar things will happen to almost all real numbers; in order to avoid it, the number must
happen to be an integer value possibly divided by a power of two.
Hence 1.0/4.0, 7.0/4.0, 23.0/256.0 etc can be represented exactly,
whereas numbers with a prime factor (other than 2) in the denominator will not be exact,
nor will irrational numbers (such as pi, or the square root of 2).
If you know how many decimals (i.e. digits behind the decimal point) are required to get an exact
representation, then order that number of decimals or fewer. Rounding will occur, and everything
will look very natural.
If you don't know the number of decimals required and care very much about the correctness of them,
say you start your own financial program or business, then you'd better have a look at the decimal type. It offers a smaller range of numbers, but in some sense a better accuracy.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Luc for the answer,
but unfortunally I'm not a Fortran developer, I do Visual C++ which do not have a decimal type.
But the 69000.015 is non preiodical double(not like 1/3=0.333333...) and internal CPU's data register representation will be a particular correspondent binary. I'm not a pro in math, but for me seems like it needs some analysis of the binary representation to get a precision.
|
|
|
|
|
This page [^]may show the internal representation of a decimal number as double.
It comes out, that 69000.015 is represented with 40F0D8803D70A3D,
i.e. 1.0528566741943360 as significand and 16 as exponent.
If you put the above number in windows calculator then you'll get:
1.0528566741943360 * 2^16 = 1,0528566741943360 * 65536 = 69000.0150000000040960
probably not exactly what is expected by you.
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler.
-- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong.
-- Iain Clarke
[My articles]
|
|
|
|
|
No real simple solution due to the way floating point numbers are represented in binary form. You'll always have some odd round off to deal with.
You could always try using the Decimal type...
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
You won't always have round off to deal with. Binary fractions like 1/2, 1/4, 3/4, 1/8, etc. can be exactly represented as a double. But you're right that most numbers can't (assuming that the word "most" can be used of an infinite set).
The reason we put up with the inexactness is that exactness doesn't exist in the physical world. If a piece of wood is "2.4 meters long", it's really "2.4 meters give or take a millimeter" (which would be written as "2.400" to emphasize this). So, then, what difference does it make if your computer represents the length as 2.399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375 m, off by a mere 8.88e-17 m, when the physical accuracy is nowhere near that good?
The one exception is money. If something costs $3.99, it costs exactly $3.99, not $3.9900000000000002. If the sales tax is 8.25%, it's exactly 8.25%, not 8.2500000000000004%. And, because we use decimal currency, Decimal classes are often used for monetary amounts.
You could use it as a general-purpose number class, but:
(1) It's not a panacea for rounding error. You still have to deal with 1/3 + 2/3 != 1.
(2) Due to the lack of hardware support, it's much slower than binary floats.
Therefore, I wouldn't just blindly recommend "use Decimal". If your only complaint with float or double is the string representation, then just use a smaller precision in sprintf or string.Format or the equivalent in your favorite language. (15 digits in the 'g' format will usually get the job done.)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
