Day 23: LAN Party
Megathread guidelines
- Keep top level comments as only solutions, if you want to say something other than a solution put it in a new post. (replies to comments can be whatever)
- You can send code in code blocks by using three backticks, the code, and then three backticks or use something such as https://topaz.github.io/paste/ if you prefer sending it through a URL
FAQ
- What is this?: Here is a post with a large amount of details: https://programming.dev/post/6637268
- Where do I participate?: https://adventofcode.com/
- Is there a leaderboard for the community?: We have a programming.dev leaderboard with the info on how to join in this post: https://programming.dev/post/6631465
deleted by creator
Dart
A little bit of googling, a little bit of Wikipedia, and so a little bit of
gave me the following which takes about 300ms.
import 'package:collection/collection.dart'; import 'package:more/more.dart'; SetMultimap<String, String> getNodes(List<String> lines) { var nodes = SetMultimap<String, String>(); for (var l in lines) { var p = l.split('-'); nodes[p.first].add(p.last); nodes[p.last].add(p.first); } return nodes; } part1(List<String> lines) { var nodes = getNodes(lines); var ts = nodes.keys.where((e) => e.startsWith('t')); var ret = <String>[]; for (var t in ts) { ret.addAll(nodes[t] .combinations(2) .where((e) => nodes[e.first].contains(e.last)) .map((e) => (([t] + e)..sort()).toString())); } return ret.toSet().length; } part2(List<String> lines) { var nodes = getNodes(lines); Iterable<Set<String>> useBK1( Set<String> R, Set<String> P, Set<String> X) sync* { if (P.isEmpty && X.isEmpty) { yield R; return; } for (var v in P.toSet()) { yield* useBK1(R.toSet()..add(v), P.intersection(nodes[v]), X.intersection(nodes[v])); P.remove(v); X.add(v); } } var vs = nodes.keys.toSet()..addAll(nodes.values.deepFlatten()); var ret = useBK1({}, vs, {}).toList(); var max = ret.map((e) => e.length).max; return ret.firstWhere((e) => e.length == max).sorted().join(','); }
Kotlin
Part1 was pretty simple, just check all neighbors of a node for overlap, then filter out triples which don’t have nodes beginning with ‘t’.
For part2, I seem to have picked a completely different strategy to everyone else. I was a bit lost, then just boldly assumed, that if I take overlap of all triples with 1 equal node, I might be able to find the answer that way. To my surprise, this worked for my input. I’d be very curious to know if I just got lucky or if the puzzle is designed to work with this approach.
The full code is also on GitHub.
Solution
class Day23 : Puzzle { private val connections = ArrayList<Pair<String, String>>() private val tripleCache = HashSet<Triple<String, String, String>>() override fun readFile() { val input = readInputFromFile("src/main/resources/day23.txt") for (line in input.lines()) { val parts = line.split("-") connections.add(Pair(parts[0], parts[1])) } } override fun solvePartOne(): String { val triples = getConnectionTriples(connections) tripleCache.addAll(triples) // for part 2 val res = triples.count { it.first.startsWith("t") || it.second.startsWith("t") || it.third.startsWith("t") } return res.toString() } private fun getConnectionTriples(connectionList: List<Pair<String, String>>): List<Triple<String, String, String>> { val triples = ArrayList<Triple<String, String, String>>() for (connection in connectionList) { val connectionListTemp = getAllConnections(connection.first, connectionList) for (i in connectionListTemp.indices) { for (j in i + 1 until connectionListTemp.size) { val con1 = connectionListTemp[i] val con2 = connectionListTemp[j] if (Pair(con1, con2) in connectionList || Pair(con2, con1) in connectionList) { val tripleList = mutableListOf(connection.first, con1, con2) tripleList.sort() triples.add(Triple(tripleList[0], tripleList[1], tripleList[2])) } } } } return triples.distinct() } private fun getAllConnections(connection: String, connectionList: List<Pair<String, String>>): List<String> { val res = HashSet<String>() for (entry in connectionList) { when (connection) { entry.first -> res.add(entry.second) entry.second -> res.add(entry.first) } } return res.toList() } override fun solvePartTwo(): String { val pools = getPools(connections) println(pools) val res = pools.maxByOrNull { it.size }!! return res.joinToString(",") } // will get all pools with a minimum size of 4 // this method makes some naive assumptions, but works for the example and my puzzle input private fun getPools(connectionList: List<Pair<String, String>>): List<List<String>> { val pools = ArrayList<List<String>>() val triples = tripleCache val nodes = connectionList.map { listOf(it.first, it.second) }.flatten().toHashSet() for (node in nodes) { val contenders = triples.filter { it.first == node || it.second == node || it.third == node } if (contenders.size < 2) continue // expect the minimum result to be 4, for efficiency // if *all* nodes within *all* triples are interconnected, add to pool // this may not work for all inputs! val contenderList = contenders.map { listOf(it.first, it.second, it.third) }.flatten().distinct() if (checkAllConnections(contenderList, connectionList)) { pools.add(contenderList.sorted()) } } return pools.distinct() } private fun checkAllConnections(pool: List<String>, connectionList: List<Pair<String, String>>): Boolean { for (i in pool.indices) { for (j in i + 1 until pool.size) { val con1 = pool[i] val con2 = pool[j] if (Pair(con1, con2) !in connectionList && Pair(con2, con1) !in connectionList) { return false } } } return true } }
That’s a fun approach. The largest totally connected group will of course contain overlapping triples, so I think you’re effectively doing the same thing as checking a node at a time, just more efficiently.
Haskell
The solution for part two could now be used for part one as well but then I would have to rewrite part 1 .-.
import Control.Arrow import Data.Ord (comparing) import qualified Data.List as List import qualified Data.Map as Map import qualified Data.Set as Set parse = Map.fromListWith Set.union . List.map (second Set.singleton) . uncurry (++) . (id &&& List.map (uncurry (flip (,)))) . map (break (== '-') >>> second (drop 1)) . takeWhile (/= "") . lines depthSearch connections ps | length ps == 4 && head ps == last ps = [ps] | length ps == 4 = [] | otherwise = head >>> (connections Map.!) >>> Set.toList >>> List.map (:ps) >>> List.concatMap (depthSearch connections) $ ps interconnections (computer, connections) = depthSearch connections [computer] part1 = (Map.assocs &&& repeat) >>> first (List.map (uncurry Set.insert)) >>> first (Set.toList . Set.unions) >>> uncurry zip >>> List.concatMap interconnections >>> List.map (Set.fromList . take 3) >>> List.filter (Set.fold (List.head >>> (== 't') >>> (||)) False) >>> Set.fromList >>> Set.size getLANParty computer connections = (connections Map.!) >>> findLanPartyComponent connections [computer] $ computer filterCandidates connections participants candidates = List.map (connections Map.!) >>> List.foldl Set.intersection candidates >>> Set.filter ((connections Map.!) >>> \ s -> List.all (flip Set.member s) participants) $ participants findLanPartyComponent connections participants candidates | Set.null validParticipants = participants | otherwise = findLanPartyComponent connections (nextParticipant : participants) (Set.delete nextParticipant candidates) where nextParticipant = Set.findMin validParticipants validParticipants = filterCandidates connections participants candidates part2 = (Map.keys &&& repeat) >>> uncurry zip >>> List.map ((uncurry getLANParty) >>> List.sort) >>> List.nub >>> List.maximumBy (comparing List.length) >>> List.intercalate "," main = getContents >>= print . (part1 &&& part2) . parse
The solution for part two could now be used for part one as well but then I would have to rewrite part 1 .-.
I initially thought that, but now I reconsider I’m not so sure. Isn’t it possible to have a 3-member clique overlapping two larger ones? In other words, there could be more than one way to partition the graph into completely connected components. Which means my solution to part 2 is technically incorrect. Bummer.
There probably are multiple ways to partition the graph. I haven’t applied any optimizations and my program checks members of already detected groups again, would that yield all possible partitions because I choose all the possible starting points for a k-clique?
Rust
Finding cliques in a graph, which is actually NP-comlete. For part two I did look up how to do it and implemented the Bron-Kerbosch algorithm. Adding the pivoting optimization improved the runtime from 134ms to 7.4ms, so that is definitely worth it (in some sense, of course I already had the correct answer without pivoting).
Solution
use rustc_hash::{FxHashMap, FxHashSet}; fn parse(input: &str) -> (Vec<Vec<usize>>, FxHashMap<&str, usize>) { let mut graph = Vec::new(); let mut names: FxHashMap<&str, usize> = FxHashMap::default(); for l in input.lines() { let (vs, ws) = l.split_once('-').unwrap(); let v = *names.entry(vs).or_insert_with(|| { graph.push(vec![]); graph.len() - 1 }); let w = *names.entry(ws).or_insert_with(|| { graph.push(vec![]); graph.len() - 1 }); graph[v].push(w); graph[w].push(v); } (graph, names) } fn part1(input: String) { let (graph, names) = parse(&input); let mut triples: FxHashSet<[usize; 3]> = FxHashSet::default(); for (_, &v) in names.iter().filter(|(name, _)| name.starts_with('t')) { for (i, &u) in graph[v].iter().enumerate().skip(1) { for w in graph[v].iter().take(i) { if graph[u].contains(w) { let mut triple = [u, v, *w]; triple.sort(); triples.insert(triple); } } } } println!("{}", triples.len()); } // Bron-Kerbosch algorithm for finding all maximal cliques in a graph fn bron_kerbosch( graph: &[Vec<usize>], r: &mut Vec<usize>, mut p: FxHashSet<usize>, mut x: FxHashSet<usize>, ) -> Vec<Vec<usize>> { if p.is_empty() && x.is_empty() { return vec![r.to_vec()]; } let mut maximal_cliques = Vec::new(); let Some(&u) = p.iter().next() else { return maximal_cliques; }; let mut p_pivot = p.clone(); for w in &graph[u] { p_pivot.remove(w); } for v in p_pivot { let pn = graph[v].iter().filter(|w| p.contains(w)).copied().collect(); let xn = graph[v].iter().filter(|w| x.contains(w)).copied().collect(); r.push(v); let new_cliques = bron_kerbosch(graph, r, pn, xn); r.pop(); maximal_cliques.extend(new_cliques); p.remove(&v); x.insert(v); } maximal_cliques } fn part2(input: String) { let (graph, names) = parse(&input); let p = (0..graph.len()).collect(); let mut r = Vec::new(); let maximal_cliques = bron_kerbosch(&graph, &mut r, p, FxHashSet::default()); let maximum_clique = maximal_cliques .iter() .max_by_key(|clique| clique.len()) .unwrap(); let mut lan_names: Vec<&str> = names .iter() .filter(|(_, v)| maximum_clique.contains(v)) .map(|(name, _)| *name) .collect(); lan_names.sort_unstable(); println!("{}", lan_names.join(",")); } util::aoc_main!();
Also on github
Haskell
I was expecting a very difficult graph theory problem at first glance, but this one was actually pretty easy too!
import Data.Bifunctor import Data.List import Data.Ord import Data.Set qualified as Set views :: [a] -> [(a, [a])] views [] = [] views (x : xs) = (x, xs) : (second (x :) <$> views xs) choose :: Int -> [a] -> [[a]] choose 0 _ = [[]] choose _ [] = [] choose n (x : xs) = ((x :) <$> choose (n - 1) xs) ++ choose n xs removeConnectedGroup connected = fmap (uncurry go . first Set.singleton) . Set.minView where go group hosts = maybe (group, hosts) (\h -> go (Set.insert h group) (Set.delete h hosts)) $ find (flip all group . connected) hosts main = do net <- Set.fromList . map (second tail . break (== '-')) . lines <$> readFile "input23" let hosts = Set.fromList $ [fst, snd] <*> Set.elems net connected a b = any (`Set.member` net) [(a, b), (b, a)] complete = all (uncurry $ all . connected) . views print . length . filter complete . filter (any ((== 't') . head)) $ choose 3 (Set.elems hosts) putStrLn . (intercalate "," . Set.toAscList) . maximumBy (comparing Set.size) . unfoldr (removeConnectedGroup connected) $ hosts ``