The behavior at x=6174 is artifically set to 0, which taints the pure-recursive solution, but hey it was cool problem!
The K constant is 495 for 3 digits.
So the test with 691 is wrong.
Why tests with only one digit ?
Did I miss something ?
I don't understand the Test Suite for x = 3 and x = 1 too. what should I do in this case?
For x=3, the steps are 3000-0003=2997, 9972-2799=7173, etc.
Problem description is confusing as there are different Kaprekar constants depending on the number of digits. [0 9 495 6174 for 1, 2,3 4 digits respectively.
getting this error:
Internal Server Error - Read
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
The problem should specify that any number with less than four digits should be filled up to four digits with leading zeros. (e.g. 3 -> 0003)
Very nice and interesting problem!
I like the recursion aspect of this problem.
There is a small correction needed in the problem statement. Not all natural numbers, but 4 digit numbers can be reduced to Kaprekar number by the mentioned method. Similarly 3 digit numbers can be reduced to 495
How it works x = 1？？？？？
For those confused with test cases 2,3 and 5, like myself before, do conversion to 4-digit integer. Here is an example:
x = 1:
1000-0001 = 999
9990-0999 = 8991
9981-1899 = 8082
8820-0288 = 8532
8532-2358 = 6174
Therefore, y_correct = 5
Very nice. Took some few minutes to crack this.
What I did is to convert x into string and then use sort function.
function y = KaprekarSteps(x)
while dif ~=6174
The test suite doesn't match the problem description - how can the answer to test two be 5?
Cheated with 1...:
1000 - 0001 = 999.
999 - 999 = 0
y = inf;
How it works with x = 3, x = 691, x = 1?
This works for all but test 3 where it gives, in my opinion, the correct answer 8.
But zero is not sorted in this solution. You should get same answer for input x = 691 and 6910. (And then no need for abs())
This has been the lamest test so far. You need to pad the numbers with zeros to build it up to be a 4 digit number. Not explained in the rules.
Not all test cases seem to be correct. For example x=3 would imply that the next value should be x=3-3=0, so y_correct=Inf and not 6
An efficient lookup table solution
Interesting - a recursive approach
Could you stop doing this kind of thing? I think it would be a lot more fun if we could see the _actual_ best solution..
Back to basics 1 - Saving
Who knows the last digit of pi?
Back to basics 18 - justification
Say something funny
Back to basics - mean of corner elements of a matrix
Test for balanced parentheses
Find the peak 3n+1 sequence value
Given two strings, find the maximum overlap
Most nonzero elements in row
Choose a web site to get translated content where available and see local events and offers. Based on your location, we recommend that you select: .
You can also select a web site from the following list:
Select the China site (in Chinese or English) for best site performance. Other MathWorks country sites are not optimized for visits from your location.
Contact your local office