Drew Wutka
DWUTKA at Marlow.com
Mon Apr 26 13:27:19 CDT 2010
That's not very helpful, where is my logic wrong?
Drew
-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of William
Hindman
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 11:30 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] OT: Friday Puzzles
...sweet logic ...and wrong :)
...there goes my code boy hero :(
William
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Drew Wutka" <DWUTKA at marlow.com>
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 10:58 AM
To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving"
<accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
Subject: Re: [AccessD] OT: Friday Puzzles
> Not possible that way....
>
> Look at it like this (visually):
>
> 100 soldiers.
>
> 70 lost an eye, so 30 did not lose an eye.
>
> 75 lost an ear, so 25 did not lose an ear.
>
> So let's look at this graphically, remember, we are looking at results
> for the same group of 100 soldiers, not different soldiers:
>
> 5| 10| 15| 20| 25| 30| 35| 40| 45| 50| 55| 60| 65| 70| 75| 80| 85|
90|
> 95|100|
> eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye| | | |
|
> | |
>
> Above, I have shown a 'graph' of sorts, that shows groups of five.
Now
> let's put in the ear group:
>
> 5| 10| 15| 20| 25| 30| 35| 40| 45| 50| 55| 60| 65| 70| 75| 80| 85|
90|
> 95|100|
> eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye| | | |
|
> | |
> ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear| | |
|
> | |
>
> Looking at it this way, we see that the MOST that have both is 70, and
> the most that have NOTHING is 25. But we don't care about who had
> nothing, having one or the other doesn't qualify for the generals
medal
> of having all 4 (though we are only looking at two right now)
> 'conditions'. So with just the first two conditions, what is the
least
> number that can have both? With our 'graph' here, we just have to
slide
> one of them to the other side, like this:
>
> 5| 10| 15| 20| 25| 30| 35| 40| 45| 50| 55| 60| 65| 70| 75| 80| 85|
90|
> 95|100|
> | | | | |
> |eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|
> ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear| | |
|
> | |
>
> Looking at it this way, we see that the minimum number that can have
> both conditions is 45. It doesn't matter how you span it, if you have
> 70% of a group with condition A, and 75% of the SAME group with
> condition B, you will have AT LEAST 45% of the group with BOTH
Condition
> A and Condition B. (So that's 100%-(%withoutA+%withoutB), or
> 100%-(30%+25%)=45%)
>
> If we add the other two conditions, again, it doesn't matter which way
> they slide on the scale, they are bigger than the first two
conditions,
> they will always overlap them:
>
> 5| 10| 15| 20| 25| 30| 35| 40| 45| 50| 55| 60| 65| 70| 75| 80| 85|
90|
> 95|100|
> | | | | |
> |eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|eye|
> ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear|ear| | |
|
> | |
> | | |
> |arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|arm|
> leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|leg|
|
> | |
>
> Still at the magic number of 45%. Now in Arthur's original post, he
did
> have a slight slip, by stating '85% of the soldiers had lost one leg',
> where the other three conditions all had clauses like 'at least one',
or
> 'at a minimum', but if we were to take that literally, it's a
> mathematical impossibility to have 85% only losing one leg (and
nothing
> else). To answer his riddle, he asks who, at a minimum, lost one eye,
> one ear, one arm, AND one leg, which is anywhere from 45% to 70%. The
> minimum to the maximum overlap of the conditions.
>
> This was a great puzzle for relational database developers. When it
> comes to Joins, we often thing of the overlapping circles, which
> represent different groups of data. But when it comes to data
metrics,
> we sometimes have to look at our joins in different ways. In this
case,
> 4 subsets all within one set. So Arthur's puzzle could easily have
been
> a task a developer would have to figure out for a client, here it is
in
> a real world example:
>
> Your client wants a database to track Returned Goods. There are 4
> possible conditions (A,B,C,D) in which a product will be returned.
RG's
> can be returned for any combination of A,B,C, or D. One of the
reports
> your client wants, is a report showing returned goods with all 4
> conditions, compared to the Max and Min that could have been returned
> with all four conditions based on the percentages returned with each
> condition. (ie, assuming Arthur's percentages, as RG reasons, and not
> injuries), a client might have 68% returned with all four conditions,
so
> the report would show that his returned goods are hitting all 4
> conditions on the higher end of the possible range.
>
> Drew
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Kevin
> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 1:24 PM
> To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] OT: Friday Puzzles
>
> OK...
> I would like to revise and extend my remarks...
> Assuming an army of 100, 10 lost all 4
>
> 70 lost an eye
> So 30 did NOT lose an eye
> 75 lost an ear
> So 25 did NOT lose an ear
> 80 lost an arm
> So 20 did NOT lose an arm
> 85 lost a leg
> So 15 did NOT lose an leg
>
> The soldiers that retained at least one of the body parts is 90
> (30+25+20+15
> = 90) meaning that 10 lost all 4.
>
> Kevin Waddle
> "The time has come," the Walrus said,
> "To talk of many things:
> Of shoes--and ships--and sealing-wax--
> Of cabbages--and kings--
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Shamil
> Salakhetdinov
> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 10:22 AM
> To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
> Subject: Re: [AccessD] OT: Friday Puzzles
>
> That's wrong, and a bit(?)/plain(?) stupid, sorry. Any, takers? (I'm
off
> till tomorrow's late evening/Monday).
>
> Thank you.
>
> --Shamil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shamil Salakhetdinov [mailto:shamil at smsconsulting.spb.ru]
> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 7:30 PM
> To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
> Subject: RE: [AccessD] OT: Friday Puzzles
>
> 8925 medals.
>
> Correct?
>
> x = size of the army
> y = qty of soldiers who have lost one arm, one leg, one ear and one
eye;
>
> y = 0.85*(1-0.8)*0.75*0.7x
>
> Assuming that army size is between 100,000+ and 150,000
> (
> http://www.secondworldwar.co.uk/units.html
> http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blchancommand.htm
> )
>
> the anwers would be
>
> foreach (int x in Enumerable.Range(100000,50001))
> {
> decimal y = 0.85m * (1.0m-0.8m) * 0.75m * 0.7m * x;
>
> if (y == (decimal)(int)y)
> Console.WriteLine("// SizeOfTheArmy={0:#,0}+, Medals={1} ",
> x, (decimal)(int)y);
> }
>
> // SizeOfTheArmy=100,000+, Medals=8925
> // SizeOfTheArmy=104,000+, Medals=9282
> // SizeOfTheArmy=108,000+, Medals=9639
> // SizeOfTheArmy=112,000+, Medals=9996
> // SizeOfTheArmy=116,000+, Medals=10353
> // SizeOfTheArmy=120,000+, Medals=10710
> // SizeOfTheArmy=124,000+, Medals=11067
> // SizeOfTheArmy=128,000+, Medals=11424
> // SizeOfTheArmy=132,000+, Medals=11781
> // SizeOfTheArmy=136,000+, Medals=12138
> // SizeOfTheArmy=140,000+, Medals=12495
> // SizeOfTheArmy=144,000+, Medals=12852
> // SizeOfTheArmy=148,000+, Medals=13209
>
> As we do not have the general's army size defined but we know that
> general
> wanted to reward teh fewest number of soldiers then we select the
> minimal
> appropriate army size = 100,000 soldiers, and then the answer will be
> 8925
> medals.
>
> Correct?
>
> Thank you.
>
> --Shamil
>
> <<< snip >>>
>
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> The information contained in this transmission is intended only for
the
> person or entity
> to which it is addressed and may contain II-VI Proprietary and/or
II-VI
> Business
> Sensitive material. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact
> the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether
electronic
> or hard copy.
> You are notified that any review, retransmission, copying, disclosure,
> dissemination,
> or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this
information
> by persons
> or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
>
>
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
--
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
The information contained in this transmission is intended only for the person or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain II-VI Proprietary and/or II-VI Business
Sensitive material. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy.
You are notified that any review, retransmission, copying, disclosure, dissemination,
or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons
or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.