Data Structures and Algorithms

Lecture notes: Algorithm paradigms: Dynamic

programming, Part 1

Lecturer: Michel Toulouse

Hanoi University of Science and Technology

michel.toulouse@soict.hust.edu.vn

15 mai 2021
Outline

Problems with divide-and-conquer

Introduction to dynamic programming

The making change problem
Optimal substructure

0-1 Knapsack Problem

Divide-&-conquer algorithms

Recursive algorithms like D&C have two phases :

1. A ”divide” phase where a problem instance is decomposed into
smaller instances
2. A ”conquer” phase where solutions to sub-problems are composed
into solutions of larger problems
Merge sort : recursive decomposition
During the divide phase of a divide-and-conquer algorithm like merge sort, problem
instances are recursively decomposed into subproblems.
For merge sort, a problem instance is array of integers to be sorted, which is then
recursively decomposed into subarrays.
Each subarray is a different problem instance, there are 14 problem instances, 14
arrays to be sorted, in the example below.
Mergesort(A[p..r ])
if p < r
q = b p+r
2
c
Mergesort(A[p..q])
Mergesort(A[q + 1..r ])
Merge(A, p, q, r )
Merge sort : the conquer phase

The conquer phase is executed by

the Merge() function
All the 14 problem instances are
sorted
First the arrays with a single
integer which are inherently
sorted
Then the arrays of size 1 are
merged together in sorted arrays
of size 2
Arrays of size 2 are merged into
sorted arrays of size 4, etc
Mergesort(A[p..r ])
if p < r
q = b p+r
2
c
Mergesort(A[p..q])
Mergesort(A[q + 1..r ])
Merge(A, p, q, r )
Problems with divide-and-conquer

During the divide part of divide-and-conquer some subproblems could

could be generated more than one time.

If subproblems are duplicated during the divide phase, then the

computation of the solution of the subproblems during the conquer
phase is also duplicated, solving the same subproblems several times
obviously yield very poor running times.
Example : D&C algo for computing the Fibonacci numbers

It is a sequence of integers. After the first two numbers in the

sequence, each other number is the sum of the two previous numbers
in the sequence :

1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89

The following divide-and-conquer algorithm computes the first n + 1

values of the Fibonacci sequence :

function Fib(n)
if (n ≤ 1) then return n ;
else
return Fib(n − 1) + Fib(n − 2)
Computing Fibonacci numbers

function Fib(n)
if (n ≤ 1) then return n ;
else
return(Fib(n − 1) + Fib(n − 2)) ;

First the following divide steps take place :

Fib(7) = Fib(6) + Fib(5)
Fib(6) = Fib(5) + Fib(4)
Fib(5) = Fib(4) + Fib(3)
Fib(4) = Fib(3) + Fib(2)
Fib(3) = Fib(2) + Fib(1)
Fib(2) = Fib(1) + Fib(0)
Fib(1) = 1
Fib(0) = 0
Computing Fibonacci numbers

function Fib(n)
if (n ≤ 1) then return n ;
else
return Fib(n − 1) + Fib(n − 2) ;

Next solutions to sub-problems are combined to obtain the solution of

the original problem instance :
Fib(0) = 0
Fib(1) = 1
Fib(2) = Fib(1) + Fib(0) = 1+0 = 1
Fib(3) = Fib(2) + Fib(1) = 1+1 = 2
Fib(4) = Fib(3) + Fib(2) = 2+1 = 3
Fib(5) = Fib(4) + Fib(3) = 3+2 = 5
Fib(6) = Fib(5) + Fib(4) = 5+3 = 8
Fib(7) = Fib(6) + Fib(5) = 8+5 = 13
Time complexity of DC Fibonacci

function Fib(n)
if (n ≤ 1) then return n ;
else
return Fib(n − 1) + Fib(n − 2) ;

One possible recurrence relation for this algorithm that counts the
number of time the function Fib is called is the following :

 1 if n=0
T(n) = 1 if n=1
T(n − 1) + T(n − 2) + 1 if n > 1


√
The solution of this recurrence is O(( 1+2 5 )n ), the time complexity is
exponential.
Call tree of D&C Fibonacci

function Fib(n)
if (n ≤ 1) then return n ;
else
return Fib(n − 1) + Fib(n − 2) ;

The poor time complexity of Fib derived from re-solving the same
sub-problems several times.

D&C generates the following call tree :

F(n)
F(n-1) F(n-2)

F(n-2) F(n-3) F(n-3) F(n-4)

F(n-3) F(n-4) F(n-4) F(n-5) F(n-4) F(n-5) F(n-5) F(n-6)

Dynamic Programming

Dynamic programming algorithms avoid recomputing the solution of

same subproblems by storing the solution of subproblems the first time
they are computed, and referring to the stored solution when needed.

So, instead of solving the same subproblem repeatedly, arrange to solve

each subproblem only one time

Save the solution to a subproblem in a table (an array), and refer back
to the table whenever we revisit the subproblem
Dynamic programming main ideas

Instead of solving the same subproblem repeatedly, arrange to solve

each subproblem only one time

Save the solution to a subproblem in a table, and refer back to the

table whenever we revisit the subproblem

”Store, don’t recompute”

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 1 2 3

I here computing Fib(4) and Fib(5) both require Fib(3), but Fib(3)
is computed only once

Can turn an exponential-time solution into a polynomial-time solution

Designing dynamic programming algorithms

There are two dynamic programming algorithm design options :

I Top down : start to compute with the whole problem
I Bottom up : start to compute with the D&C base case
Top-down dynamic programming for Fibonacci
A top-down design is a recursive algorithm where the original problem
is decomposed into smaller problems and once the base cases are
solved, solutions to subproblems are computed out of results in the
table :

function DyFib(n)
if (n == 0) return 0 ;
if (n == 1) return 1 ;
if (table[n] != 0) return table[n] ;
else
table[n] = DyFib(n − 1) + DyFib(n − 2)
return table[n] ;

input 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
solution 0 1
Bottom up dynamic programming for Fibonacci
Bottom up design is an iterative algorithm which first compute the
base cases and then uses the solutions to the base cases to start
computing the solutions to the other larger subproblems :
function fib dyn(n)
int *table, i ;
table = malloc((n + 1) ∗ sizeof(int)) ;
for (i = 0; i ≤ n; i + +)
if (i ≤ 1)
table[i] = i ;
else
table[i] = table[i − 1] + table[i − 2] ;
return f [n] ;

input 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
solution 0 1

√
fib dyn ∈ Θ(n) as opposed to the exponential complexity O(( 1+2 5 )n )
for fib rec.
When do we need DP

Before writing a dynamic programming algorithm, first do the

following :
I Write a divide-and-conquer algorithm to solve the problem
I Next, analyze its running time, if it is exponential then :
I it is likely that the divide-and-conquer generates a large number of
identical subproblems
I therefore solving many times the same subproblems
If D&C has poor running times, we can consider DP.

But successful application of DP requires that the problem satisfies

some conditions, which will be introduced later...
Writing a DP algorithm : the bottom-up approach

Writing a DP often starts by writing a D&C recursive algorithm and

use the conquer phase of the D&C recursive code to write an iterative
bottom up DP algorithm :
I Create a table that will store the solution of the subproblems
I Use the “base case” of recursive D&C to initialize the table
I Devise look-up template using the recursive calls of the D&C
algorithm
I Devise for-loops that fill the table using look-up template
I The function containing the for loop returns the last entry that
has been filled in the table.
An example : making change

Devise an algorithm for paying back a customer a certain amount using

the smallest possible number of coins.

For example, what is the smallest amount of coins needed to pay back
$2.89 (289 cents) using as denominations ”one dollars”, ”quaters”,
”dimes” and ”pennies”.

The solution is 10 coins, i.e. 2 one dollars, 3 quaters, 1 dime and 4

pennies.
Making change : a recursive solution

Assume we have an infinite supply of n different denominations of

coins.

A coin of denomination i worth di units, 1 ≤ i ≤ n. We need to return

change for N units.

Here is a recursive D&C algorithm for returning change :

function Make Change(i,j)
if (j == 0) then return 0 ;
else
return min(make change(i − 1, j), make change(i, j − di ) + 1) ;

The function is called initially as Make Change(n,N).

Making change : a recursive solution

function Make Change(i,j)

if (j == 0) then return 0 ;
else
return min(make change(i − 1, j), make change(i, j − di ) + 1) ;

How did we get this D&C algo ? The making change problem has 2 input
parameters :
1. n the number of different denominations
2. N the amount of change to return
Sub-problems are obtained by reducing the value of one of the two inputs :
1. Try to solve a sub-problem using n − 1 denominations, i.e. the sub-problem
make change(i − 1, j)
2. Use denomination n to reduce the amount of money to return, thus we are left
with the sub-problem make change(i, j − di ) to solve.
The base case is when the amount to return is 0, in which case no coin is used, the
solution to the base case is 0.
C code implementing recursive make change

#include <stdio.h>
#define min(a,b)((a<b)? a:b)
int make_change(int d[], int n, int N)
{
if(N == 0) return 0;
else if (N < 0 || (N > 0 && n <= 0)) return 1000;
else{
return min(make_change(d,n-1,N), make_change(d,n,N-d[n-1]) + 1);
}
}
int main()
{
int d[] = {1, 5, 10, 25};
int N = 13;
int n = sizeof(d)/sizeof(d[0]);
int ans = make_change(d, n, N);
printf("Minimal # of coins = %d\n",ans);
return 0;
}
Designing DP based on the D&C algo
The D&C algo has two parameters because a make change problem has two
dimensions : number of different types of coins available and the amount to return.
An instance of make change problem can be uniquely identified by these two values.
DP uses a table to store the values of instances that have already been computed, it
makes sense here to use a 2-dimensional table where one dimension refers to the
coin types and the other to the amounts to return

Coins/Amounts 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1
d2 = 4
d3 = 6

The entries of the above table can store the values of all the sub-problems of a
make change problem instance with 3 types of coins (1,4,6) and an amount to
return equal to 8.

For example, entry (d1 = 1, 2) refers to a sub-problem where the amount to return
is 2 and where only coins of type d1 = 1 are available to return this amount.
Designing DP based on the D&C algo

Assume n = 3, d1 = 1, d2 = 4 and d3 = 6. Let N = 8.

To solve this problem by dynamic programming we set up a table t[1..n, 0..N], one
row for each denomination and one column for each amount from 0 unit to N units.

Coins/Amounts 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1
d2 = 4
d3 = 6

Entry t[i, j] will store the solution to sub-problem instance i, j, i.e. the minimum
number of coins needed to refund an amount of j units using only coins from
denominations 1 to i.
Designing DP based on the D&C algo

Using the base case of the D&C algo :

function Make Change(i,j)
if (j == 0) then return 0 ;
else
return min(make change(i − 1, j), make change(i, j − di ) + 1) ;

one can immediately fill the 3 entries of the table where j = 0, i.e. for
i = 1, 2, 3
Coins/Amounts 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1 0
d2 = 4 0
d3 = 6 0
Designing DP based on the D&C algo
The solution to make change for instances where i = 0 is not defined. Thus the DP
for computing the entries of instances where i = 1 can only be based on the second
recursive call of the D&C algo :
function Make Change(i,j)
if (j == 0) then return 0 ;
else
return min(make change(i − 1, j), make change(i, j − di ) + 1) ;

Thus the solution to instance t[1, 1] = make change(i, j − di ) + 1 =

make change(1, 1 − 1) + 1 = make change(1, 0) + 1 = t[1, 0] + 1 = 1

Therefore t[1, j] for j = 1..8 is t[i, j] = t[i, j − di ] + 1

Coins/Amounts 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d2 = 4 0
d3 = 6 0

Example : the value stored in entry t[1, 4] is interpreted as the minimum number of
coins to return 4 units using only denomination 1, which is the minimum number of
coins to return 3 units, i.e. t[1, 3] + 1 = 4 coins.
Designing DP based on the D&C algo
For the solutions of instances where i > 1, one needs to consider both recursive calls
of the D&C algo. and take the minimum value return from these two.
function Make Change(i,j)
if (j == 0) then return 0 ;
else
return min(make change(i − 1, j), make change(i, j − di ) + 1) ;

Thus the solution to instance t[i, j] is the minimum of the values returned by
make change(i − 1, j) and make change(i, j − di ) + 1, i.e. t[i, j] =
min(t[i − 1, j], t[i, j − di ]).
Special case : if the amount of change to return is smaller than domination di , i.e.
j < di , then the change needs to be returned can only be based on denominations
smaller than di , i.e t[i, j] = t[i − 1, j]

Coins/Amounts 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d2 = 4 0 1 2 3
d3 = 6 0 1 2 3 1 2
A bottom-up DP algorithm for making change

For the general, the following table look-ups deduced from the D&C algo is used to
compute entries in the DP table :

t[i, j] = min(t[i − 1, j], t[i, j − di ] + 1)

DP making change(n, N)
int d[1..n] = d[1, 4, 6] ;
int t[1..n, 0..N] ;
for (i = 1; i ≤ n; i + +) t[i, 0] = 0 ; */base case */
for (i = 1; i ≤ n; i + +)
for (j = 1; j ≤ N; j + +)
if (i == 1) then t[i, j] = t[i, j − di ] + 1
else if (j < d[i]) then t[i, j] = t[i − 1, j]
else t[i, j] = min(t[i − 1, j], t[i, j − d[i]] + 1)
return t[n, N] ;

The algorithm runs in Θ(nN).

Making change : DP approach

Coins/Amounts 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d2 = 4 0 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 2
d3 = 6 0 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 2

To fill entry t[i, j], j > 0, we have two choices :

1. Don’t use a coin from di , then t[i, j] = t[i − 1, j]
2. Use at least one coin from di , then t[i, j] = t[i, j − di ] + 1.
Since we seek to minimize the number of coins returned, we have

t[i, j] = min(t[i − 1, j], t[i, j − di ] + 1)

The solution is in entry t[n, N]

Using the DP table to return coins

Entry t[n, N] display the minimum number of coins that can used to return change
for N.
Coins/Amounts 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d2 = 4 0 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 2
d3 = 6 0 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 2

From other entries in the DP table we can also find what is the denomination of the
coins to return :
I Start at entry t[n, N] ;
I If t[i, j] = t[i − 1, j] then no coin of denomination i has been used to calculate
t[i, j], then move to entry t[i − 1, j] ;
I If t[i, j] = t[i, j − di ] + 1, then add one coin of denomination i and move to
entry t[i, j − di ].
Exercises 1 and 2

1. Construct the table and solve the making change problem where
n = 3 with denominations d1 = 1, d2 = 2 and d3 = 3 where the
amount of change to be returned is N = 7

Amount 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
d2 = 2 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4
d3 = 3 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 3

t[i, j] = min(t[i − 1, j], t[i, j − di ] + 1)

2. Construct the table and solve the making change problem where
n = 4 with denominations d1 = 1, d2 = 3, d3 = 4 and d4 = 5
where the amount of change to be returned is N = 12
Solutions table
Amount 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d2 = 4 0 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 2
d3 = 6 0 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 2

Each entry in the above table is a solution to a subproblem.

For example, entry t[1, 3] is the solution to the subproblem where an
amount of 3 needs to be returned using only coins of denomination 1.
Amount 0 1 2 3
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3

Entry t[2, 6] is the number of coins that have to be returned when an

amount of 6 needs to be returned using only coins of denomination 1
or 4.
Amount 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
d2 = 4 0 1 2 3 1 2 3
Optimization problems

DP is often used to solve optimization problems that have the

following form
min f (x) or
max f (x) (1)
s.t. some constraints

Making change is an optimization problem. The problem consists to

minimize the function f (x), i.e. to minimize the number of coins
returned

There is only one constraint : the sum of the value of the coins is equal
to the amount to be returned
Solutions of an optimization problems

Optimization problems often have many solutions

The problem below has, in the last column, ”3 feasible solutions”, 6, 3

and 1.

The 3 solutions are feasible because they satisfy the constraint that the
sum of the coin values is equal the amount to return.

However, only the solution with the smallest value is a solution to the
optimization problem which is to minimize the number of coins

Amount 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
d2 = 4 0 1 2 3 1 2 3
d3 = 6 0 1 2 3 1 2 1
Optimal Substructure

In solving optimization problems with DP, we find the optimal solution

of a problem of size n by solving smaller problems of same type

The optimal solution of the original problem is made of optimal

solutions from subproblems

Thus the subsolutions within an optimal solution are optimal

subsolutions

Solutions to optimization problems that exhibit this property are say to

be based on optimal substructures
Optimal Substructure

Make Change() exhibits the optimal substructure property :

I Each entry t[i, j] in the table is the optimal solution (minimum
number of coins) that can be used to return an amount of j units
using only denominations d1 to di .
I The optimal solution of problem (i, j) is obtained using optimal
solutions (minimum number of coins) of sub-problems (i − 1, j)
and (i, j − di ).

Coins/Amounts 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d1 = 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
d2 = 4 0 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 2
d3 = 6 0 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 2

The optimal solution for t[i, j] is obtained by comparing t[i − 1, j] and

t[i, j − di ] + 1, taking the smallest of the two.
Optimal Substructure

To compute the optimal solution, we can compute all optimal

subsolutions

Often we start with all optimal subsolutions of size 1, then compute all
optimal subsolutions of size 2 combining some subsolutions of size 1.
We continue in this fashion until we have the solution for n.

Note, not all optimization problems satisfy the optimal substructure

property. When it fails to apply, we cannot use DP.
DP for optimization problems

The basic steps are :

1. Characterize the structure of an optimal solution, i.e. the problem
meet the optimal substructure property
2. Give a recursive definition for computing the optimal solution
based on optimal solutions of smaller problems.
3. Compute the optimal solutions and/or the value of the optimal
solution in a bottom-up fashion.
Integer 0-1 Knapsack Problem

Given n objects with integer weights wi and values vi , you are asked to
pack a knapsack with no more than W weight (W is integer) such
that the load is as valuable as possible (maximize). You cannot take
part of an object, you must either take an object or leave it out.

Example : Suppose we are given 4 objects with the following weights

and values :
Object 1 2 3 4
Weight 1 1 2 2
Value 3 4 5 1

Suppose W = 5 units of weight in our knapsack.

Seek a load that maximize the value

Problem formulation

Given
I n integer weights w1 , . . . , wn ,
I n values v1 , . . . , vn , and
I an integer capacity W ,
assign either 0 or 1 to each of x1 , . . . , xn so that the sum
n
X
f (x) = xi vi
i=1

is maximized, s.t.
n
X
xi wi ≤ W .
i=1
Explanation

xi = 1 represents putting Object i into the knapsack and xi = 0

represents leaving Object i out of the knapsack.

The value of the chosen load is ni=1 xi vi . We want the most valuable
P
load, so we want to maximize this sum.

The weight of the chosen load is ni=1 xi wi . We can’t carry more than
P
W units of weight, so this sum must be ≤ W .
Solving the 0-1 Knapsack

0-1 knapsack is an optimization problem.

Should we apply dynamic programming to solve it ? To answer this

question we need to investigate two things :
1. Whether subproblems are solved repeatedly when using a recursive
algorithm.
2. An optimal solution contains optimal sub-solutions, the problem
exhibits optimal substructure
Optimal Substructure

Does integer 0-1 knapsack exhibits the optimal substructure property ?

Let {x1 , x2 , . . . , xk } be the objects in an optimal solution x.

The optimal value is V = vx1 + vx2 + · · · + vxk .

We must also have that wx1 + wx2 + · · · + wxk ≤ W since x is a

feasible solution.

Claim :
If {x1 , x2 , . . . , xk } is an optimal solution to the knapsack problem with
weight W , then {x1 , x2 , . . . , xk−1 } is an optimal solution to the knapsack
problem with W 0 = W − wxk .
Optimal Substructure
Proof : Assume {x1 , x2 , . . . , xk−1 } is not an optimal solution to the
subproblem. Then there are objects {y1 , y2 , . . . , yl } such that

wy1 + wy2 + · · · + wyl ≤ W 0 ,

and
vy1 + vy2 + · · · + vyl > vx1 + vx2 + · · · + vxk−1 .
Then

vy1 + vy2 + · · · + vyl + vxk > vx1 + vx2 + · · · + vxk−1 + vxk .

However, this implies that the set {x1 , x2 , . . . , xk } is not an optimal

solution to the knapsack problem with weight W .

This contradicts our assumption. Thus {x1 , x2 , . . . , xk−1 } is an optimal

solution to the knapsack problem with W 0 = W − wxk .
Recursive solution : problem decomposition

Seeking for a recursive algorithm to a problem one must think about

the ways the problem can be reduced to subproblems.
Let K [n, W ] denote the 0-1 knapsack problem instance to be solved
where n is the initial number of objects to be considered and W is the
initial capacity of the sack.
There are two ways this problem can be decomposed into smaller
problems. Let K [i, j] be the recursive function :
I one can add the ith object in the knapsack, thus reducing the
initial problem to one with i − 1 objects yet to consider and
capacity j − wi : K [i − 1, j − wi ]
I one can choose to disregard object i (don’t put in the sack), thus
generating a new subproblem with i − 1 objects and capacity j
unchanged : K [i − 1, j]
Recursive solution : writing the algorithm

The base case will be when one object is left to consider. The solution
is

v1 if w1 ≤ j
K [1, j] =
0 if w1 > j.

Once the value of the base case is computed, the solution to the other
subproblems is obtained as followed :

K [i − 1, j] if wi > j
K [i, j] =
max(K [i − 1, j], K [i − 1, j − wi ] + vi ) if wi ≤ j.

This recursive function is initially called with K [n, W ].

Divide & Conquer 0-1 Knapsack
Below is the pseudo-code of a D&C algorithm that computes the optimal
solution of a knapsack problem instance.
This algorithm has 3 inputs : the capacity W , an array v of n values and an
array w of n weights

int K(i, W )
if (i == 1) return (W < w[1]) ? 0 : v[1]
if (W < w [i]) return K(i − 1, W ) ;
return max(K(i − 1, W ), K(i − 1, W − w [i]) + v [i]) ;

Solve for the following problem instance where W = 10 :

i 1 2 3 4 5
wi 6 5 4 2 2
vi 6 3 5 4 6
 i 1 2 3 4 5
wi 6 5 4 2 2
int K(i, W ) vi 6 3 5 4 6
if (i == 1) return (W < w[1]) ? 0 : v[1] ;
if (W < w [i]) return K(i − 1, W ) ;
return max(K(i − 1, W ), K(i − 1, W − w [i]) + v [i]) ;

5 16 10

4 11 10 4 10 8

3 11 10 3 6 8 3 6 8 3 6 6

2 6 10 2 6 6 2 6 8 2 0 4 2 6 8 2 0 4 2 6 6 2 0 2

1 6 10 1 0 5 1 6 6 1 0 1 1 6 8 1 0 3 1 0 4 1 6 8 1 0 3 1 0 4 1 6 6 1 0 1 1 0 2
C code implementing recursive 0-1 knapsack
The initial call to K (n − 1, W ) because array indexes in C start at 0,
so values of object 1 are in val[0] and wt[0], etc.

#include <stdio.h>
int max(int a, int b) { return (a > b) ? a : b; }
int K(int W, int wt[], int val[], int n) {
// Base Case
if (n ==0) return (W < wt[0])? 0 : val[0];
//Knapsack does not have residual capacity for object n
if (wt[n] > W) return K(W, wt, val, n - 1);
else
return max(
val[n] + K(W - wt[n], wt, val, n - 1),
K(W, wt, val, n - 1));
}
int main() {
int val[] = { 6, 3, 5, 4, 6}; int wt[] = { 6, 5, 4, 2, 2 };
int W = 10;
int n = sizeof(val) / sizeof(val[0]);
printf("The solution is %d\n", K(W, wt, val, n-1));
return 0;
}
Analysis of the Recursive Solution

Let T (n) be the worst-case running time on an input with n objects.

If there is only one object, we do a constant amount of work.

T (1) = 1.

If there is more than one object, this algorithm does a constant

amount of work plus two recursive calls involving n − 1 objects.

1 if n = 1
T (n) =
2T (n − 1) + 1 if n > 1

The solution to this recurrence is T (n) ∈ Θ(2n )

Overlapping Subproblems

We have seen that the maximal value is K [n, W ].

But computing K [n, W ] recursively cost 2n − 1.

While the number of subproblems is only nW .

Thus, if nW < 2n , then the 0-1 knapsack problem will certainly have
overlapping subproblems, therefore using dynamic programming is
most likely to provide a more efficient algorithm.

0-1 knapsack satisfies the two pre-conditions (optimal substructure and

repeated solutions of identical subproblems) justifying the design of an
DP algorithm for this problem.
0-1 Knapsack : Bottom up DP algorithm

Declare a table K of size n × W + 1 that stores the optimal solutions

of all the possible subproblems. Let n = 6, W = 10 and
i 1 2 3 4 5 6
wi 3 2 6 1 7 4
vi 7 10 2 3 2 6

i\j 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
0-1 Knapsack : Bottom up DP algorithm

Initialization of the table :

The value of the knapsack is 0 when the capacity is 0. Therefore,

K [i, 0] = 0, i = 1..6.
i\j 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
0-1 Knapsack : Bottom up DP algorithm

Initialization of the table using the base case of the recursive function :
if (i == 1) return (W < w[1]) ? 0 : v[1]

This said that if the capacity is smaller than the weight of object 1,
then the value is 0 (cannot add object 1), otherwise the value is v [1]

Since w [1] = 3 we have :

i\j 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
0-1 Knapsack : Bottom up DP algorithm
The DP code for computing the other entries of the table is based on
i 1 2 3 4 5 6
the recursive function for 0-1 knapsack : wi 3 2 6 1 7 4
vi 7 10 2 3 2 6

int K(i, W )
if (i == 1) return (W < w [1]) ? 0 : v [1] ;
if (W < w [i]) return K(i − 1, W ) ;
return max(K(i − 1, W ), K(i − 1, W − w [i]) + v [i]) ;

i\j 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
0-1 Knapsack : Bottom up DP algorithm
The bottom-up dynamic programming algorithm is now (more or less)
straightforward.
function 0-1-Knapsack(w , v , n, W )
int K[n, W + 1] ;
for(i = 1; i ≤ n; i + +) K [i, 0] = 0 ;
for(j = 0; j ≤ W ; j + +)
if (w [1] ≤ j) then K [1, j] = v [1] ;
else K [1, j] = 0 ;
for (i = 2; i ≤ n; i + +)
for (j = 1; j ≤ W ; j + +)
if (j ≥ w [i] && K [i − 1, j − w [i]] + v [i] > K [i − 1, j])
K [i, j] = K [i − 1, j − w [i]] + v [i] ;
else
K [i, j] = K [i − 1, j] ;
return K[n, W ] ;
Caution on the running time of the DP algo for knapsack
The previous algorithm runs in O(nW ), this seems polynomial in the input size, but
this is not the case because W is not polynomial
Two of the inputs of the previous algo are a vector of n weights and a vector of n
values. Assume the largest number in these two vectors is 29, thus we need max 5
bits to represent any number in the two vectors. Thus the total number of input bits
to represent these two vectors 2 × 5 × n. The outer for loop for
(i = 2; i ≤ n; i + +) runs n times which is linear in the size of the two input vectors
The other input is W . Assume W = 16, thus we need only 4 bits to represent W .
However, the inner loop for (j = 1; j ≤ W ; j + +) runs 16 times, i.e. 24 times its
input size of 4 bits !
For this reason, the running time of DP is said to be ”pseudo-polynomial”. Knapsack
is a NP-hard problem (actually weakly NP-hard), which means it is unlikely to have
a polynomial time solution

Nonetheless, the knapsack problem is an intuitive example to introduce dynamic

programming, considering the notions of pseudo-polynomial time and NP-hardness
will not be on the final...
0-1 Knapsack example solved with DP
i 1 2 3 4 5 6
wi 3 2 6 1 7 4
vi 7 10 2 3 2 6

for (i = 2; i ≤ n; i + +)
for (j = 1; j ≤ W ; j + +)
if (j ≥ w [i] && K [i − 1, j − w [i]] + v [i] > K [i − 1, j])
K [i, j] = K [i − 1, j − w [i]] + v [i] ;
else
K [i, j] = K [i − 1, j] ;

i\j 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
2 0 0 10 10 10 17 17 17 17 17 17
3 0 0 10 10 10 17 17 17 17 17 17
4 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 20 20
5 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 20 20
6 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 23 26
0-1 Knapsack example solved with D&C
i 1 2 3 4 5 6
wi 3 2 6 1 7 4
vi 7 10 2 3 2 6

int K(i, W )
if (i == 1) return (W < w[1]) ? 0 : v[1] ;
if (W < w[i]) return K(i-1,W) ;
return max(K(i-1,W), K(i-1,W-w[i]) + v[i]) ;

i\j 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
2 0 0 10 10 10 17 17 17 17 17 17
3 0 0 10 10 10 17 17 17 17 17 17
4 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 20 20
5 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 20 20
6 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 23 26
Finding the Knapsack

How do we compute an optimal knapsack ?

With this problem, we don’t have to keep track of anything extra. Let
K [n, k] be the maximal value.

If K [n, k] 6= K [n − 1, k], then K [n, k] = K [n − 1, k − wn ] + vn , and the

nth item is in the knapsack.

Otherwise, we know K [n, k] = K [n − 1, k], and we assume that the

nth item is not in the optimal knapsack.
Finding the Knapsack

In either case, we have an optimal solution to a subproblem.

Thus, we continue the process with either K [n − 1, k] or

K [n − 1, k − wn ], depending on whether n was in the knapsack or not.

When we get to the K [1, k] entry, we take item 1 if K [1, k] 6= 0

(equivalently, when k ≥ w [1])
Finishing the Example
I Recall we had :
i 1 2 3 4 5 6
wi 3 2 6 1 7 4
vi 7 10 2 3 2 6

I We work backwards through the table

i\j 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
2 0 0 10 10 10 17 17 17 17 17 17
3 0 0 10 10 10 17 17 17 17 17 17
4 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 20 20
5 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 20 20
6 0 3 10 13 13 17 20 20 20 23 26

max(K(i-1,W), K(i-1,W-w[i]) + v[i])

I The optimal knapsack contains {1, 2, 4, 6}

 Exercise 3 : 0-1 Knapsack

Solve the following 0-1 knapsack instance with W = 10 :

int K(i, W )
if (i == 1) return (W < w[1]) ? 0 : v[1] ; i 1 2 3 4 5
if (W < w [i]) return K(i − 1, W ) ; wi 6 5 4 2 2
return max(K(i − 1, W ), K(i − 1, W − w [i]) + v [i]) ; vi 6 3 5 4 6

i\j 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0

What is the optimal value ? Which objects are part of the optimal
solution ?
Exercise 4 : 0-1 Knapsack

Solve the following 0-1 knapsack problem : W = 10

i 1 2 3 4 5 6
wi 4 2 3 1 6 4
vi 6 4 5 3 9 7