Testwiki:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2018 May 17

{| width = "100%"

|- ! colspan="3" align="center" | Computing desk |- ! width="20%" align="left" | < May 16 ! width="25%" align="center"|<< Apr | May | Jun >> ! width="20%" align="right" |Current desk > |}

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 17

Suggestions for extracting data from a damaged Excel file?

Hello all. I have an Excel file that I put a lot of work into and it's damaged. I saved it recently and when I went back to work on it, it's name had changed to have this in front of the original file name: ~$. when I try to open it, Excel says: "Excel cannot open this file. The file might have been damaged or modified from its original format". I was just wondering if there's anything anyone might suggest I try to extract the data from the file. I am very far from a computer wiz. It's not the end of the world, but losing it is a lot of work down the drain. At the same time, it contains sensitive information, and I would not want to send it to an expert to open it. So if anyone has some spoonfed instructions... I am on an IMac running High Sierra. Thanks!--185.230.124.52 (talk) 03:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Someone else probably has a better answer, but what format is it in? XLS? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:19, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

It's xlsx.--67.244.114.239 (talk) 04:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

The ~$ at the front means that this is a temporary file resulting from an improper closedown of Excel (or the operating system). I assume that you've checked that there is not also the original filename somewhere. (Also check that you are not still running another copy of Excel.) Dbfirs 07:45, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

PAIRWISE SUMMATION

PAIRWISE SUMMATIONS I do a lot of computations, mostly in complex numbers. That includes multiplications and additions. Rounding errors accumulate and eventually become a problem. I found this article in Wikipedia [1] but it gives a pseudocode instead of C or C++ and it seems some information is missing.

I quote:

In pseudocode, the pairwise summation algorithm for an array x of length n > 0 can be written:

s = pairwise(x[1…n])
      if n ≤ N                    base case: naive summation for a sufficiently small array
          s = x[1]
          for i = 2 to n
              s = s + x[i]
      else                        divide and conquer: recursively sum two halves of the array
          m = floor(n / 2)
          s = pairwise(x[1…m]) + pairwise(x[m+1…n])
      endif

What is clear so far that the algorithm is recursive because the function calls upon itself, and then the input is an array of reals but I mostly operate with complex numbers. So, this is my thought on how it could be implemented in C, my OS is Linux Ubuntu:

dcomp is my definition of double complex. Suppose I have an array of 100 complex numbers to add, my typical situation. I expect to get one complex number in the end.

typedef std::complex<double> dcomp;

int main () {

int n = 100;
 dcomp ss, * xx;         // ss is the expected sum
 xx = new dcomp [n];     // array of input complex numbers, size of the array is n
 ss = pairwise (0, n, xx);

}

public : dcomp pairwise (int start, int end, dcomp * xx) {

int mm;
 dcomp ss;
 if (n <= N) {
   ss = xx[0];
   for (int ii = 1; ii < n; ii++) 
     ss += xx[ii];
  }
  else {
    mm = n/2;
    ss = pairwise(0,mm,xx) + pairwise(mm+1,n,xx);
  }
  return ss;

} // pairwise

I am not sure this code in this form will work. First, N is undefined. Obviously, N is an integer. Any hunch as to its possible value? My hunch is that iT is something like $N<<n$, but how is it defined? Also is it a number that changes during iterations? I must make this code work. I do have considerable loss of precision in my computations of significant practical value. I will appreciate any comments to improve the code. Thanks, - AboutFace 22 (talk) 16:16, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

The pseudocode clearly states that N is small enough to make "a sufficiently small array". The point is that you have to have a point at which you don't make a recursive call. You start adding. How small of an array do you think you need to be sure that you won't have rounding errors? That is how small N needs to be. Example: N=5. Then, when the array has 5 (or less) elements, you will just add them together and not perform a recursive call. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 18:56, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. It makes sense. I will follow it, although it is unclear how it operates. I will think about it too. AboutFace 22 (talk) 22:28, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

You might also be interested in Kahan summation algorithm. Dmcq (talk) 22:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

I am familiar with it but it's considered much slower than pairwise and only slightly better in avoiding rounding errors. AboutFace 22 (talk) 19:45, 18 May 2018 (UTC)