Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 573
Default Is this a recursive problem?

I've run across an interesting problem that I don't know how to
solve in Excel. I'm not sure it can be resolved.

I'm using a metaphor for the situation to simplify things a bit.
Let's say 6 people, a, b, c, d, e, f are given $1000 to share. Each
gets his/her share based on some external scoring system, say from 1 to
7 (we don't have to worry about the scoring system, that's someone
else's problem). Each person's share will be based on his score as
a fraction of the total score (If a's score is 3 and the total score
is 20, a gets $150). Pretty simple, so far. Here's the problem. What
if the agreement states than no participant gets less than some minimum
amount?

A B C D
E
Base Unit Share First Cut Share Actual Share
a 2 100.00 130.00 130.00
b 5 250.00 250.00 203.33
c 2 100.00 130.00 130.00
d 1 50.00 130.00 130.00
e 7 350.00 350.00 284.67
f 3 150.00 150.00 122.00
20 1000 3 1000

(I hope this is legible after I post it)

The First Cut Share is just their proportional part of the $1000 pot.
The second cut is done by replacing a, c, and d's shares with the
minimum, $130. =IF(C4<130,130,C4)
This then gives each person's Actual Share, by subtracting the $130
allocations from the total pot and then divvying up the remainder of
the pot based on the remaining participants shares.
=IF(D4=130,130,$E$2/$E$E10*B4)
Or it should, but f's share, which was over the $130 minimum at $150
has now slipped below the minimum to $122.

I can see that this can possibly go on endlessly.

I doubt very much that this is a first in the history of
math/spreadsheets. It seems to me like it's probably a classic in
some discipline, just one of the many I've never explored. Is there a
solution to this puzzle?

  #2   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,953
Default Is this a recursive problem?

POT: 1000 Remainder: 220 Revised
Original 1st Cut Scores Above Spread Remainder
a 2 100 130 0 0.0 130.0
b 5 250 130 5 73.3 203.3
c 2 100 130 0 0.0 130.0
d 1 50 130 0 0.0 130.0
e 7 350 130 7 102.7 232.7
f 3 150 130 3 44.0 174.0
Tot 20 1000 780 15 220.0 1000.0

give everyone 130 and then divvy the remainder proportionally from the
subset of people who are above the minimum.

--
Regards,
Tom Ogilvy


"davegb" wrote:

I've run across an interesting problem that I don't know how to
solve in Excel. I'm not sure it can be resolved.

I'm using a metaphor for the situation to simplify things a bit.
Let's say 6 people, a, b, c, d, e, f are given $1000 to share. Each
gets his/her share based on some external scoring system, say from 1 to
7 (we don't have to worry about the scoring system, that's someone
else's problem). Each person's share will be based on his score as
a fraction of the total score (If a's score is 3 and the total score
is 20, a gets $150). Pretty simple, so far. Here's the problem. What
if the agreement states than no participant gets less than some minimum
amount?

A B C D
E
Base Unit Share First Cut Share Actual Share
a 2 100.00 130.00 130.00
b 5 250.00 250.00 203.33
c 2 100.00 130.00 130.00
d 1 50.00 130.00 130.00
e 7 350.00 350.00 284.67
f 3 150.00 150.00 122.00
20 1000 3 1000

(I hope this is legible after I post it)

The First Cut Share is just their proportional part of the $1000 pot.
The second cut is done by replacing a, c, and d's shares with the
minimum, $130. =IF(C4<130,130,C4)
This then gives each person's Actual Share, by subtracting the $130
allocations from the total pot and then divvying up the remainder of
the pot based on the remaining participants shares.
=IF(D4=130,130,$E$2/$E$E10*B4)
Or it should, but f's share, which was over the $130 minimum at $150
has now slipped below the minimum to $122.

I can see that this can possibly go on endlessly.

I doubt very much that this is a first in the history of
math/spreadsheets. It seems to me like it's probably a classic in
some discipline, just one of the many I've never explored. Is there a
solution to this puzzle?


  #3   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.programming
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 573
Default Is this a recursive problem?


Tom Ogilvy wrote:
POT: 1000 Remainder: 220 Revised
Original 1st Cut Scores Above Spread Remainder
a 2 100 130 0 0.0 130.0
b 5 250 130 5 73.3 203.3
c 2 100 130 0 0.0 130.0
d 1 50 130 0 0.0 130.0
e 7 350 130 7 102.7 232.7
f 3 150 130 3 44.0 174.0
Tot 20 1000 780 15 220.0 1000.0

give everyone 130 and then divvy the remainder proportionally from the
subset of people who are above the minimum.

--
Regards,
Tom Ogilvy



Doh! Thanks Tom!

"davegb" wrote:

I've run across an interesting problem that I don't know how to
solve in Excel. I'm not sure it can be resolved.

I'm using a metaphor for the situation to simplify things a bit.
Let's say 6 people, a, b, c, d, e, f are given $1000 to share. Each
gets his/her share based on some external scoring system, say from 1 to
7 (we don't have to worry about the scoring system, that's someone
else's problem). Each person's share will be based on his score as
a fraction of the total score (If a's score is 3 and the total score
is 20, a gets $150). Pretty simple, so far. Here's the problem. What
if the agreement states than no participant gets less than some minimum
amount?

A B C D
E
Base Unit Share First Cut Share Actual Share
a 2 100.00 130.00 130.00
b 5 250.00 250.00 203.33
c 2 100.00 130.00 130.00
d 1 50.00 130.00 130.00
e 7 350.00 350.00 284.67
f 3 150.00 150.00 122.00
20 1000 3 1000

(I hope this is legible after I post it)

The First Cut Share is just their proportional part of the $1000 pot.
The second cut is done by replacing a, c, and d's shares with the
minimum, $130. =IF(C4<130,130,C4)
This then gives each person's Actual Share, by subtracting the $130
allocations from the total pot and then divvying up the remainder of
the pot based on the remaining participants shares.
=IF(D4=130,130,$E$2/$E$E10*B4)
Or it should, but f's share, which was over the $130 minimum at $150
has now slipped below the minimum to $122.

I can see that this can possibly go on endlessly.

I doubt very much that this is a first in the history of
math/spreadsheets. It seems to me like it's probably a classic in
some discipline, just one of the many I've never explored. Is there a
solution to this puzzle?



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Recursive Functions...maybe busboy10 Excel Worksheet Functions 0 March 28th 11 09:46 PM
Recursive Code Myles[_68_] Excel Programming 1 August 13th 06 02:11 PM
Help with Recursive Call? mark Excel Programming 9 May 25th 06 08:44 PM
recursive sums Joe Excel Worksheet Functions 6 July 17th 05 09:45 AM
Recursive Subs? ExcelMonkey[_74_] Excel Programming 5 February 5th 04 02:54 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 ExcelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Microsoft Excel"