I wanted to go into details — but it would have been a full 30 minutes. Any suggestion/query is welcome.
№ | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
---|---|---|
1 | ecnerwala | 3649 |
2 | Benq | 3581 |
3 | jiangly | 3578 |
4 | orzdevinwang | 3570 |
5 | Geothermal | 3569 |
5 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
7 | tourist | 3565 |
8 | maroonrk | 3531 |
9 | Radewoosh | 3521 |
10 | Um_nik | 3482 |
Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
№ | Пользователь | Вклад |
---|---|---|
1 | maomao90 | 174 |
2 | awoo | 164 |
3 | adamant | 161 |
4 | TheScrasse | 159 |
5 | nor | 158 |
6 | maroonrk | 156 |
7 | -is-this-fft- | 152 |
8 | SecondThread | 147 |
9 | orz | 146 |
10 | pajenegod | 145 |
I wanted to go into details — but it would have been a full 30 minutes. Any suggestion/query is welcome.
Название |
---|
I don't think your solution can pass the system test. I think it will be TLE. In the worst case, updating the nodes' information can be O(n); So it's O(q*n)? Did I misunderstand? :D
updating will take O(log(n)) per query. Something like:
So, we are building the data structure for LCA incrementally after each query.
For more info check out "Another easy solution in <O(N logN, O(logN)>" section on TC