# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
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 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | maomao90 | 174 |
2 | awoo | 165 |
3 | adamant | 161 |
4 | TheScrasse | 159 |
5 | nor | 158 |
6 | maroonrk | 156 |
7 | -is-this-fft- | 152 |
8 | orz | 146 |
8 | SecondThread | 146 |
10 | pajenegod | 145 |
Name |
---|
SPOILER ALERT!!
Regarding to that problem about tree you described — I think that decomposing whole tree into layers of centroids should work.
Right; and constants were so low (TL=9s) that even simple decomposition of tree into blocks by sqrt(N) vertices (which in comparison to centroid decomposition is like sqrt-decomposition comparing with segment tree for arrays) was fast enough to pass.