### Edvard's blog

By Edvard, history, 4 years ago, translation, ,

### 660A - Co-prime Array

The problem was suggested by Ali Ibrahim New_Horizons.

Note that we should insert some number between any adjacent not co-prime elements. On other hand we always can insert the number 1.

С++ solution

Complexity: O(nlogn).

### 660B - Seating On Bus

The problem was suggested by Srikanth Bhat srikkbhat.

In this problem you should simply do what was written in the problem statement. There are no tricks.

C++ solution

Complexity: O(n).

### 660C - Hard Process

The problem was suggested by Mohammad Amin Raeisi aminra.

Let's call the segment [l, r] good if it contains no more than k zeroes. Note if segment [l, r] is good than the segment [l + 1, r] is also good. So we can use the method of two pointers: the first pointer is l and the second is r. Let's iterate over l from the left to the right and move r while we can (to do that we should simply maintain the number of zeroes in the current segment).

C++ solution

Complexity: O(n).

### 660D - Number of Parallelograms

The problem was suggested by Sadegh Mahdavi smahdavi4.

It's known that the diagonals of a parallelogram split each other in the middle. Let's iterate over the pairs of points a, b and consider the middle of the segment : . Let's calculate the value cntc for each middle. cntc is the number of segments a, b with the middle c. Easy to see that the answer is .

C++ solution

Complexity: O(n2logn).

### 660E - Different Subsets For All Tuples

The problem was suggested by Lewin Gan lewin.

Let's consider some subsequence with the length k > 0 (the empty subsequences we will count separately by adding the valye mn at the end) and count the number of sequences that contains it. We should do that accurately to not count the same sequence multiple times. Let x1, x2, ..., xk be the fixed subsequence. In the original sequence before the element x1 can be some other elements, but none of them can be equal to x1 (because we want to count the subsequence exactly one time). So we have m - 1 variants for each of the elements before x1. Similarly between elements x1 and x2 can be other elements and we have m - 1 choices for each of them. And so on. After the element xk can be some elements (suppose there are j such elements) with no additional constraints (so we have m choices for each of them). We fixed the number of elements at the end j, so we should distribute n - k - j numbers between numbers before x1, between x1 and x2, \ldots, between xk - 1 and xk. Easy to see that we have choices to do that (it's simply binomial coefficient with allowed repititions). The number of sequences x1, x2, ..., xk equals to mk. So the answer is . Easy to transform the last sum to the sum . Note the last inner sum can be calculating using the formula for parallel summing: . So the answer equals to . Also we can get the closed formula for the last sum to get logarithmic solution, but it is not required in the problem.

C++ solution

Complexity: O((n + m)log MOD), где MOD = 109 + 7.

### 660F - Bear and Bowling 4

The problem was prepared by Kamil Debowski Errichto. The problem analysis is also prepared by him.

The key is to use divide and conquer. We need a recursive function f(left, right) that runs f(left, mid) and f(mid+1, right) (where mid = (left + right) / 2) and also considers all intervals going through mid. We will eventually need a convex hull of lines (linear functions) and let's see how to achieve it.

For variables L, R (, ) we will try to write the score of interval [L, R] as a linear function. It would be good to get something close to aL·xR + bL where aL and bL depend on L, and xR depends on R only.

For each L we should find a linear function fL(x) = aL·x + bL where aL, bL should fit the equation ( * ):

Now we have a set of linear functions representing all possible left endpoints L. For each right endpoint R we should find xR and constR to fit equation ( * ) again. With value of xR we can iterate over functions fL to find the one maximizing value of bL + aL·xR. And (still for fixed R) we should add constR to get the maximum possible score of interval ending in R.

Brute Force with functions

Now let's make it faster. After finding a set of linear functions fL we should build a convex hull of them (note that they're already sorted by slope). To achieve it we need something to compare 3 functions and decide whether one of them is unnecessary because it's always below one of other two functions. Note that in standard convex hull of points you also need something similar (but for 3 points). Below you can find an almost-fast-enough solution with a useful function bool is_middle_needed(f1, f2, f3). You may check that numbers calculated there do fit in long long.

Almost fast enough

Finally, one last thing is needed to make it faster than O(n2). We should use the fact that we have built a convex hull of functions (lines). For each R you should binary search optimal function. Alternatively, you can sort pairs (xR, constR) and then use the two pointers method — check the implementation in my solution below. It gives complexity because we sort by xR inside of a recursive function. I think it's possible to get rid of this by sorting prefixes in advance because it's equivalent to sorting by xR. And we should use the already known order when we run a recursive function for smaller intervals. So, I think is possible this way — anybody implemented it?

Intended solution with two pointers

Complexity: O(nlog2n).

• +32

 » 4 years ago, # | ← Rev. 3 →   +26 We don't need divide and conquer in F. We can use only convex hull trick. This way the solution has better complexity and is easier to implement. Let's say that S1 is a normal prefix sum array, that is S1[i]=A[1]+A[2]+...+A[i] and S2 is again a prefix sum array but this time every element is multiplied by its index, that is S2[i]=A[1]+2*A[2]+3*A[3]+...+i*A[i]. Let's choose some R which will be the right end of our chosen interval. Now we are looking for the L that minimizes S2[R]-S2[L-1]-(L-1)*(S1[R]-S1[L-1]) which is a standard use of CHT — http://codeforces.com/contest/660/submission/17245184. The complexity is O(NlogN).
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   +6 Nice! And is it possible to implement it with integers only?
•  » » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   +1 Ah yes, since we need to compare A1/B1 and A2/B2 where A1, B1, A2 and B2 are integers. Thanks if you asked to make me think about it, I will know that in future! :)
•  » » » » 4 years ago, # ^ | ← Rev. 3 →   +6 But I think your B may be up to N2·107 and A is up to N·107 so long long's won't be enough to multiply them. So maybe the intended solution was valuable anyway because it allowed to use integers only.
•  » » » » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   +3 Oh yeah, they are too big, sorry. But don't think that I want to say it's not valuable, of course it is.
•  » » » » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   +15 In a previous educational round we've learnt how to compare fractions of long longs in integers http://codeforces.com/blog/entry/21588?#comment-262867
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 sum_so_far += t[i]; score_so_far += sum_so_far; Fun f = Fun{mid - i + 1, score_so_far}; sum_so_far can be N * 107score_so_far can be N2 * 107When we will calculate f.a*f.b it can be N3 * 107, which is bigger than 1022.Am I missing something?
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ | ← Rev. 2 →   +3 f.a is up to N and f.b is up to N2·107 but we don't multiply some random values. Values of f.a increase by 1 and values of f.b increase by N·107, as we move from fi to fi + 1 (and we multiply differences like f1.a - f2.a). I came up with a proof that it amortizes but I don't see that proof right now. I will try to get it again (and I hope it exists).
 » 4 years ago, # | ← Rev. 4 →   -43 sorry
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 My approach for Problem F is as follow (It didn't work, but I can't find the bug in this algorithm): We can determine the stop point (deleted suffix) by looping back from n to 1: for(int i=n; i>=1; i--) { sum += ts + a[i], ts+=a[i]; if (sum < 0) { sum=0, ts=0; if(a[i] < 0) bef[i-1]=1; else bef[i]=1; } } then I implemented this for loop to get the best stop point for every i: bef[n]=1; int last = 1; for(int i=1; i<=n; i++) { if(bef[i]) { for(int j=last; j<=i; j++) go[j] = i; last = i+1; } } So now go[i]+1---> n will be the deleted suffix for item i. I think if this part of code works , I think this problem can be solved in O(n) Complexity, And if it doesn't work, my approach will fail entirely. So, what is wrong with my code?
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 In C problem, why complexity O(n + k)? even if k > n it will be O(n).
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 Well technically you are right.Anyway considering the fact, that (by the statement) K<=N, then O(n+k) == O(n) (the complexities are equal)So → you are right, but so is Edvard (at least in asymptote) ^_^But I agree that it might be slightly misleading, considering, that the "k" really does not have to be used for counting of the complexity :)
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 Thanks. Fixed.
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 For D, another interpretation is to count pairs (dx, dy) for all pairs of points and then for each such pair add to answer count * (count - 1) / 2. Since the parallel sides are parallel and has same length. But we will count each parallelogram twice, so divide the answer by 2.
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   +13 It's just a building vectors on each parallelogram's side, isn't it?
•  » » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   +5 an easier aproach and easy to implement is to find miidle of each line then use the fact that in every parallogram diagonals intersect at the middle.
•  » » » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 It will be not working if more than 3 points can lie on the same line. For example, {(2,2),(4,4),(-2,-2),(-4,-4)} is not a parallelogram. Yes, I know, following by problem statement its impossible, but the fact remains.
•  » » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 exactly as you say!Build vectors, merge them (count number of same vectors) and use Gauss's formula! ^_^
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 How can you solve Problem E?
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 I could not understand the editorial. Can someone please explain?
 » 4 years ago, # |   +7 Out of A,B,C,D guess which one I found the hardest? That's right! A. FML ;_;
 » 4 years ago, # |   -8 There is another method of solving B with sorting. Some people might find it easier and shorter to code17235532
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 For Problem F you can just make a form of slope such that (p[j] — p[k]) / (j — k) <= s[i], where p[i] = i * sigma(a[i]) — sigma(i * a[i]), s[i] = sigma(a[i]). then you can make a convex hull, for each i, you just to use binary search to find the best choice and update the answer. this complexity is O(nlogn)
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 for E ,in 5th line ,there should be m - 1 choices for each of them but not k-1 choices.
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   +5 Thanks. Fixed.
 » 4 years ago, # | ← Rev. 3 →   -36 Here's just a funny story I want to tell you guys.I solved problem F by a weird O(N) algorithm, which is not correct.Maybe test cases are weak, so my solution passed 52/54 tests (failed on 2 tests, I had to write "if n=... cout..." in order to AC). Seem crazy right ?
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 An O(n) alternative for E:  LL powr = 1; LL current = 1; ii (n) { current = ((2*m)*current - (current - powr)) % MOD; powr = (powr * m) % MOD; } cout << current << '\n'; This is more direct from the statement of the problem. We build the set of all sequences, element by element, from left to right, and current tracks the count of distinct subsequences within all the sequences (visualise a different room for each sequence maybe). At each step for each room we create m new rooms. Also, in each room, each subsequence splits into two: one with the newly added element, and one without. Except we have just created some subsequences that were already there; all of them, in fact (except the empty ones), so we subtract them (the number of empty ones is powr, which is m**i).Seems to work: 17242031.
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ | ← Rev. 3 →   0 It seems I forgot how to solve recurrences. But Wolfram Alpha hasn't. Edit: for some reason that link doesn't work. Here it is: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+recurrence+a%5Bi%5D+%3D+a%5Bi-1%5D*K+%2B+M%5E%28i-1%29So there's a O(lg (n+m+MOD)) solution. Logarithmic time means we can solve it in Python!Complete solution:  import sys n, m = map(int, sys.stdin.readline().split()) MOD = int(1e9+7) first_term = pow(2*m-1, n, MOD) rr = first_term + ( first_term - pow(m, n, MOD) ) * pow(m-1, MOD-2, MOD) print rr % MOD if m > 1 else n+1 `Apparently it works: 17273456
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 Hey,this may be a bit naive question but please can you explain how the answer for n=2 & m=2 for this problem is 14.
•  » » » 4 years ago, # ^ | ← Rev. 2 →   0 There are 4 sequences and in each we need to count unique subsequences:00: [], [0], [0,0]01: [], [0], [1], [0,1]10: [], [0], [1], [1,0]11: [], [1], [1,1]That's 3+4+4+3.
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 For B, you say "There are no tricks." What about 17246985?
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 Check my solution as suggested in tags binary search, dp(pre calculation)
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 Can u explain how to solve it using binary search and dp?
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 I don't understand why the problem D is complexity O(n^2*logn), I know that the n^2 is there because we have to compare every segment with every other segment but I don't understand why the log(n).
•  » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 The log(n) comes up from the complexity of the data structure needed to handle cnt, such as a C++ map. Note that you need to count how many times a point appears as a middle point.
•  » » » 4 years ago, # ^ |   0 Okey, thank you!
 » 4 years ago, # |   0 I didnt understand the samples in the question for E, could someone help me out here?
 » 3 years ago, # | ← Rev. 2 →   0 Can someone elaborate on the following from problem E's editorial?
 » 12 months ago, # |   0 I think the test cases of 660C - Hard Process are weak. There is a similar problem 676C - Vasya and String. I tried my accepted submission 49270641 of 660C - Hard Process for 676C - Vasya and String but it got WA on test 12 49757559.
 » 8 months ago, # | ← Rev. 2 →   0 The closed formula being referred to in problem E is:$ans = m^n + \frac{m}{m-1}((2m-1)^n - m^n)$. It doesn't work when $m = 1$ (because of division by 0). But in that case, since there is only a single sequence of length $n$ comprising of all $1$-s, the answer is simply $(n + 1)$.
 » 3 weeks ago, # |   0 can someone suggest the dp approach to the HARD PROCESS problem.it would be really helpful .