# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|

1 | tourist | 3509 |

2 | OO0OOO00O0OOO0O0…O | 3327 |

3 | Um_nik | 3297 |

4 | Syloviaely | 3274 |

5 | LHiC | 3216 |

6 | Petr | 3161 |

7 | Benq | 3130 |

8 | ko_osaga | 3124 |

9 | Swistakk | 3089 |

10 | dotorya | 3060 |

# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|

1 | Radewoosh | 185 |

2 | rng_58 | 161 |

3 | tourist | 158 |

4 | Petr | 152 |

5 | Swistakk | 150 |

5 | Vovuh | 150 |

7 | csacademy | 147 |

8 | Errichto | 145 |

8 | Um_nik | 145 |

8 | PikMike | 145 |

↑

↓

Codeforces (c) Copyright 2010-2018 Mike Mirzayanov

The only programming contests Web 2.0 platform

Server time: Sep/19/2018 16:54:27 (f2).

Desktop version, switch to mobile version.

User lists

Name |
---|

Me after realizing that I have spent half an hour in the contest on problem E

Also

div2 D/div 1 Acan be solved using binary search on time in which every man must come to the office. Sort men and keys positions and then on each check: for every man (going from left to right) we should take key lies "as left as possible". If keys are out, then this time (which we were checking) is smaller than answer.O((n+k)log10^{18}) if we take answer in range [0;10^{18}]http://codeforces.com/contest/831/submission/28546197

I just think it is ((k+n)log()) Because, how should you take keyas left as possible? Also because always keys can be contiguos maybe we can do BS on starting key pos?

right, I forgot to change it)

I thought we can do trinary search on starting key position (when we are moving contiguous set of keys from left to right, time is nonincreasing first, and nondecreasing then), but there is problem when two different starting key positions result in the same time. I don't know how to advance trinary search in that case.

I remember the same situation in another task, and it was solved (or just partially..) by using bin search from m1 to left and from m2 to right to find first value different from m1/m2, then we can compare them.

But new values can be equal again.

I can prove that looking for minumum in table of length n which is nonincreasing first and nondecreasing then needs checking at least n-1 elements from that table.

Let's look at n different input tables which look like this:

So i-th input table have '0' at i-th position and '1' everywhere else.

All these tables are nonincreasing first and nondecreasing then, so any algorithm solving looking for minumum of such a function have to distinguish these n tables, because answers (place where minimum is) are different for that tables.

But when algorithm will ask about some position in table of length n and it will find '1', then it just eliminate only one possible input table (that which have '0' in asked position). And for any given algorithm, regardless how it asks about values in table, there exists input table, for which algorithm will ask about '1' n-1 times (opponent can just say that there is '1' in places where algorithm asks). So algorithm for given problem needs to check at least n-1 values to find minumum of table.

So it is not possible to use trinary search in that task efficiently unless there exists some another observation I cannot see.

I solved with binary search for starting key position. http://codeforces.com/contest/830/submission/28644458 You know that the function is strictly decreasing, then strictly increasing. So to determine if you should go high or low you need to check two values and see if they are decreasing or increasing. If they are the same then one is the answer.

For trinary search you would need to do a similar thing to determine which way to go, check the value right next to the problematic key positions.

Ok, I didn't see that function is

strictlydecreasing andstrictlyincreasing.what is the proof of "taking continuous key will give us optimal solution" .

First step: You can show that if some person B is more on the right than person A, person B have to take key which is more on the right than key taken by person A. It is suffiecient to show that you can swap their keys otherwise, not increasing time to both of them go to office (there are few cases to check).

Second step: You can show that if there is key not taken by anybody between two key taken by some two people, one person can take key in the middle instead of another key and shorten his path.

And second step imply that there exists optimal solution in which all taken keys are continuous.

I am trying to solve using DP. I defined a recursive function f(i,j). Here i=> ith person and j=> jth key.

f(i,j) = max(f(i-1,j-1), f(i-1,j), abs(p-j)+abs(j-i)). Minimum of all f(n-1,j) is the answer. What is wrong with this solution. WA test case 8.

When is the full tutorial for div1 C & D coming out?

why the solution to div2 E is so strange? confuzed...

how do div1C&&div2F

Can anyone explain the solution for div2 E/div1 B ...

KAN Can you translate it to english please !??!

Use fenwick tree to calculate how many items are left in each prefix. You simulate the algorithm in the problem statement using this.

This picture might help you:

Think of elements being removed in rounds.If an element is removed at ith round then it has been looked up exactly i times.We can maintain total elements remaining to remove and add this to the answer at the beginning of the round.It can be done without fenwick trees.Code

if we go by a brute force approach than we can easily find the answer and after a close look on the brute force solution the only problem is that we have to quickly answer the query that what is the total card present in the deck in an specific range... you can use segment trees to know what is the total cards that are still available in the deck within a specific range as we can update all the used numbers in logN..

hope it helps !

There are some interesting ways to solve div1 A&B...

For A, binary search an answer K, then link ith person to jth key such that |a_i-b_j|+|P-b_j| \le K, then we can use a maxflow algorithm to check if the answer K is accepted. Then we find out that a person will fit a segment of keys, so we can use segment tree to reduce the number of edges.

For B, just use splay tree to simulate the operations......

Well, splay is absolutely INTERESTING

Anyway, I will try.

About div.1 D, I don't really understand the definition of dp[k][c] in the hint. If it means the number of sets which include c non-intersecting paths in k-house, I think the c will be (1<<k)-1 when all paths are single points, that seems ridiculous to me. Can anyone offer to explain it? Thanks.

Let's consider the dp array, dp[i][j] denotes the number of ways to get j non-intersecting paths in an annoying graph with height i as the promblem shows in the description, it seems that j can be as large as 1<<i , but never mind. Let's see what are the transitions first.

Now assume we've got all the dp[i-1][x], how can we make it to dp[i][x]? First enum how many paths we have in the left and right child, let's call them l and r. There are 5 types of transitions.

num = dp[i-1][l]*dp[i-1][r]

Now the interesting thing is, every time we go from i to i+1, we can only decrease the number of paths by 1, which means that j>k in the dp[i][j] is totally useless, it won't affect the final answer dp[k][1], so the complexity will be O(k^3) which is enough to pass the test.

Wish my poor English hadn't make it too hard to understand :D.

Thank you for your quite clear tutorial, I bet I'll understand it soon, after finishing my running contest. Never mind English, I'm from JS, too. 233

In fact, your English is perfect so I can understand easily. Thank you for your clear answer.

hint: I'm from JS, too, it's nightmare to recall the exams of English when I was in high school. It seems that you are in high school? Hope you good luck!

Can you please explain 3rd and 5th case ?

Can someone explain the idea behind Cards Sorting ?

traslated text(still no idea what this means):Firstly, we note that the operation "put under the bottom of the deck" is tantamount to "starting from the beginning when the deck ends," without shifting the cards anywhere.

Next, we will process all the cards with the same numbers at a time, obviously, Vasily will postpone them one by one. Suppose, at the moment when he laid out all the cards smaller than x, he was in some position p in the deck. Then two cases are possible.

If all the cards equal to x are later than the p position, then he scans all the cards until the last card x, and puts all x equal; Otherwise, if there is a card equal to x before p, it will first scan all the cards to the end of the deck, and then — all the cards from the beginning of the deck to the last card, equal to x, going to position p. Both cases are easy to process, if for each number write out all the positions of cards with such a number in ascending order. In addition, you need any data structure that allows you to count the amount on a segment and change it at a point, for example, if you store for each position 1, if the card is still in the deck, and 0 otherwise. For example, a tree of segments or Fenwick tree

Didn't understand how to implement Fenwick trees here

I am thinking of a 2D array and applying the techique

My submission: Code

store positions in the corresponding set v[val]

iterate values through v[], if v[i] is not empty then binary search for the next element

use the fenwick tree (which is global across all values) to calculate the amount of cards that are still active, which we would have to push it back to the bottom during the procss, and update it

repeat step 2,3 until all elements are processed.

Actually, it can be solved much easier using two pointers: firstly, let's store the array of sets of the positions of some element x, so it would be something like this: in the array Pos the key is the card value, and value is set of the positions of this element. Also let's maintain a set of values(we will name it "values"), which are still left in our array. So now we do the following: while not values.empty(), we look to the last position of the minimum element in the array (*values.begin()) , and look to the next element in the "values". And if the last position of the minimum element in the "values" set is greater, than last position of the next element in "values" set(we can determine it with O(log n) complexity, using the lower_bound function), than we know, that after deleting the last element (*values.begin()) in the array we can not delete anything else, because the next element after *values.begin() always stands leftside from the current minimum element. So the size of the array decreases only by the size of Pos[*values.begin()].size(). If not so(if the last position of the minimum element in the "values" set is less, than last position of the next element in "values" set), than also with the lower_bound function we determine the first position of the next element in "values", that is greater, than the last position of the current minimum element in the array, and after getting the iterator on this element we start deleting all the positions from the set, that are greater, then the last position of minimum element.And we can see the case (ex.: 1 1 1 2 2) that after deleting the minimum element(x = 1) we can also delete all elements that are becoming minimum after x(in this example after deleting 1 we can delete all 2 elements), so we now with only one iteration through array we can delete more than one kind of elements, so we derease our length of array by the size of Pos[x].size() minimum elements x, that we can delete entirely, and by the amount of positions of the last minimum element we could not delete entirely. And before each iterartion we add the current size of the array. That's all:)

Sorry if the explanation is some kind of vague, feel free to ask questions. Here is my code: 28526786

830A — Office Keys

"To solve this problem you need to understand the fact that all keys which people will take is continuous sequence of length n in sorted array of keys."

can anyone explain this , why it should happen ? How you get to know that you should sort them , any tips is really appreciated

lets divide all man in 2 groups : left men and right man(if their poitions is right or left from office). It is obvious, that the "right" people should go right to the office and take all the keys on their way, it is true for the "left" people also. Of course we can face the situation , that the amount of keys on the way right to the office is to small, so each "right" man can take the next key to the right that is not take or, the next key to the left(if he will skipp one key, the overall distance will only increase).That is absolutely true for the "left" man too. So you can see that it should really be a continuous sequence. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. I hope thois will help you

sorry but it is not clear.

Thanks for at least making effort , it is appreciated.

It is a genuine doubt , i don't know why people are not asking and answering :p , seems like all follows intuition and don't care to prove anything.

Hm, can you try to explain, what is not clear?:)i'll try to explain one more time

Can someone help me in formally proving that the greedy way of having continuous assignment between the keys and people is optimum.

Lets take a simple case of 2 people (

p_{1}<p_{2}) and 2 keys (k_{1}<k_{2}).Let the position of office beO.We need to show that

max(|p_{1}k_{1}| + |k_{1}O|, |p_{2}k_{2}| + |k_{2}O|) ≤max(|p_{1}k_{2}| + |k_{2}O|, |p_{2}k_{1}| + |k_{1}O|)ie. matching

p_{1}tok_{1}orp_{1}tok_{2}Now we need to take care of 4 cases (LHS and RHS can have 2 possibilities each). But I couldn't get any useful information from this relation.

I'm stuck over here . Is this way of proving wrong ?

I too,am facing the same problem,during contest I had the same intuition but it was too naive and had no backign up for it,also i was left with only 20 minutes,I came and checked the solution and I see the author's solution also mentions that,till now however I have not been able to prove why it is right..please help with the proof![user:VovanF98]

Can you explain your logic by taking the following example: office is located at: 60 keys are at: 10 40 400 men are at: 80 100 VovanF98

I think intuitively, you could start by proving that what if the people did not take consecutive keys? If there was a key that was not used by anyone and the key is between two "continuous key parts", would it be better for someone to choose the key instead? In essence, proving by contradiction may be a good start.

Why should we put initial scores exactly in set in problem C div 2?

To avoid their repetitions.

Simple solution for

div2 A:Let make up 3 states: state 1 if

a[i] >a[i- 1], state 2 ifa[i] = =a[i- 1], and state 3 ifa[i] <a[i- 1].Now init

prev_state= 1 and iterate in range [2;n]. Ifstate<prev_state, output "NO", otherwiseprev_state=stateand continue iterating.It looks really simple: http://codeforces.com/contest/831/submission/28547499

Very simple solution for Div1 C.

Could you please explain it in a clearer way?

I think I can prove that his method is correct.

is an increasing function with

d.We want the max value of

dsuch thatF(d) ≥dFor some

d, letF(d) =x.If

x<dthen thisdis invalid, but ifx≥dthen asFis an increasing function,F(x) ≥F(d)We can say that,

F(x) ≥x, soxis a better solution.So for every

dthat satisfiesF(d) ≥dwe have a better solution,F(x) ≥xwherex=F(d)Hence we need to check only on the possible values of

F(d)I understand all your analysis, but when it comes to your code I got screwed up.

Check my submission: 28524841

yep, I checked it and don't follow why all the possible answers are values of k/i

There will be atmost O(2*sqrt(k)*n) values of floor(k/i). I am iterating on i in such a way that all possible value of floor(k/i) occurs once. Total number of iterations will be O(2*sqrt(k)) and complexity will be O(2*sqrt(k)*n).

For more information: link

I understand that you are iterating through all possible values of floor(k/i). But why are they possible answers? why can't answer be sth like floor(k/i)+1 or floor(k/i)-1? U see that if d get smaller, it is more likely to become a valid answer. Thank you for your patience.

d*Σ (ai + d -1) / d <= k + Σ ai ;

d <= ( k+ Σ ai ) / ( Σ (ai + d -1) / d ) ;

The ( k+ Σ ai ) / Σ (ai + d -1) / d has at most sqrt ( k + Σ ai ) values.

So it is enough to check all these values.

I understand like this.

The ( k+ Σ ai ) / Σ (ai + d -1) / d has at most sqrt ( k + Σ ai ) values.

Yeah, but why can't d be a bit smaller than some value?

Ok,i am confused now too,233. If you solve it, please remind me,555.

I still want the answer to this

Nope, I still haven't come to a reasonable prove to it. Yet I do understand the method described by the editorial.

I proved it in a comment above

I got your analysis . but i am not getting how you are iterating over so that each value occur once and checking the condition on your analysis . can you please explain it

In div-2 E — Cards Sorting, i am using segment tree to find out the remaining cards. My code passes the sample test cases of this problem but i am getting WA. Please have a look at my code here and please tell me how to correct it.

Your code works if all the cards all unique. This is because you are sorting them based on value. But what if some values are repeated ?. If you have two values which are equal to minimum and they are left and right of the card removed, you should consider the right one, which you cant guarantee by sorting.

Instead try finding minimum in left half and right half separately using seg tree. Code

Thanks PradeepYarlagadda ! I've tried that using set but now i am getting TLE on case 20. code

I'm having an error on Test11 of div 2 /problem C. can somebody help?? solution :LINK

[Div 2 C]

How do we take care of the fact that there can be upto 4 * 10

^{6}values in the set (i.e the number of possible initial values), according to the editorial solution?There are only at most 2000 score changes, so you have at most 2000 initial score to check

Here the set can have up to 4 * 10

^{6}values right?It's enough to get the initial points only for b[0] (like in tutorial). The solutions should be among these values + prefix_sum[i]. points = b[0]; for(int i = 0; i < n; i++){ points = points — a[i]; initial_scores.insert(points); }

Oh, how could I miss that! Thanks bagodabago and YTF!

I still didn't get it. Why should we take only b[0] for initial points. Please someone explain.

Let n = 6, a (jury points): 5 5 -15 -15 10 15 and b (points which he remembers): 100, 95, 90. pts = b[0] = 100. If he remembers after 1st jury the intial points are 95(pts = pts — a[0]). If he remembers after 2nd jury the initial points are 90(pts = pts — a[1]). If he remembers after 3rd jury the initial points are 105(pts = pts — a[2]). If he remembers after 4th jury the intial points are 120(pts = pts — a[3]). If he remembers after 5th jury the initial points are 110(pts = pts — a[4]). If he remembers after 6th jury the initial points are 95(pts = pts — a[5]).

So the initial points that player had could only be 95, 90, 105, 120, 110, 95, although Polycarp couldn't remember that once the player had 100 points.

You have to check that these points, and only these, are the solutions.

Thank you so much. I got it now.

I completely don't get why scoring for D and E was 2250-2250. Maybe D is not easy, but is kinda standard and E is definitely not standard and demands a lot of work and not very pleasant code. 2000-2500 would do the justice. Results of both VK (known before round) and round itself confirm this.

Could anybody tell me how to optimize this solution on Java? 28657960 (logical part in method "solve")

For start, I do so as it do in tutorial. It got TL on 7 test.

Then I change array to set. It got TL on 34 test.

Then I change long to int where it possible. It got TL on 36 test.

Answer: change treeSet to hashSet

i didn't understand the idea of div 1 D, dp[k][c] , c non-intersecting paths in k-house . what does it mean??