the problem is UVa 11157 — lazy frog
i understand that the subproblem is to find the minimax jump between two closest big stones. but how to prove that alternating jumps on the small stones is the best strategy ?
№ | Пользователь | Рейтинг |
---|---|---|
1 | ecnerwala | 3648 |
2 | Benq | 3580 |
3 | orzdevinwang | 3570 |
4 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
5 | Geothermal | 3568 |
6 | tourist | 3565 |
7 | maroonrk | 3530 |
8 | Radewoosh | 3520 |
9 | Um_nik | 3481 |
10 | jiangly | 3467 |
Страны | Города | Организации | Всё → |
№ | Пользователь | Вклад |
---|---|---|
1 | maomao90 | 174 |
2 | awoo | 164 |
2 | adamant | 164 |
4 | TheScrasse | 159 |
4 | nor | 159 |
6 | maroonrk | 156 |
7 | -is-this-fft- | 150 |
8 | SecondThread | 147 |
9 | orz | 146 |
10 | pajenegod | 145 |
the problem is UVa 11157 — lazy frog
i understand that the subproblem is to find the minimax jump between two closest big stones. but how to prove that alternating jumps on the small stones is the best strategy ?
Название |
---|
Let us prove this by contradiction. Let this not be the optimal strategy and the maximum jump is Mi - 1 → Mi + 1. Using optimal solution frog will jump:
Mi - 1 → Mi frog must jump Mi - 2 → Mi + 1 — greater distance than Mi - 1 → Mi + 1;
Mi → Mi + 1 frog must jump Mi - 1 → Mi + 2 — greater distance than Mi - 1 → Mi + 1.
We got a contradiction, so your greedy is correct.