rng_58's blog

By rng_58, history, 4 months ago, In English,

We will hold diverta 2019 Programming Contest 2.

The point values will be announced later.

We are looking forward to your participation!

By the way, now you can reach here from AtCoder:

 
 
 
 
  • Vote: I like it
  • +146
  • Vote: I do not like it

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +12 Vote: I do not like it

time link is broken

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +146 Vote: I do not like it

That discuss tab/link is an amazing idea!

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +50 Vote: I do not like it

I earlier thought that Atcoder came up with new discussion forum, but when i cliked the link, I was like LOL.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it -26 Vote: I do not like it

Discussion of AtCoder contest at Codeforces!!Good to see it.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +45 Vote: I do not like it

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

Practical

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +9 Vote: I do not like it

Are favs bound to the device? I don't understand why do I have different fav lists on my pc and my laptop while being on the same account.

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +16 Vote: I do not like it

    The favorite list is just stored to your browser's local storage.

»
4 months ago, # |
Rev. 5   Vote: I like it +21 Vote: I do not like it

Announcement: it's 17:20 in Japan timezone, so less than 4 hours to start!

This is my first time to write one or more problems in a contest which is rated and not a Beginner Contest. I'm looking forward to your participation :)

»
4 months ago, # |
Rev. 2   Vote: I like it +6 Vote: I do not like it

So, are AtCoder Regular Contests permanently replaced by sponsored contests ?

E869120 and square1001 did a great job as usual in setting the Problem F. Although I had no idea in how to solve the problem, I immediately understood the editorial. It was such a nice Mathematical problem. Strangely, it reminded me of Tashakashi's Information (ABC088 C) and Five, Five Everywhere (ABC096D).

Both those problems had short, surprising constructive solutions. They were elegant and had the aha! factor. I believe this F Had it too.

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +35 Vote: I do not like it

    I'm not sure if this is permanent, but at least majority of ARCs will be replaced by sponsored contests. The difficulty/quality of problems will be the same for all ~2799-rated contests, regardless of the names of the contests.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it -24 Vote: I do not like it

Codeforces is Atcoder's mentor??

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +1 Vote: I do not like it

Wish everyone can get a high rating:)

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

How to solve B? Any ideas?

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

    Obviously, (p, q) should be the difference between two balls' coordinates, since otherwise we'll never be able to acquire a ball at zero cost (and our answer would be N). Iterate over every pair of balls and let (p, q) be the difference between their coordinates. Then, for each such (p, q), iterate over every ball and determine whether we can collect it at zero cost. (We can do so if and only if there exists a ball at (x-p, y-q): since there can be only one ball at each point, we know that we can collect (x, y) right after (x-p, y-q).) That lets us determine the minimum cost of collecting the balls given this pair (p, q), and our answer is the minimum of all of these values.

    • »
      »
      »
      4 months ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it -8 Vote: I do not like it

      For the third sample test case in problem B why is the answer 2. What are the values of p and q taken ?

      • »
        »
        »
        »
        4 months ago, # ^ |
          Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

        Take p=1, q=0, then collect the four points in the order #1, #3, #2, #4. #3 and #4 will then be free, so the answer is two.

        There are several more cases that work (p=0, q=1, and the order #1, #2, #3, #4, for example), but this gives a correct answer.

        • »
          »
          »
          »
          »
          4 months ago, # ^ |
            Vote: I like it -16 Vote: I do not like it

          but given that u r not allowed to take value 0 of any p & q !!

          • »
            »
            »
            »
            »
            »
            4 months ago, # ^ |
              Vote: I like it +8 Vote: I do not like it

            We must have p != 0 or q != 0, so one of the two can be zero as long as they aren’t both zero.

        • »
          »
          »
          »
          »
          4 months ago, # ^ |
            Vote: I like it -16 Vote: I do not like it

          "We will collect all of these balls, by choosing two integers p and q such that p ≠ 0 or q ≠ 0 and then repeating the following operation:"

    • »
      »
      »
      4 months ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

      I used union-find to connect balls with the same (p, q). 1. I first sort the balls first by x, then by y. 2. For all pairs of balls (i, j) where i < j, I compute (p, q) and check the cost. This gets WA on more than half the tests. Why?

      I know that it doesn't help the complexity to use only i < j pairs. But I thought that sorting would be enough to make it work.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +10 Vote: I do not like it

What was the solution to F?

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

Hint for C?

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +6 Vote: I do not like it

    Here's a small hint that helped motivate my solution.

    Suppose we have three terms x, y, and z. After subtracting z from y, we get y-z, and after subtracting that from x, we get x-y+z. As you can see, the z is being added now, since it was subtracted twice. In general, subtracting a number an even number of times is equivalent to adding that number. Can we take advantage of this somehow?

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

When will editorial come out?

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

    Uploaded just now.

    • »
      »
      »
      4 months ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it -32 Vote: I do not like it

      soo long editorial for problem f diverta city in japanese, but only few lines in english, that's not fair.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +10 Vote: I do not like it

Solution for E?

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +11 Vote: I do not like it

    Here's my solution, although the explanation may be a bit hard to follow.

    Let dp[i] be the ways to get at least one block to height i and then to order however many blocks end up on height i at some point. (We need to order them because we have to figure out the order in which we'll add blocks to these squares.) Then, dp[0] = N! since there are N! ways to arrange the blocks at point 0.

    Afterwards, dp[i] is the sum of the dp values from dp[i-1] to dp[i-D], since we can start anywhere from 1 to D blocks below, times the sum from 1! to N! (as we can bring any number from 1 to N of blocks up to height i and then we have x! ways to order their next steps).

    Then, our answer is dp[H] except at this step, we don't multiply by the factorials (as we won't be doing any future steps, so we don't need to order the blocks arriving at H).

    • »
      »
      »
      4 months ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

      Thank you :) your explanation is somehow better than the editorial for me.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it -21 Vote: I do not like it

rng_58 when will the editorial come.

»
4 months ago, # |
Rev. 2   Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

After thinking C for over an hour, I find D a simple brute force.
QwQ

How to solve C?

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

    Brute force? How? (I used DP 2 times)

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

    Take the largest number in the set, and call it A. Take the smallest number in the set and call it B.

    Subtract each of the remaining positive numbers in the set from B. Then, subtract each of the remaining negative numbers in the set, plus the new value of B, from A.

    This is ideal because we're subtracting B and all remaining negative numbers from A once while subtracting all remaining positive numbers twice, which is equivalent to adding them. So, we're adding as many positive numbers and subtracting as many negative numbers as possible.

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it
»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +35 Vote: I do not like it

Problem C(without answer reconstruction): https://codeforces.com/contest/1038/problem/D

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +8 Vote: I do not like it

    I think problem in codeforces is little diffrent.I can't handle the situation of adjacent.Can somebody help me in this problem.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +6 Vote: I do not like it

I don't understand why my code passed the test cases for question B. More precisely, why does adding the following 4 lines make my code correct ?

pot.emplace(a,b);
pot.emplace(-a,b);
pot.emplace(a,-b);
pot.emplace(-a,-b);

My code

( Maybe it's because test cases are weak. )

Thanks

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

I thought you could choose lines with different slopes for B, time to relearn reading.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +8 Vote: I do not like it

Oh wow, F is pretty similar to a problem that appeared in a Finnish contest recently, and I even realized that, but multiplied by $$$2^{\left\lceil log2(M)\right\rceil}$$$ instead of M at every step. Too bad, with that this would have been my best-ever performance :/

Submission during contest, Accepted submission after contest

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +6 Vote: I do not like it

I dont understand statement problem D :( . But tasks were interesting thanks to the authors.

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +24 Vote: I do not like it

E869120 and square1001 wrote problem F. How was it?

My solution is in the editorial and the max length of Hamiltonian Path will be $$$96 \ 755 \ 758 \ 040$$$. If we start induction from $$$N=3$$$ with setting edge length $$$1, 2, 3$$$, we can get more 'accurate' answer which max length is $$$83 \ 907 \ 014 \ 282$$$.

However, when I saw the submissions, most people solved in different ways to writers' one. Also, I am curious how short the optimal answer is, because writers/admins could not find the solutions which score is less than $$$6\times 10^{10}$$$ :)

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +5 Vote: I do not like it

    why u wrote so short editorial for F, while in japanese its too long. why partiality?

    • »
      »
      »
      4 months ago, # ^ |
      Rev. 3   Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

      That's because square1001 wrote a detailed editorial of problem F, and evima, who usually translates the problem statement in AtCoder, wrote English editorial of F.

      • »
        »
        »
        »
        4 months ago, # ^ |
        Rev. 2   Vote: I like it -43 Vote: I do not like it

        since evima is not so active on cf, tell him to write proper editorials from the next time. Cutting his job short is not good.

        • »
          »
          »
          »
          »
          4 months ago, # ^ |
            Vote: I like it +28 Vote: I do not like it

          But some people even in Japan are saying that English editorial is more simple and it means better. So I think that this is just an opinion difference to evima and square1001.

          I personally think that it is good to write every steps of approach which the writer and/or editorialist used to solve the problem. That's why I wrote 5 + extra 1 step of ideas to complete the Japanese editorial.

          But some people think differently — they think that editorial is the best if they could tell "how to get AC" in the most simple way.

          • »
            »
            »
            »
            »
            »
            4 months ago, # ^ |
            Rev. 2   Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

            If one just wants AC. he can copy paste other submissions. unless and until proof and intution behind the solution for a particular problem is not given editorial makes no meaning and sense.

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
    Rev. 2   Vote: I like it +29 Vote: I do not like it

    Apparently my solution produces a better one, with maximum path cost $$$49721430711 \approx 5 \cdot 10^{10}$$$:

    distances

    Edit: And the improved solution from my post below, with maximum path cost $$$45201300642 \approx 4.5 \cdot 10^{10}$$$

    distances
    • »
      »
      »
      4 months ago, # ^ |
      Rev. 3   Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

      Great solution.
      How did you find this answer?

      • »
        »
        »
        »
        4 months ago, # ^ |
          Vote: I like it +8 Vote: I do not like it

        It seems there are two differences to the solution in the editorial:

        Firstly, I have the "optimal" (minimum maximum value) list of values for every size:

        values

        Finding them took a few seconds with a simple brute force:

        brute code

        Secondly, instead of building inductively by adding edges to all previous nodes multiplied by M, I add edges from the first node to the other ones, then from the second to later ones, and so on, each time multiplied by the product of the sum of the two longest edges for every previous node. This works by the same argument, but we end up multiplying smaller values.

        Here's the submission: code

        • »
          »
          »
          »
          »
          4 months ago, # ^ |
            Vote: I like it +10 Vote: I do not like it

          Why do you think that we multiplying smaller values? Your value covers all subsets of edges with no more than 2 edges from each group, while authors solution covers only interesting subsets.

          I think that it is actually worse, because I was doing the same thing, but with bad values (like in editorial), and it wasn't enough ($$$1.36 \cdot 10^{11}$$$). I had to use different values for one group, so that only sums of two are different (and all numbers different). We can do this because after decoding all other groups we know the exact number of edges we need. And that helps only if the size of group is 5, 6 or 7 (not more).

          Also I don't understand why you multiply by sum of two maximums, not sum of two maximums + 1 (and the same question for solution from editorial). You know, when we use 10-based system, we multiply by the largest digit + 1, not by the largest digit.

          • »
            »
            »
            »
            »
            »
            4 months ago, # ^ |
              Vote: I like it +8 Vote: I do not like it

            I actually didn't even realise I wasn't adding 1. It isn't a issue here though, since if the total length is exactly some multiple of b, we know the contribution from the earlier nodes is exactly b, since it is at least 1 and not more than b, and the contribution from later nodes is divisible by b.

            Note that by doing it in this order you cannot find the maximum cost of hamiltonian path, since at each step you add edges to nodes that you have not handled yet. So I think the approximation is necessary.

            It turns out the intuition about "multiplying smaller values" doesn't really work. But by constructing the graph like this, the maximum path is pretty easy to find: It always goes $$$1 \rightarrow 3 \rightarrow 5 \rightarrow 7 \rightarrow 9 \rightarrow 10 \rightarrow 8 \rightarrow 6 \rightarrow 4 \rightarrow 2$$$, since the lengths of the edges from every node are sorted by how large of an index the edge goes to, and it is optimal to take as many edges and as heavy edges from every node as possible, we get this greedy solution. So we end up taking one edge from every group of edges we add, and the multiplier will always be the second smallest value in the list of weights for that group. Additionally, b will be determined by the product of the sum of the two largest values in the suffix of lists.

            I ran the brute force again, firstly minimising the sum of the two last numbers in every list, and secondarily minimising the second smallest number. This gave the following values:

            values

            And the graph with maximum path cost $$$45201300642 \approx 4.5 \cdot 10^{10}$$$:

            distances

            Here's the submission

            The original values but using the maximum as in the editorial gives $$$75915624051 \approx 7.5 \cdot 10^{10}$$$ for the longest hamiltonian path: submission. The modified values (even though they weren't optimized for this use) give $$$69050411635 \approx 6.9 \cdot 10^{10}$$$: submission

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

    I used a similar idea, but with a worse sequence: $$$1, 2, a_i = a_{i-1} + a_{i-2} + 1$$$. My thought process: Well shit, the last two edges are too big. If it's just 1 edge, I can find the lengths of all paths that don't contain it, all paths that contain it and just bruteforce the minimum length of that edge such that no two paths' lengths coincide (using 2 pointers to check if a fixed length is ok). But it's 2 edges, so I'll just guess one of them and do that for the other. Distances:

    0 878 37673475840 5381925120 448493760 22424688 679536 12584 143 1
    878 0 6 10763850240 896987520 44849376 1359072 25168 286 2
    37673475840 6 0 21527700480 1793975040 89698752 2718144 50336 572 4
    5381925120 10763850240 21527700480 0 3139456320 156972816 4756752 88088 1001 7
    448493760 896987520 1793975040 3139456320 0 269096256 8154432 151008 1716 12
    22424688 44849376 89698752 156972816 269096256 0 13590720 251680 2860 20
    679536 1359072 2718144 4756752 8154432 13590720 0 415272 4719 33
    12584 25168 50336 88088 151008 251680 415272 0 7722 54
    143 286 572 1001 1716 2860 4719 7722 0 88
    1 2 4 7 12 20 33 54 88 0
    

    (6 is the guessed length here, there are other options). The max. length is pretty short, too.

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +10 Vote: I do not like it

    Here you go! A solution with max. cost approximately $$$9 \cdot 10^9$$$.

    0 214 95963 4008331713 448493760 22424688 679536 12584 143 1
    214 0 3 2004429048 896987520 44849376 1359072 25168 286 2
    95963 3 0 1002019965 1793975040 89698752 2718144 50336 572 4
    4008331713 2004429048 1002019965 0 3139456320 156972816 4756752 88088 1001 7
    448493760 896987520 1793975040 3139456320 0 269096256 8154432 151008 1716 12
    22424688 44849376 89698752 156972816 269096256 0 13590720 251680 2860 20
    679536 1359072 2718144 4756752 8154432 13590720 0 415272 4719 33
    12584 25168 50336 88088 151008 251680 415272 0 7722 54
    143 286 572 1001 1716 2860 4719 7722 0 88
    1 2 4 7 12 20 33 54 88 0
    
»
4 months ago, # |
Rev. 2   Vote: I like it -52 Vote: I do not like it

Can someone explain. The sol of C

»
4 months ago, # |
Rev. 2   Vote: I like it +46 Vote: I do not like it

Problem A,B,C and E were written by me. Thank you for your participation!

»
4 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

For the third sample test case in problem B why is the answer 2. What are the values of p and q taken

»
4 months ago, # |
Rev. 2   Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

yuma_ satashun square1001

The editorial mentions that problem D can be solved using knapsack dp in $$$O(M)$$$ time where $$$M$$$ is the maximum amount of acorns/weight. Can you explain that DP ?

To update any state of DP, it takes $$$O(M/g)$$$ time where $$$g=$$$ cost of exchange

  • »
    »
    4 months ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +5 Vote: I do not like it

    let dp[i] be the maximum amount of acorns we can get when we start with i acorns.

    As we can exchange multiple times, we can update dp from smaller side (like dp[i] = max(i, dp[i-g_1]+g_2))

    max (dp) can be as large as N * (g_2/g_1) for the first time, and we can afford the same dp for the second time