| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ecnerwala | 3649 |
| 2 | Benq | 3581 |
| 3 | orzdevinwang | 3570 |
| 4 | Geothermal | 3569 |
| 4 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
| 6 | tourist | 3565 |
| 7 | maroonrk | 3531 |
| 8 | Radewoosh | 3521 |
| 9 | Um_nik | 3482 |
| 10 | jiangly | 3468 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | maomao90 | 174 |
| 2 | awoo | 164 |
| 3 | adamant | 161 |
| 4 | TheScrasse | 159 |
| 5 | nor | 158 |
| 6 | maroonrk | 156 |
| 7 | -is-this-fft- | 152 |
| 8 | SecondThread | 147 |
| 9 | orz | 146 |
| 10 | pajenegod | 145 |
A tree is given in which each edge is having some weight associated with it and you are given a number K.
So starting from root in K-steps how much maximum weight you can collect. You can traverse in any direction either from parent to child or child to parent. You can visit a node multiple times.
~~~~~ ~~~~~
I have not formally proved this, but say we use the edges e1, e2, e3, ..., ek (these are the weights). So sum over all ei is less than k * max(ei), i.e, it is better to repeat the max edge k times. So this may lead to a greedy algorithm. For each edge, if the depth of the node is d, add the weight upto that depth, and then add the edge k - d times. Find the maximum for all edges.