^
# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 3880 |
2 | jiangly | 3669 |
3 | ecnerwala | 3654 |
4 | Benq | 3627 |
5 | orzdevinwang | 3612 |
6 | Geothermal | 3569 |
6 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
8 | jqdai0815 | 3532 |
9 | Radewoosh | 3522 |
10 | gyh20 | 3447 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | awoo | 161 |
2 | maomao90 | 160 |
3 | adamant | 156 |
4 | maroonrk | 153 |
5 | atcoder_official | 148 |
5 | -is-this-fft- | 148 |
5 | SecondThread | 148 |
8 | Petr | 147 |
9 | nor | 144 |
10 | TheScrasse | 142 |
^
Name |
---|
I usually prove my greedy by submission. :)
Proof by Accepted :"D
but what if there are weak tests?
There's one argument I use and if it doesn't work, I just believe in it :) Here's it (pretty standard):
Consider candidate to the answer x' ≠ x and where x is the one that would be chosen by greedy. Now we say that if we choose x something gets improved.
Proof by contradiction. Can you share some of your favorite greedy problems, I need to improve my problem solving on greedy problems :)
You can use A2oj and select "Greedy" category in that.Or just google "Greedy problems codeforces".
Use the leaderboard. If many people have wrong submissions, it might mean that the obvious-ish greedy solution is wrong. Then one should think about it more. Find a countertest or prove it. Or just stresstest against the naive solution.
I usually think for a moment about a countertest or an easy proof. It doesn't make much sense to spend a lot of time to prove something, unless the solution would take long to implement
I used the leaderboard in the last contest for the clique problem (Div. 2 E — Div. 1 C Party) and the code passed the pretests. As it turned out, the pretests were just very weak and hundreds of greedy submissions including mine got Wrong answer on test 51 :(
mehh, just call it a bad day , this trick is mostly godlike , especially to people like me :)
I was thinking about contests with full feedback, but it's often the same for CF — as long as pretests aren't weak.
I don't have enough experience to advise you but several times I've seen solutions that are solved by some weird comparators then some processing.
Usually I got a little bit surprised, and thought to myself "What sort of thinking process did this guy/team go through", only to ask them later, and know they just implemented some verifier, and tried several comparators till one passed them, submitted and AC.
This is why I usually have a strong dislike against "hard to prove but easy to guess and code" greedy problems.