maroonrk's blog

By maroonrk, history, 2 months ago, In English

We will hold AtCoder Regular Contest 124.

The point values will be 300-400-500-700-800-900.

We are looking forward to your participation!

 
 
 
 
  • Vote: I like it
  • +87
  • Vote: I do not like it

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

I have a question. That is if I register for a contest and I don't participate in that contest(don't submit anything). is it impacts my rating? (the question is for both codeforces and atcoder).

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

Hope for a good contest.

I hope to become green in Atcoder.

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

Hope for a good contest!

»
2 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +2 Vote: I do not like it

Who's the problem setter of D?

(I'll knit his name on my death list.)

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

Why does using set gets TLE submission while simple sort works submission .Are sets slower? also, which 1 test case does this(C) fail on?

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

https://atcoder.jp/contests/arc124/submissions/24542794 Can anyone help me find what's wrong in my solution in problem B? It is passing 34 cases but failing in 7

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

    I got similar results before accounting for duplicate items.

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

      I think I did account for duplicate items.Can you please check my code what's wrong?

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

        Sorry, getting ready to die in global round.

        If it turns out to be a coincidence matching the number of WA results, sorry for the distraction!

        fwiw, I remember getting funny stuff from:

        3
        2 2 1
        2 2 1
        
»
2 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +17 Vote: I do not like it

Can someone please explain the dp part in the editorial for E?

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

Problem C

Can anyone tell whats wrong in this code..it is passing 72/73 test cases..What is that one case which it is failing at?

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

    It's a greedy strategy... it will make locally "correct", but globally wrong choices. Example:

    3
    3 2
    1 6
    1 2
    

    The correct output is 2. Your program tries to save a common factor of 3 after the first two packs, but this dooms it to a worse final result. The test data was probably not very good if this approach was able to pass 72/73 test cases.

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

      https://atcoder.jp/contests/arc124/submissions/24552411

      Can you please check this one out what's wrong here? It passes 72/73 cases as well.

      Brief explanation : I am storing all those primes that are divisors of all pairs' at least one number and updating answer for all permutations of those primes. According to the order of primes in each permutation, I am adding a number to the red bag if it has a prime divisor whose exponent is greater than the other pair member. Is there anything wrong with my logic or do I have a bug?

      • »
        »
        »
        »
        2 months ago, # ^ |
          Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it
        3
        2 12
        18 3
        2 3
        

        Correct output is 6. Your output is 3. Also, as you may realize, it would TLE on this input, since there are too many relevant primes:

        1
        58642669 223092870
        
»
2 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

How large would the number of divisors of a number be?

I used to assume it was at most $$$\sqrt n$$$.

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

    It's about $$$O(\sqrt[3]{n})$$$

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

      Could you explain how to achieve the $$$\mathcal{O}(N^{1/3})$$$ bound?

      • »
        »
        »
        »
        2 months ago, # ^ |
        Rev. 2   Vote: I like it +5 Vote: I do not like it

        There's actually an exact formula. Number of divisors equals to the multiple of [power degrees of prime factors of the number + 1];

        12 = 2^2 * 3^1 — > d(12) = (2+1)*(1+1) = 6

        I suppose it can be proven that the maximum number of divisors will have numbers which have each prime multiplied exactly once (2*3*5*7...). The maximum number which we can get like that and won't exceed 10^9 consists of 10 primes so its number of divisors will be 2^10.

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

        I think I had read somewhere that the number of divisors of a number n can be shown to be asymptotically less than n^eps where eps > 0, for all n > some N.

        Therefore, I guess if we are truly exact then we are talking of a kind of "polynomial" of arbitrarily small degree. Maybe that would be kind of logn or (logn)^2 etc ( as it a function which grows slower than n^eps where eps > 0)

        Anyway, I think the n^(1/3) bound isn't really a "real" tight bound. Instead, its just probably the best bound which works when dealing with numbers that are in the range we deal with, for our purposes

        n < 1e9 or 1e18

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

C with $$$n \leq 50$$$ and TL = 4 sec is the best trolling I ever seen

»
2 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it -8 Vote: I do not like it
void solve()
{  
    ll n;
    cin>>n;
    vector<ll> a(n),b(n);
    ll x=0,y=0;
    for(ll i=0;i<n;i++)
    {
        cin>>a[i];
       
    }
    for(ll i=0;i<n;i++)
    {
        cin>>b[i];
       
    }
    
    unordered_map<ll , ll> mp;
    for(ll i=0;i<n;i++)
    {
        for(ll j=0;j<n;j++ )
        {
            mp[a[i]^b[j]]++;
        }
    }
   
    set<ll> s;
    
    for( auto i : mp)
    {  if(i.second>=n)
    {
        s.insert(i.first);
    }
    }
    cout<<s.size()<<endl;
    for( auto it=s.begin();it!=s.end();++it)
    {
        cout<<*it<<"\n";
    }
}

LINK Can somebody tell me which cases are missing using above approach in problem B? I got 38xAC and 3xWA

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

    Your code is not giving the correct answer for this test case —

    3 1 1 2 3 3 1

    Correct answer : 0

    Your Answer : 1,2

    I think your logic is flawed as you have not accounted for identical elements in the original array.

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

    I think u should also use map since values were around 2^30 and maps are better to pass test cases where collision might occur but still I think that can be fixed in case of unordered maps and also u have used a nested loop to calculate the candidates for x , i.e the same xor value, u could have done in a single loop a[0]^b[j] , j running from 0 to n( since a[0]^b[0]=a[1]^b[1] ....)

    my code

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

    instead of vector use set to take input of a,b. and for checking count of map of XORs use min(a.size(),b.size()). my submission

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

what is the logic in A can anyone explain plz!

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

C can be solved by using randomized algorithm: https://atcoder.jp/contests/arc124/submissions/24542820

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

    This only works because the test data for C is pretty weak. Here's a small, easy-to-construct input on which it will fail 100% of the time:

    3
    3 10
    5 14
    7 6
    
    • »
      »
      »
      7 weeks ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

      Yeah luckily, there isn't a hacking round at Atcoder. I hope the admin can allow it.

      But how can you come up with the idea though?

      • »
        »
        »
        »
        7 weeks ago, # ^ |
          Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

        My thought process was something like this:

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

Applying std::random_shuffle 1000 times makes my fake solution to C pass...

»
2 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it -8 Vote: I do not like it

I don't know if the time complexity of my algorithm is correct. Is there anyone can tell me?

#include<bits/stdc++.h>
#define int long long
using namespace std;

const int maxn=55;
const int inf=1ll<<60;

int gcd(int x,int y) {
	return y==0?x:gcd(y,x%y);
}

int lcm(int x,int y) {
	return x/gcd(x,y)*y;
}

struct Node {
	int x,y;
	Node(int x=0,int y=0):x(x),y(y) {}
	bool operator < (const Node &rhs) const {
		return x==rhs.x?y<rhs.y:x<rhs.x;
	}
};

int a[maxn];
int b[maxn];
set<Node> st[maxn];

signed main() {
	ios::sync_with_stdio(false);
	cin.tie(0),cout.tie(0);
	int n;
	cin>>n;
	for(int i=1; i<=n; i++) {
		cin>>a[i]>>b[i];
	}
	st[0].insert(Node(0,0));
	for(int i=0; i<n; i++) {
		for(auto x:st[i]) {
			st[i+1].insert(Node(gcd(x.x,a[i+1]),gcd(x.y,b[i+1])));
			st[i+1].insert(Node(gcd(x.x,b[i+1]),gcd(x.y,a[i+1])));
		}
	}
	int ans=0;
	for(auto x:st[n]) {
		ans=max(ans,lcm(x.x,x.y));
	}
	cout<<ans;
}
»
2 months ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +9 Vote: I do not like it

Can anyone explain dp part? That's the most important part in the editorial for E

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

In B-XOR Matching 2

Why is it sufficient for checking for only n distinct values of X. Shouldn't it be $$$n^2$$$ for different values across a^b where a , b = arrays(a,b) which could be at max $$$n^2$$$

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

    Think it in this way that a[0] can map with b[0] to ..... b[n-1] so we will have n different values of xor (a[0]^b[k]) and hence we need to check for only n possible values because the xor for every pair in each matching needs to be same

    Here is my submission

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

Can someone explain how to get the formula $$$ f(n) = g(n) - 2 \sum^{n-1}_{0} g(i)C(n-i-1) $$$ in problem F?

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

    To get $$$f(n)$$$ you need to subtract from $$$g(n)$$$ all the cases where they met before $$$n$$$. Suppose the LAST time they met before meeting again at $$$n$$$ is after moving right $$$i$$$ times.

    Then, both of the animals should move $$$n - i$$$ times right. During this phase the camel should always be strictly faster than the cat (or vice versa). This is known to be $$$C(n -i - 1)$$$. See the lattice paths interpretation of Catalan number: catalan

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

      Thanks!! I get it.

    • »
      »
      »
      6 weeks ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

      Can u explain dp part in the editorial for E ?

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

        Were you able to find the dp for E? Please share if you could find it

        • »
          »
          »
          »
          »
          5 weeks ago, # ^ |
            Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

          I do not have it. In the editorial for E, they just said to use dp to solve without explaining how to use dp ~~~~~

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

I am getting WA in problem B in three testcases.After so much trying i still cant figure out whats wrong .Please help me out.Here is my Submission

»
5 weeks ago, # |
Rev. 2   Vote: I like it -8 Vote: I do not like it

Can someone explain, how did we prove that N+M-K+2*max(R,B) is the minimum(for problem D: Yet Another Sorting Problem) from the below argument:

Argument from the official editorial on Atcoder

clyring

  • »
    »
    5 weeks ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

    Why tag me

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

      Thought that you could have helped seeing the other comments on this page.

      Sorry for the tag. Removed it now.

  • »
    »
    5 weeks ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

    This proves a lower bound since if the original list is sorted after $$$j$$$ operations, then

    $$$ f(j) = j+N+M-K_j + 2 \max(R_j,B_j) = j + N + M - (N + M) + 2 \max(0, 0) = j, $$$

    since there are exactly $$$N + M$$$ components each of size $$$1$$$ in that case. But since $$$f$$$ is increasing and obviously $$$j \geq 0$$$ it must further hold that $$$j = f(j) \geq f(0) = N+M-K_0+2 \max(R_0,B_0)$$$. The editorial then continues by describing a specific strategy that achieves this lower bound and must therefore be optimal.

    • »
      »
      »
      5 weeks ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

      Thanks for your reply.

      I might not have been clear with my doubt. The doubt was that how did the editorial claim that N+M-K+2*max(R,B) steps were needed at any point.

      After going through your comment, I went through the greedy strategy mentioned and it seems that the strategy helps to break open the the claim.

      Thanks again, clyring. If not for you I would have given up on this problem.

      For people who come later with the same confusion, the minimum steps can be rewritten as (N+M-(K-max(R,B))) + max(R,B). The second term max(R,B) is the number of steps required to join a pure red or pure blue component to another red/blue component(not necessarily pure). We do so because for swaps to occur a component must have both a red and blue node.

      By doing so, we decrease the number of components by max(R,B). Now, K(final)=K(initial)-max(R,B). And since in a single step we can decrease the number of components just by one we need at least N+M-K(final) steps to have the sorted array.