I wanted to go into details — but it would have been a full 30 minutes. Any suggestion/query is welcome.
# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | jiangly | 3976 |
2 | tourist | 3815 |
3 | jqdai0815 | 3682 |
4 | ksun48 | 3614 |
5 | orzdevinwang | 3526 |
6 | ecnerwala | 3514 |
7 | Benq | 3482 |
8 | hos.lyric | 3382 |
9 | gamegame | 3374 |
10 | heuristica | 3357 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | cry | 169 |
2 | -is-this-fft- | 166 |
3 | Um_nik | 161 |
3 | atcoder_official | 161 |
5 | djm03178 | 157 |
6 | Dominater069 | 156 |
7 | adamant | 154 |
8 | luogu_official | 152 |
9 | awoo | 151 |
10 | TheScrasse | 147 |
I wanted to go into details — but it would have been a full 30 minutes. Any suggestion/query is welcome.
Name |
---|
I don't think your solution can pass the system test. I think it will be TLE. In the worst case, updating the nodes' information can be O(n); So it's O(q*n)? Did I misunderstand? :D
updating will take O(log(n)) per query. Something like:
So, we are building the data structure for LCA incrementally after each query.
For more info check out "Another easy solution in <O(N logN, O(logN)>" section on TC