Problem Statement: this Is there a way to prove that if we are not able to connect the vertices to 1 in the greedy order that has been suggested, then there exists no other answer?
Thanks.
# | 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 |
Problem Statement: this Is there a way to prove that if we are not able to connect the vertices to 1 in the greedy order that has been suggested, then there exists no other answer?
Thanks.
Name |
---|
Auto comment: topic has been updated by PimpedButterfly (previous revision, new revision, compare).
Let's call sum of Ak as Sk
If we can connect (i,j) (i,j != 1), it means Si + Sj >= i * j * c
If Si > Sj, then Si + Si >= i * j * c, Si >= i * (j/2) * c
j/2 >= 1, so Si >= i * 1 * c, We can connect (i, 1) and (1, j).
Aah, got it. Thanks