hey guys! can u explain why I can ignore the exact positions of the rooks in the initial configurations and that only the number of free rows and columns matter.
| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3676 |
| 2 | Kevin114514 | 3659 |
| 3 | jiangly | 3640 |
| 4 | turmax | 3450 |
| 5 | tourist | 3382 |
| 6 | strapple | 3360 |
| 7 | Um_nik | 3354 |
| 8 | squareOf105 | 3348 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 3312 |
| 10 | idontwannadothis…e | 3191 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 155 |
| 2 | nik_exists | 151 |
| 3 | maspy | 149 |
| 4 | AmShZ | 145 |
| 5 | Um_nik | 143 |
| 6 | Errichto | 139 |
| 7 | BledDest | 136 |
| 8 | adamant | 134 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 132 |
| 10 | cry | 130 |
hey guys! can u explain why I can ignore the exact positions of the rooks in the initial configurations and that only the number of free rows and columns matter.
| Name |
|---|



Look at it this way. A configuration is valid if no two rooks share the same column or row. So given that there are n rows and n columns, and a rook uses up one row and one column, it doesn't really matter which row and which columns it uses, since you will have left n-1 rows and n-1 columns. Notice that once you are actually solving the problem, the position actully matters while counting because you might count choosing [(3,1) then (2,4)] and [(2,4) then (1,3)] as diferent configurations, but that's the fun part of the problem.
In a more computational way, a configuration of rooks is a matching between the n rows and the m columns, so by adding an edge between row x and column y (putting a rook in (x,y)) you are left with a match between n-1 rows and n-1 columns and in the counting it doesn't really matter which are this columns/rows [again watch out for repetition, and in the case of this problem, how choosing one edge, the computer will choose another]