| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3676 |
| 2 | Kevin114514 | 3657 |
| 3 | jiangly | 3638 |
| 4 | turmax | 3442 |
| 5 | tourist | 3380 |
| 6 | Um_nik | 3353 |
| 7 | strapple | 3350 |
| 8 | squareOf105 | 3346 |
| 9 | heuristica | 3322 |
| 10 | maroonrk | 3310 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 158 |
| 2 | nik_exists | 150 |
| 2 | maspy | 150 |
| 4 | AmShZ | 144 |
| 5 | Um_nik | 143 |
| 6 | Errichto | 139 |
| 7 | adamant | 137 |
| 8 | BledDest | 135 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 133 |
| 10 | qwexd | 130 |
| Name |
|---|



the input size if small (the largest factorial you will need is 20!) so here you can generate all the possible factorials and use bitmasking (or recursion) to pre-calculate all possible values and cache them ... then for every case you just output the answer
I pre-calculate all the value upto 20. But now i cant understand how can i find my desired number .
I have no idea about bitmasking. Is there any other way ?
Use brute-force. For each number there are two cases — to use or not to use :)
If i use brute-force, at some stage summation of fact(num) may exceed my desired n , at that case i may avoid that fact(num) . But can i surely say that at any stage summation of fact(num) will be equal to my desired n ?
I think that this approach will result in TLE since the limit is 0.5 :) I think it is better to read Caraz96's idea and ask if you misunderstood something in it.
It is possible to use a greedy approach: since fact(n) > fact(0)+fact(1)+...+fact(n-1) (this is true for each n > 2) you can iterate from the greatest factorial(20!) to the smallest one, if fact[i] is less than or equal to N you must take it, decrease N by fact[i] and proceed with the next factorial. At the end, if N is 0 you found the solution, otherwise it is impossible to obtain N adding factorials.