# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 4009 |
2 | jiangly | 3773 |
3 | Radewoosh | 3646 |
4 | ecnerwala | 3624 |
5 | jqdai0815 | 3620 |
5 | Benq | 3620 |
7 | orzdevinwang | 3612 |
8 | Geothermal | 3569 |
8 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
10 | Um_nik | 3396 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | Um_nik | 163 |
2 | cry | 161 |
3 | maomao90 | 160 |
4 | -is-this-fft- | 159 |
5 | awoo | 158 |
6 | atcoder_official | 157 |
7 | adamant | 155 |
8 | nor | 154 |
9 | maroonrk | 152 |
10 | Dominater069 | 148 |
Name |
---|
When I see your blog, I look 'Top contributors' list immediately. And I saw you are not first..
stop it already
You said "let's assume we'll pick an odd-sized subset for now" and forgot to prove why it's optimal.
You're right, thanks for pointing this out! It's not necessarily optimal, one has to consider the even-sized subsets as well, but the solution is really similar for that case so I don't think digging into it would add much now :)
Actually in that problem one may prove that even-size subset can always be replaced with an odd-size subset without making the simple skewness smaller. Just consider removing the second middle element from the set.