Блог пользователя duckladydinh

Автор duckladydinh, история, 9 лет назад, По-английски

Hallo everyone,

Do you know any simple formulas that are often unknown to many? For me, some can be mentioned are

  • Graph: Euler characteristic, Handshaking theorem, Caley Formula, Kirchhoff's theorem, Kőnig's theorem

  • Polygon: 2-Ear Theorem, incenter formula of a triangle, pick theorem, Shoelace Formula

  • Logic: Pigeonhole

  • Prime: Fermat, Wilson's theorem

  • Number: McNugget theorem

  • Fibonacci: Zeckendorf's theorem

  • Counting: Burnside Lemma, stars and bars

  • Combinatorics Identity: Vandermonde's Identity, Hockey-stick identity

  • Math: Linearity of Expectation

  • Other: harmonic series sum

... And what about you? Can you share some?

Thank you.

  • Проголосовать: нравится
  • +92
  • Проголосовать: не нравится

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +24 Проголосовать: не нравится

Well I suppose if you included Pigeonhole, then Harmonic Series sum can be included too. It's just useful to know (sometimes used in problems):

has an upperbound of

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Pick's Theorem is One Such theorem. Problems are there on this topic.

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +10 Проголосовать: не нравится

Auto comment: topic has been updated by duckladydinh (previous revision, new revision, compare).

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
← Rev. 2  
Проголосовать: нравится +30 Проголосовать: не нравится

Chicken McNugget theorem.

The motivation is in McDonald Chicken McNuggets, which come in packs of 4, 6, 9, and 20. If you wanted to troll them, you could ask for a pack of 11 (the largest amount of chicken McNuggets they can't make).

https://artofproblemsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=Chicken_McNugget_Theorem

For two coprime positive integers m and n, that largest number that cannot be written as am + bn (cannot be made by adding up m and n) will be m*n — m — n.

Not sure why it works (could not under stand proof :P), so it would be great if some smarter folks expanded on this.

  • »
    »
    9 лет назад, скрыть # ^ |
     
    Проголосовать: нравится +10 Проголосовать: не нравится

    Such a formula does exist :o what a surprise?

    Updated

  • »
    »
    9 лет назад, скрыть # ^ |
     
    Проголосовать: нравится +16 Проголосовать: не нравится

    It's actually very easy to see that if you look at it as a graph problem. Remainders modulo m are vertices and there are edges from each vertex x to (x+n)%m of length 1, because this is equivalent to adding n once. Now you can see that by reaching shortest path from 0 to a vertex we get the smallest possible number of "+n" parts (crucial here is that adding m doesn't change the remainder modulo m).

    You can notice that the distances are 1,2,3.. in some order and the last one is exactly m (n-1)-n

    • »
      »
      »
      9 лет назад, скрыть # ^ |
      ← Rev. 2  
      Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

      Thank you so much! I've always felt guilty about not getting this but the graphs explanation is much clearer than the maths explanation :P

    • »
      »
      »
      9 лет назад, скрыть # ^ |
       
      Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

      I just tried to draw it out.

      I am confused about this part "You can notice that the distances are 1,2,3.. in some order and the last one is exactly m (n-1)-n"

      How could the distance between any two vertices in this graph be m (n-1) — n when the greatest distance possible is m-1? (there are m vertices)

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +24 Проголосовать: не нравится

I have found the Shoelace Formula to be extremely useful in some instances (esp with coordinate/geometry problems).

A nice trick for determining whether a bunch of points are collinear: if they enclose an area of 0 then they lie on a line or are the same point -- meaning the shoelace formula should give 0 as well.

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
← Rev. 2  
Проголосовать: нравится -11 Проголосовать: не нравится

Maybe Faulhaber's Formula for calculating ?

Some Pythagorean triplet's properties?

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Auto comment: topic has been updated by duckladydinh (previous revision, new revision, compare).

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Auto comment: topic has been updated by duckladydinh (previous revision, new revision, compare).

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +115 Проголосовать: не нравится

2 + 2 = 4 — 1 = 3 Quick Maths!

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +2 Проголосовать: не нравится

Could you please edit your post and make the theorems point-wise using bullets or something? Right now it looks unpleasant to read.

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
← Rev. 8  
Проголосовать: нравится +13 Проголосовать: не нравится

Cayley's formula is the number of spanning trees of N nodes which is equal to NN - 2

Number of spanning trees in complete bipartite graph GX, Y is : XY - 1 × YX - 1

Such that

X : is the number of nodes in the first set.

Y : is the number of nodes in the second set.

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Auto comment: topic has been updated by duckladydinh (previous revision, new revision, compare).

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Auto comment: topic has been updated by duckladydinh (previous revision, new revision, compare).

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

I have met a problem about several days before, which used "Fermat's theorem on sums of two squares" (I am not sure of the exact name of this theorem). This theorem has a simple description but perhaps a little bit complicated proof. It states that for any prime integer p > 2, it can be written as p = a2 + b2, where both a and b are positive integers, if and only if p mod 4 = 1.

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Thanks a lot for your effort. It would be really nice if you also go on adding the links for these theorems. Others might help for the links they found, by commenting.

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
← Rev. 2  
Проголосовать: нравится +16 Проголосовать: не нравится
  • »
    »
    9 лет назад, скрыть # ^ |
     
    Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

    Could u give me a problem where Jensen's inequality is used... thank you.

  • »
    »
    9 лет назад, скрыть # ^ |
    ← Rev. 3  
    Проголосовать: нравится +5 Проголосовать: не нравится

    Wow, so many, so nice :D

    I have updated the blog from some of those, but... not all.

    For example, I think that the Bertrand's theorem is so obvious. For Goldbach's theorem, I have never really seen a problem that can be "indirectly" solve by it (problems for it are all obviously the definition). Faulhaber's formula, I do not think it is simple in anyway. Jensen's inequality, I think is more suitable for proving rather than implementing. Am I wrong? If so, please just tell me :D

    And Burnside theorem is indeed powerful. That is my motivation for writing this blog

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +10 Проголосовать: не нравится

Zeckendorf's theorem.

A problem using this theorem: http://codeforces.me/problemset/problem/126/D .

The winning strategy for fibonacci nim also uses the theorem.

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

I have found the Paleka's lemma to be useful:

click
»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Auto comment: topic has been updated by duckladydinh (previous revision, new revision, compare).

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Auto comment: topic has been updated by duckladydinh (previous revision, new revision, compare).

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Ok, maybe all you pros knew it long ago, but I learned inverse mod finding of prime mod with fermat's little theorem just yesterday

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

I think you can add Catalan Numbers in Number theory/Combinatorics or Counting.

»
9 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

For some reason people don't usually use barycentric coordinates in problems where they can help. Let's say that a point P has masses (x, y, z) wrt triangle ABC with sides a, b, c and angles α, β, γ (side with length a has endpoints B and C, angle α is , the same naming with other sides and angles) if x + y + z ≠ 0 and (x + y + z)P = xA + yB + zC. This can help to find some points associated to a triangle:

  • centroid has masses (1, 1, 1),
  • incenter has masses (a, b, c),
  • excenters have masses ( - a, b, c), (a,  - b, c), (a, b,  - c),
  • orthocenter has masses or (if you don't want to mess with infinity) ((a2 + b2 - c2)(a2 - b2 + c2), ...) or (acosβcosγ, ...),
  • if one point has masses (x, y, z) then its isotomic conjugate has masses (a2 / x, b2 / y, c2 / z), which instantly gives us masses of the circumcenter,
  • Steiner point (also known as Fermat point or Torricelli point) is either the vertex of angle which exceeds , or (if there is no such angle in the triangle) has masses (a / sin(α + π / 3), ...).

I use "masses" instead of "barycentric coordinates" since the sum of barycentric coordinates should equal 1. The points listed above can be found in one line if one has a written Point class with addition and multiplication by a real. Of course, sometimes (for example, for orthocenter of circumcenter) it's easier to intersect two lines, but there are problems where masses optimize time and efforts.