# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 3856 |
2 | jiangly | 3747 |
3 | orzdevinwang | 3706 |
4 | jqdai0815 | 3682 |
5 | ksun48 | 3591 |
6 | gamegame | 3477 |
7 | Benq | 3468 |
8 | Radewoosh | 3462 |
9 | ecnerwala | 3451 |
10 | heuristica | 3431 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | cry | 168 |
2 | -is-this-fft- | 162 |
3 | Dominater069 | 160 |
4 | Um_nik | 159 |
5 | atcoder_official | 156 |
6 | djm03178 | 153 |
6 | adamant | 153 |
8 | luogu_official | 149 |
9 | awoo | 148 |
10 | TheScrasse | 146 |
Name |
---|
Auto comment: topic has been updated by Parvej (previous revision, new revision, compare).
Just try to backtracking/bruteforces. Each vertices during the visit will be marked (not go to that vertice again), else unmark it. The complexity will be $$$O(n!)$$$ time
SPyofgame I think time complexity will be O ((N^2) * (N!)) as for each path there will be N^2 computation right? Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks in advance.
I dont think we need $$$O(n^2)$$$ for each $$$O(n!)$$$ path since you can try to implement directly or something similar.
By the way, $$$O(n^2)$$$ is also considerably small compared to $$$O(n!)$$$. So unless the time limit is small, you can try to improve the complexity by changing implementation or even a bit of heuristic — which can provide better complexity and constant.