| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | jiangly | 3810 |
| 2 | Benq | 3676 |
| 3 | Kevin114514 | 3655 |
| 4 | maroonrk | 3463 |
| 5 | strapple | 3447 |
| 6 | Um_nik | 3387 |
| 7 | heuristica | 3322 |
| 8 | turmax | 3317 |
| 9 | tourist | 3307 |
| 10 | jiangbowen | 3291 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 156 |
| 2 | nik_exists | 150 |
| 2 | maspy | 150 |
| 4 | Um_nik | 142 |
| 5 | Errichto | 139 |
| 6 | adamant | 137 |
| 7 | AmShZ | 135 |
| 8 | BledDest | 132 |
| 8 | maroonrk | 132 |
| 10 | qwexd | 129 |
|
0
Makes sense. Fastio is designed to not flush output buffer for every print statement and untie from cin, but cerr flushes at the end of every << operator. |
|
+1
Hi Codeforces Team, I received a message concerning plagiarism for problem 2114D of this contest on my submission 321509477 with user P1KACHUUU for their submission 321458826. I completely understand that plagiarism and colluding is against the codeforces guidelines; however, I believe the similarity between our code is completely by coincidence. I developed my solution approach by considering that it would be optimal to remove the point that is at the smallest or largest x-y positions. I then considered the cases where the smallest / largest x and y are the same point and adjusted for that. Finally, I considered the case where the remaining area is equal to n — 1, in which case we must add the removed point back to the shortest side. Although our code is very similar, I think it is reasonable for two random contestants to have the same intuition regarding this problem and implement our solutions in the same manner. Looking at other solutions for 2114D, if participants only consider using arrays rather than multi-sets or other ordered data structures to find the remaining max and min, their solutions would be very similar to mine and P1KACHUUU's. Secondly, our code differs in the fact that to create a list of points sorted by the y values, P1KACHUUU uses a list with points stored as {y, x} along with the list of points stored as {x, y}. On the other hand, my solution creates two lists, but stores both as {x, y} points and simply uses a custom comparator to sort the second list into non-descending order by y-value. This slight difference causes distinct problems for sharing code as it requires the re-ordering of every line involving the second list of points sorted by y-values. I also think that considering P1KACHUUU is over 1600 rated and was thus not able to compete as a rated participant in a Div 3, it is highly unlikely that they decided to collude and submit plagiarized code. I did not plagiarize, and I believe that neither did P1KACHUUU. Although I can only claim that our code is similar due to random coincidence, I do not believe that this similarity is completely improbable. Please look into this, and thank you for your time. -Andelupe |
| Name |
|---|


