| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3857 |
| 2 | jiangly | 3810 |
| 3 | maroonrk | 3534 |
| 4 | tourist | 3528 |
| 5 | Kevin114514 | 3510 |
| 6 | turmax | 3411 |
| 7 | Um_nik | 3387 |
| 8 | Radewoosh | 3367 |
| 9 | heuristica | 3322 |
| 10 | strapple | 3317 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 158 |
| 2 | maspy | 150 |
| 3 | Um_nik | 146 |
| 4 | Errichto | 139 |
| 5 | nik_exists | 138 |
| 6 | adamant | 136 |
| 7 | maroonrk | 134 |
| 8 | DNR | 133 |
| 9 | Dominater069 | 131 |
| 9 | AmShZ | 131 |
|
0
This case worked with me output 1,5 2,4 3,3 4,2 5,1 I think you mean this case which failed with me 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 5 5 |
|
0
it couldn't be solve with recursive method use only one loop and check at the end for the maximum value here is my solution http://codeforces.me/contest/580/submission/22301569 |
|
-10
can u explian why this values are optimal!!!!! |
|
On
late_riser →
Codeforces Round -270: (D. Design Tutorial: Inverse the Problem) — Cannot understand the gravity of the problem !!!, 10 years ago
0
I understand your explanation but is this property of weighted tree?! Or it what the problem need?! |
| Name |
|---|


