| # | 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 | 141 |
| 5 | Errichto | 139 |
| 6 | adamant | 137 |
| 7 | AmShZ | 135 |
| 8 | BledDest | 132 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 131 |
| 10 | qwexd | 129 |
|
0
yes I got it . Thanks |
|
0
I believe there is a missing test case in Problem 2130B - Pathless – Sum on the Subtree, which leads to incorrect solutions being accepted. Consider the following input: 5 9 0 2 2 2 1 This input represents a tree with 5 nodes and a total required sum of 9. The array specifies the desired subtree sums for each node. In this case, the configuration is already valid, and the correct output should be: 0 2 2 2 1 However, submission 342216799 incorrectly returns -1 for this input, yet it was accepted by the system. This suggests that the test cases do not cover such scenarios where the input is already a valid configuration, but the solution fails to recognize it. |
| Name |
|---|


