Sir, please help me with my logic for this problem.
After spending some time on this question, I came with a math expression, which I believe is correct. The main part of my method depends on the fact that for ‘n’ positions, there will be a minimum and a maximum length of cable needed to make the desired connections - this is the obvious part. Upon doing some calculations on pen-paper, I came up with the following:
if n==1:
min=max=2
else if n==2:
min=max=3
else:
min=4*(n-1)
max=(n*(n+3))/2
I did calculations manually uptill n=6 and things turned out correct thus far. Now, given a value of ‘m’, it will fall in either of the 3 cases:
m<lo
m>hi
m lies between hi and lo (both inclusive)
based on that logic, the psuedocode is:
input n
if n==1:
lo=hi=2
else if n==2:
lo=hi=5
else:
lo=4*(n-1)
max=(n*(n+3))/2
input m
if m<lo:
print -1
else if m>hi:
print (m-hi)
else:
print 0
Unfortunately, this gave a WRONG ANSWER. So I compared the output of my code with that of an accepted code and couldn’t find any differences.
Simplest proof to prove that all [min(n),max(n)] are possible is :
case 1 : if n==1
max(1) = min(1) = 2;
case 2 : if n==2
max(2) = min(2) = 5;
case 3 : if n==3
max(3) = 9;
min(3) = 8;
So for n>3 if we go for solution then after dividing the problem we will surely reach some level where we have to solve for n’=3 and thing will be able to create the difference of 1 (if all other branches are remained constant). Hence we can get all the numbers in [min(n),max(n)].
I made my solution according to the editorial , someone please have look on code and suggest the mistakes?
I matched few test cases with the solution all good , but its always WA while submitting.
i got the perfect explanation of the logic used by setter, but i am not allowed to post image here. so if anyone is curious to know, can mail me @ sumeshkpandit@gmail.com
Note the following is not a proof:
Yet it can give some intuition,
f(n) = n+1 + f(n-x) + f(x), will have minima at x = n/2, u can find this by assuming f(n) to a polynomial function, and taking the derivative.
and f(n) is maximum at other two ends, that is either x = 1 or x = n-1, due to increasing both arms of parabola. (assuming the degree of polynomial f(n) is 2 ), again this is intuitive since the dip is at x=n/2.
f(n) starts decreasing as x increasing from 1 to n/2, reaches its minima when x = n/2, then again starts increasing.
@mkagenius - the equation in the first line of your explanation should be f(n)=(n+1)+f(x)+f(n-x-1).
Further, the statement “For maximum, we just need to place in the order {1,2,3…N}” seems fairly intuitive to me. (n*(n+3))/2 is easily derivable as being equal to ((n+1)+…+2).
Regarding the one regarding minLen[n], I also am having trouble finding a satisfactory proof for it. It is no doubt intuitive, but it would be great if someone could come up with a concrete proof for the same.
Let me put it this way - if the length of the wire to connect the ith soldier (meaning i-1 soldiers have already been stationed on the wall) be denoted by len[i], then one can easily see that len[i]>len[i+1]. Now, we know that len[1]=n+1. Hence, we can easily deduce that the max value for len[2] is n. Going on this way, the statement in question is evident.
, i think you already assumed that best placement permutation to be (1,2,3..,N) but that is the question, whether this particular permutation is best one or not.(or why do you think that to get maximum, that condition should be satisfied?).
See the constraints say that N<=30. Till N<=10, we can actually simulate the give procedure and display the different lengths we can incur. If we check that, we will come to know that all values will be taken. I mean it is an assumption but as 1/3 rd of the cases are going to satisfy it, we can give it a shot.