Wrongly Penalized

Below are my two submissions for this problem:

  1. First Submission(TLE): Solution Link
  • This version included macro definitions and typedefs to simplify the code. The sieve function calculated the smallest prime factors, and the primes were stored in a separate vector.
  1. Second Submission (Corrected flagged as cheating): Solution Link
  • In this version, I removed the macros and typedefs for better clarity. The sieve function remained the same, but I moved the prime vector initialization to the main function to ensure all primes were stored correctly.

Given the nature of competitive programming and the large number of participants, it is not uncommon for solutions to appear similar, especially when standard algorithms like the Sieve of Eratosthenes are applied. My intention was solely to optimize and correct my initial approach.

I would like to clarify that my work was independently developed and i not copy a code from any other participants.

I respectfully request a review of my submissions in the context provided.

Hi @anon12886460

We have reviewed your case, we found that this is a legitimate case of cheating.

One such pair is CodeChef: Practical coding for everyone - CodeChef: Practical coding for everyone

Please refrain from copying code from someone or sharing your code to someone.

1 Like