Problem Statement: this Is there a way to prove that if we are not able to connect the vertices to 1 in the greedy order that has been suggested, then there exists no other answer?
Thanks.
# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 3690 |
2 | jiangly | 3647 |
3 | Benq | 3581 |
4 | orzdevinwang | 3570 |
5 | Geothermal | 3569 |
5 | cnnfls_csy | 3569 |
7 | Radewoosh | 3509 |
8 | ecnerwala | 3486 |
9 | jqdai0815 | 3474 |
10 | gyh20 | 3447 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | maomao90 | 174 |
2 | awoo | 165 |
3 | adamant | 161 |
4 | TheScrasse | 160 |
5 | nor | 158 |
6 | maroonrk | 156 |
7 | -is-this-fft- | 152 |
8 | orz | 146 |
9 | SecondThread | 145 |
9 | pajenegod | 145 |
Name |
---|
Auto comment: topic has been updated by Flvx (previous revision, new revision, compare).
Let's call sum of Ak as Sk
If we can connect (i,j) (i,j != 1), it means Si + Sj >= i * j * c
If Si > Sj, then Si + Si >= i * j * c, Si >= i * (j/2) * c
j/2 >= 1, so Si >= i * 1 * c, We can connect (i, 1) and (1, j).
Aah, got it. Thanks