Блог пользователя maroonrk

Автор maroonrk, история, 5 лет назад, По-английски

Please note that the contest time is one hour earlier than the usual time.

We will hold AtCoder Regular Contest 120.

The point values will be 400-400-500-600-700-1600(800).

The full version of the last problem is unusually hard for ARC, so there is an 800-point subtask.

We are looking forward to your participation!

  • Проголосовать: нравится
  • +122
  • Проголосовать: не нравится

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +77 Проголосовать: не нравится

Same time as Google Kickstart Round C :(

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +10 Проголосовать: не нравится

Please try to prepond it.

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится -13 Проголосовать: не нравится

Please prepone or postpone , I hope you also know that the no. of participants will be very less due to kickstart then why not prepping or postponing ?

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +34 Проголосовать: не нравится

Although it sucks for contests to overlap, especially with a Google round, I really appreciate AtCoder has been trying to run theirs at the same time each week. Out of all 347 contests ever hosted since 2016, a whopping 298(85.9%) of them have started at 12:00 UTC sharp. And for the past year, that number has been 88.8%. Their consistency is very impressive.

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
Rev. 2  
Проголосовать: нравится +86 Проголосовать: не нравится

Since the English editorial is not ready now, I'll leave short hints here.

A
B
C
D
E
F and F2

UPD: it's up.

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +147 Проголосовать: не нравится

I’m consistently in awe of how beautiful most AtCoder problems are. Can rarely solve any or am pathetically slow, but the ideas behind most of them are so elegant and many turn out to have such trivial solutions that I’m repeatedly banging my head while admiring it. Kudos to authors and everyone else involved yet again. Very grateful.

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится +11 Проголосовать: не нравится

From C, I really feel the charming of swapping, for I didn't get it until I read the editorial.

So, can anyone give me some advice on how to think of the problems like this one.(I mean, problems about swapping)

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
Rev. 2  
Проголосовать: нравится +10 Проголосовать: не нравится

I'm sorry but the editorial of the E problem is really hard to understand. The picture in it is misleading!

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

I have a WA idea for problem D, which I still cannot understand why it is wrong.

First, I observe that a '(' could only match a ')' in a position of different parity, otherwise the number of characters between them is odd and thus cannot make a valid sequence. Therefore, I split the numbers into two sets, each one with different parity of the indices.

Then I sort the first set in ascending order and the other in descending order. I think that this way of matching would maximize the cost. Finally, I match those two sets and construct a valid sequence.

However, I got WA and still do not understand why. Could anyone find out my flaws? Thanks in advance.

Here is my code: https://atcoder.jp/contests/arc120/submissions/22888138

  • »
    »
    5 лет назад, скрыть # ^ |
    Rev. 6  
    Проголосовать: нравится +3 Проголосовать: не нравится

    Try

    3
    1 2 3 3 2 1
    

    The Answer from your program will be

    ((()))
    

    Which yields 0, one better answer would be

    (())()
    

    which yields 4.

    The problem is: You are matching indices 3-0, 1-4 and 5-2 this way. By just placing '(' at the lower valued index and ')' at the higher valued index you get ((())), which does match indices 0-5, 1-4 and 2-3 though! Here's the flaw in your placement of the brackets. It is a valid bracket sequence, just not the one you wanted.

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Is there any dynamic programming counting solution for problem B??

»
5 лет назад, скрыть # |
 
Проголосовать: нравится 0 Проголосовать: не нравится

Why in problem D we should add i to a[i] (a[i] = a[i] + i)?