Hi everyone, and to the Codeforces Admin team,

I'm writing to address the situation regarding my submission for Problem H in the recent Div. 4 contest (Round 1017), which was marked as "Skipped" due to potential plagiarism concerns. I want to provide some context and hopefully clear up any misunderstandings.

There were a couple of points raised that might have looked suspicious, and I'd like to explain them:

1. The Code for Problem H (Variable Names & Template): It was pointed out that my accepted solution for H didn't use my typical template and had longer variable names (like distinct_a_values, current_idx). This happened because my initial approach involved some pre-computation logic, which, for some reason, kept giving me index errors. I couldn't quite figure out the bug because there were many things to track simultaneously under the time pressure. So, I decided the best way forward was to rewrite the code from scratch. This time, I focused on a much cleaner and clearer implementation, using more descriptive variable names to help me keep track of everything accurately. While long names might not be typical in speed contests, that clarity really helped me get the logic right on the second attempt, and this time it worked perfectly.

2. The Quick Resubmission: Anyone looking closely would see two submissions for H very close together, with completely different code, where the second one got "Accepted". This was simply a mistake on my part. I submit solutions by uploading files, and I accidentally uploaded the code for a different problem I had recently solved ("Arrow Paths" — 1900 rated). I realized the error immediately and submitted the correct file for H right after.

3. Recent Contest Performance: Some might notice my performance in the last two contests was significantly better than before. There's a reason for that. I only started taking competitive programming seriously around mid-January because of a university course I'm enrolled in. Until recently, my focus was purely on learning fundamentals (number theory, graphs, DP, etc.), aiming for a solid base (~2k rating topics). Contests weren't my priority.

   • Our course requires participation in some external contests (like on CF/AtCoder), mainly for completion credit. This explains why in some older contests, you might see me only attempting specific problems (sometimes not even A or B) – I was just fulfilling the requirement.
   • For example, in the Div 3 (Round 1016), the course needed us to solve F and G, so those were my main targets. After solving H (which took a while) and the required F, I still had over an hour left, so I tackled the remaining problems (though one of the solutions got hacked unfortunately).
   • Seeing the Div 4 (Round 1017) announced felt like a good chance to try and solve everything, as Div 4 contests are less frequent and generally easier. I quickly Googled the typical rating cap (saw ~1400 mentioned on Google), which felt achievable given my practice on 1600-1800 problems. So, I decided to try a different strategy: solve H first, putting my best energy into the potentially hardest problem, then work backwards (H -> A). This is why H was my first solved problem in that contest (in about 36 minutes).

Also, my submission for H doesn't seem to match other skipped solutions I checked, so perhaps the accidental wrong submission triggered the flag? I'm not sure. I've messaged MikeMirzayanov earlier today about this and am hoping for a positive resolution. Being flagged as a cheater after genuinely solving the problems is quite disheartening.

For anyone wanting to see the effort I've been putting in, feel free to check my profile. You can see the number of problems I've solved this year. Also, if you go to my Submissions tab and tick "Show unofficial," you'll see consistent practice on problems ranging from 800 up to 1800+ since January, alongside practice on other platforms like CSES and AtCoder when I find relevant problems there.

I sincerely hope this clarifies the situation and that my submission for H can be reassessed and hopefully changed from "Skipped" to "Accepted".

It would be really unfortunate if things like not using a template or using descriptive variable names when tackling a complex problem could lead to submissions being flagged. I'm working incredibly hard to improve, and facing false accusations would honestly make that journey much less motivating.

If anyone still has doubts after reading this, please feel free to share your thoughts, but I'd appreciate it if you could provide specific reasons so I can understand the concern better. Simply saying "you cheated" doesn't help much.

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I hope we can get this sorted out soon.