|
|
Show all threads Hide all threads Show all messages Hide all messages | overrated | 👑TIMOFEY👑 | 2021. Scarily interesting! | 26 Jul 2024 14:18 | 3 | | WA17 | Agabek | 2021. Scarily interesting! | 1 Nov 2018 02:21 | 8 | WA17 Agabek 11 Oct 2014 17:24 Re: WA17 Angel Gonzalez 11 Dec 2014 19:25 Can anybody share that testcase? Here's a test case: 4 6 6 5 0 0 2 1 2 Which answer is correct for this test? My output (I also have WA17): 4 1 3 2 1 4 2 3 Why is it wrong? Re: WA17 Jane Soboleva (SumNU) 7 Mar 2016 16:01 Okay, so i finally figured it out. There was a phrase «For example, if six challenges until the end “Oozma Kappa” is forty points ahead, the audience at the stadium stands will just lose interest to the game.», which made me think that to "keep in suspense", on each step, i should choose such pair, that the current total sum is as close to zero as possible. However, this approach gives WA17. The proper approach is to keep, for as long as possible, such situation that if the first team gets all 6's for the remaining participants, and second gets all 0's, the first team wins; respectively, if 2nd team gets all 6's for the remaining participants, and 1st gets all 0's, 2nd team wins. An example test: 11 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 Wrong WA17 approach gives 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 but last two rounds aren't interesting, because at that point 1st team has 50, and 2nd team has 36 points, and even if 2nd team gets all 6's for last two, and 1st all 0's, it's still 50:48 and 1st team wins. One of the right answers is 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 Before last two rounds, we have 48:36, and 2nd team can potentially get all 6's on last two rounds for a draw 48:48; however, after a next round we have 54:36, and only then gets clear that 2nd team isn't going to win. Cheers to Felix_Mate for a test and nice explanation. Re: WA17 Smilodon_am [Obninsk INPE] 1 Nov 2018 02:21 > Which answer is correct for this test? > My output (I also have WA17): > 4 1 > 3 2 > 1 4 > 2 3 > Why is it wrong? This answer is wrong. We understand that the first team is a winner after the third round: 4 1 -> 0 + (0-0) = 0 3 2 -> 0 + (5-2) = 3 1 4 -> 3 + (6-2) = 7 - we understand that the first team is a winner 2 3 -> +(6-1) = 12 Correct answer is, for example: 4 2 3 4 2 3 1 1 Explanation - we understand that the first team is a winner only after the last (forth) round: 4 2 -> 0 + (0-2) = -2 3 4 -> -2 + (5-2) = 1 2 3 -> 1 + (6-1) = 6 - we don't know who is a winner 1 1 -> 6 + (6-0) = 12 Edited by author 01.11.2018 02:24 Edited by author 01.11.2018 02:24 | Wrong answer test 1 | Alexey | 2021. Scarily interesting! | 7 Jun 2017 10:21 | 1 | Is first test from problem description? I can't find any issue | Idea | Felix_Mate | 2021. Scarily interesting! | 22 Feb 2016 23:22 | 5 | Idea Felix_Mate 14 Jul 2015 12:37 Можно жадиной решать,заметив,что всё зависит от суммы набранных очков.В зависимости от ситуации( Sum1<Sum2 Sum1>=Sum2) построить решение. К примеру с помощью двух сортировок. Условие задачи, ИМХО, сформировано ужасно, в результате чего мы завалили эту задачу на контесте В условии нет ни слова про то, что понимается под "держать в напряжении", в результате наше решение максимальное количество раундов держало минимамальную разницу между командами, что является неправильным решением *кидает камень в огород жюри* this idea gives wa9 Very interesting to find test when it is bad. May be situation when Sum1=Sum2 is important For example: with idea we have 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 and in i=3 2-st doesn't loser but for 0 0 0 0 6 6 we have uncertainty for i<=3 Edited by author 21.01.2016 13:10 Да,но ведь победа всё равно не очевидна(ведь в конце может быть 6) Re: Idea Jane Soboleva (SumNU) 22 Feb 2016 23:22 Фраза «держать в напряжении» действительно достаточно неясная. Я посчитала, что алгоритм должен быть таким: на каждом шаге я подбираю какую-нибудь одну из пар, которая максимально приблизит суммарную разницу в очках к нулю (неважно, с какой стороны). В итоге WA17, как у людей в соседней ветке, и не вполне понятно, почему... | Wrong jury solution? (to admins) | Alexey Dergunov [Samara SAU] | 2021. Scarily interesting! | 22 Oct 2014 13:21 | 3 | I don't have permissons to this page. BTW, there was a bug in checker: std::unique wants sorted array. It's fixed on Timus. Thanks, I always forget about that sorting |
|
|
|