ENG  RUSTimus Online Judge
Online Judge
Problems
Authors
Online contests
About Online Judge
Frequently asked questions
Site news
Webboard
Links
Problem set
Submit solution
Judge status
Guide
Register
Update your info
Authors ranklist
Current contest
Scheduled contests
Past contests
Rules
back to board

Discussion of Problem 1346. Intervals of Monotonicity

Show all messages Hide all messages

Some tests to clear problem definition (+) Dmitry 'Diman_YES' Kovalioff 20 Feb 2005 14:44
I've solved this problem finally, of course, but I still suppose its definition to be unclear a bit :) So some tests for you:

1 3
1 1 1

1

//

1 5
1 2 3 4 5

//

1 5
5 4 3 3 3

1

//

1 7
1 2 2 3 3 4 5

1

//

1 5
1 2 3 2 1

2

//

1 6
1 2 3 2 3 4

2 - that's the point!

//

1 6
3 2 1 4 4 5

2

//

1 6
1 2 1 2 1 2

3

//

1 6
1 2 3 1 2 1

3
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) Kargapolov Andrey 20 Feb 2005 22:20
Thank you. I've solved this problem finally too.
Thank you.Your tests are very useful Neumann 2 Mar 2005 21:14
Thank you Fyodor Menshikov 1 Nov 2006 10:29
The problem statement is quite ambiguous. Thank you for clarification.
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) Ivanov Alexander 22 Jun 2007 20:11
Thank you for tests! Who has problem with test 9 - use test
1 12
1 2 3 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 4
Answer - 4
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) Denis Koshman 3 Aug 2008 17:22
Thanks! Problem statement really lacks definition for flat slopes...
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) Oracle[Lviv NU] 12 Jan 2009 17:08
Thanks! Really helpful!
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) Alex Tolstov [Vologda STU #19] 13 Jan 2009 00:25
Thanks!

Если честно, то условие ваще дурацкое.
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) →MOPDOBOPOT← 26 Aug 2009 17:10
>>
1 6
1 2 3 2 3 4

2 - that's the point!
>>
Why so? =( I know, that problem of my solution in this but don't understand.. I think it should be 3.
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) 2rf [Perm School #9] 27 Aug 2009 14:02
cause it can be divided in (1,2,3) and (2,3,4)
Again about this test. Artem Khizha [DNU] 10 Aug 2010 13:09
> 1 6
> 1 2 3 2 3 4
Well, I see, it can be divided into (1, 2, 3) and (2, 3, 4). But I don't see anything in the statement, that restricts me to divide into (1, 2), (3, 2), (3, 4). Does this mean, that complexity should be minimal?
Re: Again about this test. A.06 8 Apr 2013 22:33
Then why cant it be divided into (1,2) , (3,2) , (3) , (4) ?
Re: Again about this test. Drunken Statue 13 Mar 2016 12:57
Because (1,2) , (3,2) , (3) , (4) = complexity 4 is not optimal

Less complexity is: (1,2) , (3,2) , (3,4) = complexity 3

Optimal is: (1,2,3) , (2,3,4) = complexity 2
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) Lebedev_Nicolay[Ivanovo SPU] 27 Aug 2009 15:47
It is not necessary to connect point #3 and point #4
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) King Taylor Ag 15 Jan 2011 18:34
Hi!
1 3
2 10 5
->2
*
1 5
20 20 200 20 200
->2
*
1 5
1 2 2 1 1
->2
*
WA#21 MOPDOBOPOT (USU) 15 Sep 2012 23:32
This test helped me to overcome WA21:

input:
1 7
2 2 1 2 2 1 2
output:
3
Thanks for the test cases. Agreed. The problem is easy, but the sample I/O is very misleading.
Of great help.Thanks.
Re: Some tests to clear problem definition (+) Leonid Kokorin 4 Jun 2023 15:29
Thanks: WA2 -> WA25