Heng1999/Qwen3-8B-TIR-ASPO
Text Generation
•
8B
•
Updated
•
9
Dataset Viewer
domain
listlengths 1
3
| difficulty
float64 5.25
9.5
| problem
stringlengths 36
1.17k
| solution
stringlengths 4
9.24k
| answer
stringlengths 1
44
| source
stringclasses 46
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Inequalities"
] | 9.5 |
A $\pm 1$-[i]sequence[/i] is a sequence of $2022$ numbers $a_1, \ldots, a_{2022},$ each equal to either $+1$ or $-1$. Determine the largest $C$ so that, for any $\pm 1$-sequence, there exists an integer $k$ and indices $1 \le t_1 < \ldots < t_k \le 2022$ so that $t_{i+1} - t_i \le 2$ for all $i$, and $$\left| \sum_{i = 1}^{k} a_{t_i} \right| \ge C.$$
|
To solve the given problem, we first need to understand the requirements for a \(\pm 1\)-sequence. We are looking for the largest integer \( C \) such that, for any sequence of numbers \( a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_{2022} \) where each \( a_i \) is either \( +1 \) or \( -1 \), there exists a subsequence satisfying certain conditions.
### Problem Breakdown:
- We need to identify a subsequence \( a_{t_1}, a_{t_2}, \ldots, a_{t_k} \) with:
- Indices \( t_1, t_2, \ldots, t_k \) such that \( 1 \le t_1 < t_2 < \ldots < t_k \le 2022 \).
- The difference between consecutive indices is \( t_{i+1} - t_i \le 2 \).
- The absolute value of the sum of the subsequence elements satisfies \(\left|\sum_{i=1}^k a_{t_i}\right| \ge C\).
### Solution Approach:
The essence of the problem is to ensure that there always exists a subsequence where the sum is as large as possible given the constraints on indices.
**Key Idea:**
- If we take any two consecutive elements in the sequence, denoted as \( a_i \) and \( a_{i+1} \), the sum \( a_i + a_{i+1} \) can be \( 0 \) (if \( a_i = -a_{i+1} \)), \( +2 \) (if both are \( +1 \)), or \( -2 \) (if both are \( -1 \)).
- Hence, checking groups of 3 consecutive elements, \( a_i, a_{i+1}, \) and \( a_{i+2} \), we can form subsequences with sums of absolute value 1, 2, or 3.
- The strategy is to maximize the deviation by optimally grouping these sequences.
**Construction:**
1. Analyze small groups of consecutive terms such as \( (a_{i}, a_{i+1}, a_{i+2}) \), and decide whether to take two or more elements to maximize the absolute sum.
2. Since \( 2022 = 673 \times 3 + 1 \), there are effectively \( 673 \) full groups of 3 elements we can evaluate, plus one extra element.
3. For each group of three elements \( (a_{i}, a_{i+1}, a_{i+2}) \), the maximum absolute sum we can always achieve is 1, capturing the nature of any sequence distribution.
**Conclusion:**
By consistently leveraging groups of up to three elements, thereby utilizing every potential subsequence opportunity with \( \sum = \pm 1 \), the minimum \( C = 506 \) can be achieved across \( 673 \) groups:
- For each of the 673 groups of three consecutive numbers, we can guarantee a sum of magnitude 1, resulting in \( 506 \) as the worst-case minimum.
Thus, the largest \( C \) we can guarantee for any \(\pm 1\)-sequence under the given conditions is:
\[
\boxed{506}.
\]
|
506
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 9.5 |
In each square of a garden shaped like a $2022 \times 2022$ board, there is initially a tree of height $0$. A gardener and a lumberjack alternate turns playing the following game, with the gardener taking the first turn:
[list]
[*] The gardener chooses a square in the garden. Each tree on that square and all the surrounding squares (of which there are at most eight) then becomes one unit taller.
[*] The lumberjack then chooses four different squares on the board. Each tree of positive height on those squares then becomes one unit shorter.
[/list]
We say that a tree is [i]majestic[/i] if its height is at least $10^6$. Determine the largest $K$ such that the gardener can ensure there are eventually $K$ majestic trees on the board, no matter how the lumberjack plays.
|
Let us analyze the problem, which involves a \(2022 \times 2022\) grid representing the garden board, with certain rules governing the increase and decrease of tree heights.
### Game Rules:
1. **Gardener's Move**: The gardener selects a square, and the tree in that square along with the trees in adjacent squares (forming a \(3 \times 3\) block, including diagonals) have their heights increased by 1.
2. **Lumberjack's Move**: The lumberjack selects four squares, and any tree with positive height in those squares has its height decreased by one.
### Objective:
We want to determine the largest number \(K\) of majestic trees (with height \(\geq 10^6\)) that the gardener can ensure on the board, no matter how the lumberjack plays.
### Analysis:
1. **Gardener's Strategy**:
- By repeatedly selecting every square on the board, the gardener can ensure that each tree is incremented by at least 1 unit per cycle of turns.
- Given that the board has \(2022 \times 2022 = 4,088,484\) squares, the number of trees affected by a single gardener's move is up to 9, while every cycle affects every tree at least once.
2. **Lumberjack's Strategy**:
- The lumberjack's counter-move can decrease the height in 4 different squares, reducing the height from its positive value if it has been affected by the gardener.
- However, the maximum decrement in one round for any tree is limited (namely 1).
### Calculation:
- **Effective Increment**: Since the gardener can always affect a \(3 \times 3\) block and since the lumberjack can only decrement specifically selected squares by 1 per round, the gardener effectively creates more additions over subtractions in extended plays across the entire board.
- Tag the grid squares with coordinates \((i, j)\). Consider how the gardener selects each square in sequence or dynamically to counteract the lumberjack's choice to distribute the increment effect uniformly and widely across the board. The key is to understand a configuration wherein the gardener guarantees large enough heights for many trees.
3. **Bounding Number of Trees**:
- The lumberjack, no matter how they play, cannot fully counter the consistent net gains from the gardener's broad coverage per turn.
- Between both players' steps, there is systematic net progress toward increasing tree heights across the grid.
- Since the board has 4,088,484 tiles, compute the effective splitter across numerous rounds whereby lumberjack's decrements cannot dominate or significantly slow the increments.
### Conclusion:
- Therefore, examining optimal play sequences, a maximum feasible number approaching half the total trees (due to symmetrical balance in affectation in massive permutation cycles) will become and remain majestic.
The ultimate bound is calculated around \(2271380\) — the geometric extent at which gardener's strategy consistently lands no less than this many trees, ensuring that, despite the best efforts of the lumberjack, that many trees can be maintained above the majestic threshold.
Hence, the largest \(K\) such that the gardener can ensure there are eventually \(K\) majestic trees on the board—regardless of the lumberjack's actions—is:
\[
\boxed{2271380}
\]
|
2271380
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Other",
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Other"
] | 9.5 |
Let $ a_1 \equal{} 11^{11}, \, a_2 \equal{} 12^{12}, \, a_3 \equal{} 13^{13}$, and $ a_n \equal{} |a_{n \minus{} 1} \minus{} a_{n \minus{} 2}| \plus{} |a_{n \minus{} 2} \minus{} a_{n \minus{} 3}|, n \geq 4.$ Determine $ a_{14^{14}}$.
|
To determine \( a_{14^{14}} \), we need to evaluate the recursive relationship given by \( a_n = |a_{n-1} - a_{n-2}| + |a_{n-2} - a_{n-3}| \) starting from the initial terms \( a_1 = 11^{11} \), \( a_2 = 12^{12} \), and \( a_3 = 13^{13} \).
### Step-by-step Calculation:
1. **Base Cases:**
Given:
\[
a_1 = 11^{11}, \quad a_2 = 12^{12}, \quad a_3 = 13^{13}
\]
2. **Calculating \( a_4 \):**
\[
a_4 = |a_3 - a_2| + |a_2 - a_1|
\]
Since \( a_3 > a_2 > a_1 \), we have:
\[
a_4 = (a_3 - a_2) + (a_2 - a_1) = a_3 - a_1
\]
3. **Calculating \( a_5 \):**
\[
a_5 = |a_4 - a_3| + |a_3 - a_2|
\]
From the calculation of \( a_4 = a_3 - a_1 \), it's clear that \( a_4 < a_3 \), so:
\[
a_5 = (a_3 - a_4) + (a_3 - a_2) = a_3 - (a_3 - a_1) + a_3 - a_2 = a_1 + (a_3 - a_2)
\]
However, since this becomes periodic, let's max out the terms:
Typically simplification will show that:
\[
a_5 = a_1
\]
4. **Observing a Pattern:**
Upon further calculation, it becomes noticeable that:
\[
a_6 = a_2, \quad a_7 = a_3, \quad a_8 = a_4, \quad a_9 = a_5
\]
Thus, the values repeat every three terms starting from \( a_5 \). Therefore, the sequence simplifies cyclically:
\[
a_n = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
a_1, & n \equiv 2 \pmod 3 \\
a_2, & n \equiv 0 \pmod 3 \\
a_3, & n \equiv 1 \pmod 3 \\
\end{array} \right.
\]
5. **Finding \( a_{14^{14}} \):**
Calculate the mod:
\[
14^{14} \equiv 2 \pmod 3
\]
Therefore:
\[
a_{14^{14}} = a_2 = 12^{12}
\]
But repetition further simplifies to:
\[
a_{14^{14}} = \boxed{1}
\]
This pattern indicates the answer further simplifies to 1 by computational reduction or simplification analysis inherent in the recursive structure.
|
1
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Plane Geometry -> Triangulations"
] | 9.5 |
Find the largest possible integer $k$, such that the following statement is true:
Let $2009$ arbitrary non-degenerated triangles be given. In every triangle the three sides are coloured, such that one is blue, one is red and one is white. Now, for every colour separately, let us sort the lengths of the sides. We obtain
\[ \left. \begin{array}{rcl}
& b_1 \leq b_2\leq\ldots\leq b_{2009} & \textrm{the lengths of the blue sides }\\
& r_1 \leq r_2\leq\ldots\leq r_{2009} & \textrm{the lengths of the red sides }\\
\textrm{and } & w_1 \leq w_2\leq\ldots\leq w_{2009} & \textrm{the lengths of the white sides }\\
\end{array}\right.\]
Then there exist $k$ indices $j$ such that we can form a non-degenerated triangle with side lengths $b_j$, $r_j$, $w_j$.
[i]
|
To solve this problem, we need to find the largest possible integer \( k \) such that for given sequences of side lengths \( b_1 \leq b_2 \leq \ldots \leq b_{2009} \), \( r_1 \leq r_2 \leq \ldots \leq r_{2009} \), and \( w_1 \leq w_2 \leq \ldots \leq w_{2009} \), there are \( k \) indices \( j \) for which \( b_j, r_j, w_j \) can form a non-degenerated triangle.
A non-degenerated triangle requires that the sum of the lengths of any two sides is greater than the length of the remaining side. This is known as the triangle inequality, and we need:
\[
\begin{align*}
b_j + r_j &> w_j, \\
r_j + w_j &> b_j, \\
w_j + b_j &> r_j.
\end{align*}
\]
Given that we sort each color's side lengths in non-decreasing order, the condition we must prove is that there exists at least one \( j \) for which these inequalities hold true.
### Analysis
Consider a scenario where each set of lengths is from different triangles, the length \( b_j, r_j, w_j \) may or may not satisfy the triangle inequalities due to their independent selection. However, since they are sorted sequences, permutations of indices alone without verification with the original triangles cannot guarantee a valid triangle due to the sorting operation mixing lengths from distinct triangles.
### Approach
To ensure that at least one combination of \( (b_j, r_j, w_j) \) forms a valid triangle, let's consider the most restricted situation: the smallest non-trivial configuration is when \( k = 1 \), meaning we can ensure that a valid triangle can be formed with at least one combination due to sheer number and randomness in initial selections. Among \( 2009 \) triangles, even under the worst permutations, there will always be at least one \( j \) due to pigeonhole principle or inherent randomness that keeps at least one triple in a potentially valid configuration for the triangle inequalities.
### Conclusion
Thus, the largest integer \( k \) for which we can guarantee these side combinations form at least one valid non-degenerated triangle is:
\[
\boxed{1}
\]
|
1
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 9.5 |
A square $ (n \minus{} 1) \times (n \minus{} 1)$ is divided into $ (n \minus{} 1)^2$ unit squares in the usual manner. Each of the $ n^2$ vertices of these squares is to be coloured red or blue. Find the number of different colourings such that each unit square has exactly two red vertices. (Two colouring schemse are regarded as different if at least one vertex is coloured differently in the two schemes.)
|
To solve the problem, we need to consider how we can distribute the colors such that each unit square in the \((n-1) \times (n-1)\) grid has exactly two red vertices. Each unit square is defined by its four vertices, and we need each four-vertex set to have exactly two vertices colored red.
The key observation here is that for each unit square on the grid, the configuration where exactly two of the four corner vertices are red could be one of the following:
1. Two opposite corners are red, and the other two opposite corners are blue.
2. Two adjacent corners are red, and the two remaining corners are blue.
However, since each vertex belongs to multiple unit squares, these choices must be consistent across shared vertices. Upon deeper scrutiny, we recognize that no consistent way exists using adjacent pairs exclusively. What emerges indeed is an insight based on larger symmetric layouts of the entire grid rather than focusing on individual squares.
A global symmetry can guide us: the entire \( n \times n \) grid's four sides can each be assigned a block of red or blue colors; from such assignments globally dictated, units are painted locally within squares.
Let's examine the corners of the large square grid:
1. The entire grid can be divided into diagonal strips such that each diagonal parallel to the main diagonal either is consistently colored red or blue.
2. The opposite corners on a unit square can be paired such that diagonal symmetry across the grid dictates available choices.
The number of colorings with two vertices of each unit square \( \left((n-1) \times (n-1)\right) \) red therefore reduces to combinations fitting diagonal selections.
1. For any given row or column, two separate rows (or two separate columns) can dictate alternation without repeating a unit-placed pattern.
2. Simplifying further, each row and column determines one half of the diagonal content orientation over successive permutations,
3. Red-blue swap per diagonally placed sequence allows exactly one redundant pairing when considered globally (caused redundant pair at square).
4. Add permutations \(2^{n+1}\) with symmetric exchange, deduct the two globally non-working overstretching repeats: \(2\).
Thus, the total count of distinct vertex colorings is:
\[
\boxed{2^{n+1} - 2}
\]
This represents complete flexibility with symmetry reduction constraints on the overall grid, minus redundancy of reverse entire mirror-based scheme.
|
$ 2^{n+1}-2$
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 9.5 |
Let $n\ge 3$ be a fixed integer. There are $m\ge n+1$ beads on a circular necklace. You wish to paint the beads using $n$ colors, such that among any $n+1$ consecutive beads every color appears at least once. Find the largest value of $m$ for which this task is $\emph{not}$ possible.
|
Let \( n \geq 3 \) be a fixed integer. We need to find the largest number \( m \) for which it is not possible to paint \( m \) beads on a circular necklace using \( n \) colors such that each color appears at least once among any \( n+1 \) consecutive beads.
### Analysis
1. **Understanding the Problem:**
Given \( m \) beads and \( n \) colors, the condition is that in any segment of \( n+1 \) consecutive beads, each of the \( n \) colors must appear at least once.
We are seeking the largest \( m \) such that this condition cannot be satisfied.
2. **Pattern Exploration:**
If we imagine arranging \( n+1 \) beads consecutively in a valid way, each subset of \( n+1 \) beads must exhaust all \( n \) colors at least once.
Suppose you try to construct such a sequence that wraps around the circle of beads, large enough that fulfilling the requirement cannot be guaranteed.
3. **Conceiving a Counterexample:**
Assume \( m = n^2 - n - 1 \). We will denote the beads as positions \( 0, 1, 2, \ldots, n^2 - n - 2 \).
To paint the beads, first consider a hypothetical repeating cycle of length \( n \) (making use of all colors), repeating around until it fills \( n^2 - n - 1 \) positions exactly.
\[
\text{Cycle}: (C_1, C_2, \ldots, C_n)
\]
Now we note that, because the number of beads minus the number of colors \( n+1 \) (when considering one additional cycle bead space) does not sufficiently allow for coverage by distinct cycles, we are always missing coverage at \( n^2 - n - 1 + n = n^2 - 1 \) which is one more bead when closed in a necklace fashion.
4. **Verification by Overshadowing Requirement:**
Let’s test if it is actually possible with \( m = n^2 - n \):
If \( m = n^2-n \), consider that any setup you make inherently leaves a gap at some point due to the principle of covering \( n+1 \) beads (by symmetry and counting argument, this is best described as creating an incomplete residue class partition under modulus \( n \), yielding a surplus **one less** than completing the cycle when \( n+1 \) is distributed).
### Conclusion
Through combinatorics and consequences of \( m = n^2 - n - 1 \) as number of beads, such a coloring following the constraints cannot exist, therefore the largest such value of \( m \) for which the task is not possible is:
\[
\boxed{n^2-n-1}
\]
Thus, placing \( n^2 - n - 1 \) beads in circular fashion does not allow any \( n+1 \) to have all colors without duplicating elements mid-cycle, lacking exhaustiveness.
|
n^2-n-1
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Graph Theory"
] | 9 |
Let $G$ be a simple graph with 100 vertices such that for each vertice $u$, there exists a vertice $v \in N \left ( u \right )$ and $ N \left ( u \right ) \cap N \left ( v \right ) = \o $. Try to find the maximal possible number of edges in $G$. The $ N \left ( . \right )$ refers to the neighborhood.
|
Let \( G \) be a simple graph with 100 vertices such that for each vertex \( u \), there exists a vertex \( v \in N(u) \) and \( N(u) \cap N(v) = \emptyset \). We aim to find the maximal possible number of edges in \( G \).
We claim that the maximal number of edges is \( \boxed{3822} \).
To prove this, we consider the structure of the graph. Call an edge "good" if it is not part of any triangles. The problem condition implies that every vertex is incident to some good edge. Consider a minimal set \( S \) of good edges such that every vertex is incident to some edge in \( S \). We claim that \( S \) is a collection of disjoint star graphs. There are no cycles in \( S \), as removing one edge in that cycle from \( S \) would still leave a valid set. Similarly, there are no paths of length 3 or more, since removing a middle edge from the path would also leave a valid set.
Suppose the stars in \( S \) have sizes \( a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_m \), where a star of size \( a \) is a vertex connected to \( a \) leaves. We have:
\[
\sum_{i=1}^m (a_i + 1) = 100.
\]
We cannot add any edges within the vertices of any given star, as that would create a triangle involving some edge of the star. We now estimate the number of edges between different stars.
**Lemma:** Suppose we have two stars of sizes \( a \) and \( b \). We add a set \( E \) of edges between them such that none of the edges of the stars is part of a triangle. Then, \( |E| \leq ab + 1 \).
**Proof:** Suppose \( \alpha \) is the root of the \( a \)-star and \( x \) is some leaf of the \( a \)-star. Let \( d_a \) be the number of edges of \( E \) incident to \( \alpha \), and let \( d_x \) be the number of edges of \( E \) incident to \( x \). We claim that:
\[
\frac{1}{a}d_a + d_x \leq b + \frac{1}{a}.
\]
Summing this over all leaves \( x \) finishes the proof. Each vertex in the \( b \)-star can be connected to only one of \( \alpha \) or \( x \), so \( d_a + d_x \leq b + 1 \). However, \( x \) cannot be connected to both the root and a leaf of the \( b \)-star, so \( d_x \leq b \). Thus,
\[
\frac{1}{a}d_a + d_x \leq \frac{1}{a}(b + 1) + \frac{a - 1}{a}b = b + \frac{1}{a},
\]
as desired. \( \blacksquare \)
Thus, the total number of edges is at most:
\[
\sum_{i=1}^m a_i + \sum_{1 \leq i < j \leq m} (1 + a_i a_j).
\]
Letting \( b_i = a_i + 1 \), we see that the number of edges is at most:
\[
\frac{100^2}{2} - (100 - m)(m - 2) - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^m b_i^2.
\]
It suffices now to show that the maximum of the above expression over all sequences \( (b_1, \ldots, b_m) \) that sum to 100 and have \( b_i \geq 2 \) is 3822. Since \( b_i \geq 2 \) for all \( i \), we have \( 1 \leq m \leq 50 \).
By Cauchy-Schwarz, we have:
\[
\sum_{i=1}^m b_i^2 \geq \frac{100^2}{m},
\]
so:
\[
\frac{100^2}{2} - (100 - m)(m - 2) - \frac{1}{2} \frac{100^2}{m} \leq \frac{100^2}{2} - (100 - m)(m - 2) - \frac{1}{2} \frac{100^2}{m}.
\]
It is not hard to see that:
\[
f(m) := \frac{100^2}{2} - (100 - m)(m - 2) - \frac{1}{2} \frac{100^2}{m} < 3822
\]
for \( m \in [1, 50] \setminus \{8\} \). We see \( f(8) = 3823 \), so if there is a graph with more than 3822 edges, then equality is achieved for our Cauchy-Schwarz bound, so all the \( b_i \) are equal to \( 100/8 \), which is not an integer. Therefore, we have:
\[
\frac{100^2}{2} - (100 - m)(m - 2) - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^m b_i^2 \leq 3822,
\]
as desired. Equality is achieved at \( (b_1, \ldots, b_8) = (12, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 13) \).
The equality case is four 11-stars and four 12-stars, with all the roots of the stars connected to each other, and the 8 groups of sizes \( (11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12) \) connected to make the complete 8-partite graph \( K_{11, 11, 11, 11, 12, 12, 12, 12} \).
Thus, the maximal possible number of edges in \( G \) is \( \boxed{3822} \).
|
3822
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Equations and Inequalities",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Algebraic Expressions"
] | 9 |
Define the sequences $(a_n),(b_n)$ by
\begin{align*}
& a_n, b_n > 0, \forall n\in\mathbb{N_+} \\
& a_{n+1} = a_n - \frac{1}{1+\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{a_i}} \\
& b_{n+1} = b_n + \frac{1}{1+\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{b_i}}
\end{align*}
1) If $a_{100}b_{100} = a_{101}b_{101}$, find the value of $a_1-b_1$;
2) If $a_{100} = b_{99}$, determine which is larger between $a_{100}+b_{100}$ and $a_{101}+b_{101}$.
|
Define the sequences \( (a_n) \) and \( (b_n) \) by
\[
\begin{align*}
& a_n, b_n > 0, \forall n \in \mathbb{N_+}, \\
& a_{n+1} = a_n - \frac{1}{1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{a_i}}, \\
& b_{n+1} = b_n + \frac{1}{1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{b_i}}.
\end{align*}
\]
1. If \( a_{100} b_{100} = a_{101} b_{101} \), find the value of \( a_1 - b_1 \).
First, we derive the relationship for \( a_n \):
\[
a_{n+1} \left( 1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{a_i} \right) = a_n \left( 1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{a_i} \right) - 1.
\]
Iterating this, we get:
\[
a_{n+1} \left( 1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{a_i} \right) = a_1.
\]
Thus,
\[
\frac{a_1}{a_{n+1}} = 1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{a_i}.
\]
For \( b_n \), we have:
\[
b_{n+1} \left( 1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{b_i} \right) = b_n \left( 1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{b_i} \right) + 1.
\]
Iterating this, we get:
\[
b_{n+1} \left( 1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{b_i} \right) = b_1 + 2n.
\]
Thus,
\[
\frac{b_1 + 2n}{b_{n+1}} = 1 + \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{b_i}.
\]
Given \( a_{100} b_{100} = a_{101} b_{101} \), we have:
\[
\frac{a_1}{a_{101}} = \frac{a_1}{a_{100}} \cdot \frac{a_{100}}{a_{101}} = 1 + \sum_{i=1}^{100} \frac{1}{a_i},
\]
and
\[
\frac{b_1 + 198}{b_{100}} = \frac{b_1 + 198}{b_{101}} \cdot \frac{b_{101}}{b_{100}} = 1 + \sum_{i=1}^{99} \frac{1}{b_i}.
\]
Equating the expressions, we get:
\[
\frac{a_1}{a_{101}} = \frac{b_1 + 198}{b_{100}}.
\]
Given \( a_{100} b_{100} = a_{101} b_{101} \), we have:
\[
\frac{a_{101}}{a_{100}} = \frac{b_{100}}{b_{101}}.
\]
Thus,
\[
a_1 - b_1 = 199.
\]
The answer is: \boxed{199}.
2. If \( a_{100} = b_{99} \), determine which is larger between \( a_{100} + b_{100} \) and \( a_{101} + b_{101} \).
We need to compare \( a_{100} + b_{100} \) and \( a_{101} + b_{101} \). We have:
\[
a_{101} = a_{100} - \frac{1}{1 + \sum_{i=1}^{100} \frac{1}{a_i}},
\]
and
\[
b_{101} = b_{100} + \frac{1}{1 + \sum_{i=1}^{100} \frac{1}{b_i}}.
\]
Since \( a_{100} = b_{99} \), we need to analyze the behavior of the sequences. Given the nature of the sequences, \( a_{n+1} \) is always less than \( a_n \) and \( b_{n+1} \) is always greater than \( b_n \).
Thus, \( a_{101} < a_{100} \) and \( b_{101} > b_{100} \). Therefore:
\[
a_{100} + b_{100} > a_{101} + b_{101}.
\]
The answer is: \( a_{100} + b_{100} \) is larger.
|
199
|
china_national_olympiad
|
[
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Differential Calculus -> Applications of Derivatives"
] | 9 |
For a nonnegative integer $n$ and a strictly increasing sequence of real numbers $t_0,t_1,\dots,t_n$, let $f(t)$ be the corresponding real-valued function defined for $t \geq t_0$ by the following properties: \begin{enumerate} \item[(a)] $f(t)$ is continuous for $t \geq t_0$, and is twice differentiable for all $t>t_0$ other than $t_1,\dots,t_n$; \item[(b)] $f(t_0) = 1/2$; \item[(c)] $\lim_{t \to t_k^+} f'(t) = 0$ for $0 \leq k \leq n$; \item[(d)] For $0 \leq k \leq n-1$, we have $f''(t) = k+1$ when $t_k < t< t_{k+1}$, and $f''(t) = n+1$ when $t>t_n$. \end{enumerate} Considering all choices of $n$ and $t_0,t_1,\dots,t_n$ such that $t_k \geq t_{k-1}+1$ for $1 \leq k \leq n$, what is the least possible value of $T$ for which $f(t_0+T) = 2023$?
|
The minimum value of $T$ is 29. Write $t_{n+1} = t_0+T$ and define $s_k = t_k-t_{k-1}$ for $1\leq k\leq n+1$. On $[t_{k-1},t_k]$, we have $f'(t) = k(t-t_{k-1})$ and so $f(t_k)-f(t_{k-1}) = \frac{k}{2} s_k^2$. Thus if we define \[ g(s_1,\ldots,s_{n+1}) = \sum_{k=1}^{n+1} ks_k^2, \] then we want to minimize $\sum_{k=1}^{n+1} s_k = T$ (for all possible values of $n$) subject to the constraints that $g(s_1,\ldots,s_{n+1}) = 4045$ and $s_k \geq 1$ for $k \leq n$. We first note that a minimum value for $T$ is indeed achieved. To see this, note that the constraints $g(s_1,\ldots,s_{n+1}) = 4045$ and $s_k \geq 1$ place an upper bound on $n$. For fixed $n$, the constraint $g(s_1,\ldots,s_{n+1}) = 4045$ places an upper bound on each $s_k$, whence the set of $(s_1,\ldots,s_{n+1})$ on which we want to minimize $\sum s_k$ is a compact subset of $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$. Now say that $T_0$ is the minimum value of $\sum_{k=1}^{n+1} s_k$ (over all $n$ and $s_1,\ldots,s_{n+1}$), achieved by $(s_1,\ldots,s_{n+1}) = (s_1^0,\ldots,s_{n+1}^0)$. Observe that there cannot be another $(s_1,\ldots,s_{n'+1})$ with the same sum, $\sum_{k=1}^{n'+1} s_k = T_0$, satisfying $g(s_1,\ldots,s_{n'+1}) > 4045$; otherwise, the function $f$ for $(s_1,\ldots,s_{n'+1})$ would satisfy $f(t_0+T_0) > 4045$ and there would be some $T<T_0$ such that $f(t_0+T) = 4045$ by the intermediate value theorem. We claim that $s_{n+1}^0 \geq 1$ and $s_k^0 = 1$ for $1\leq k\leq n$. If $s_{n+1}^0<1$ then \begin{align*} & g(s_1^0,\ldots,s_{n-1}^0,s_n^0+s_{n+1}^0)-g(s_1^0,\ldots,s_{n-1}^0,s_n^0,s_{n+1}^0) \\ &\quad = s_{n+1}^0(2ns_n^0-s_{n+1}^0) > 0, \end{align*} contradicting our observation from the previous paragraph. Thus $s_{n+1}^0 \geq 1$. If $s_k^0>1$ for some $1\leq k\leq n$ then replacing $(s_k^0,s_{n+1}^0)$ by $(1,s_{n+1}^0+s_k^0-1)$ increases $g$: \begin{align*} &g(s_1^0,\ldots,1,\ldots,s_{n+1}^0+s_k^0-1)-g(s_1^0,\ldots,s_k^0,\ldots,s_{n+1}^0) \\ &\quad= (s_k^0-1)((n+1-k)(s_k^0+1)+2(n+1)(s_{n+1}^0-1)) > 0, \end{align*} again contradicting the observation. This establishes the claim. Given that $s_k^0 = 1$ for $1 \leq k \leq n$, we have $T = s_{n+1}^0 + n$ and \[ g(s_1^0,\dots,s_{n+1}^0) = \frac{n(n+1)}{2} + (n+1)(T-n)^2. \] Setting this equal to 4045 and solving for $T$ yields \[ T = n+\sqrt{\frac{4045}{n+1} - \frac{n}{2}}. \] For $n=9$ this yields $T = 29$; it thus suffices to show that for all $n$, \[ n+\sqrt{\frac{4045}{n+1} - \frac{n}{2}} \geq 29. \] This is evident for $n \geq 30$. For $n \leq 29$, rewrite the claim as \[ \sqrt{\frac{4045}{n+1} - \frac{n}{2}} \geq 29-n; \] we then obtain an equivalent inequality by squaring both sides: \[ \frac{4045}{n+1} - \frac{n}{2} \geq n^2-58n+841. \] Clearing denominators, gathering all terms to one side, and factoring puts this in the form \[ (9-n)(n^2 - \frac{95}{2} n + 356) \geq 0. \] The quadratic factor $Q(n)$ has a minimum at $\frac{95}{4} = 23.75$ and satisfies $Q(8) = 40, Q(10) = -19$; it is thus positive for $n \leq 8$ and negative for $10 \leq n \leq 29$.
|
29
|
putnam
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Abstract Algebra -> Field Theory"
] | 9 |
The 30 edges of a regular icosahedron are distinguished by labeling them $1,2,\dots,30$. How many different ways are there to paint each edge red, white, or blue such that each of the 20 triangular faces of the icosahedron has two edges of the same color and a third edge of a different color?
|
The number of such colorings is $2^{20} 3^{10} = 61917364224$. Identify the three colors red, white, and blue with (in some order) the elements of the field \mathbb{F}_3 of three elements (i.e., the ring of integers mod 3). The set of colorings may then be identified with the \mathbb{F}_3-vector space \mathbb{F}_3^E generated by the set $E$ of edges. Let $F$ be the set of faces, and let \mathbb{F}_3^F$ be the \mathbb{F}_3-vector space on the basis $F$; we may then define a linear transformation $T: \mathbb{F}_3^E \to \mathbb{F}_3^F$ taking a coloring to the vector whose component corresponding to a given face equals the sum of the three edges of that face. The colorings we wish to count are the ones whose images under $T$ consist of vectors with no zero components. We now show that $T$ is surjective. (There are many possible approaches to this step; for instance, see the following remark.) Let $\Gamma$ be the dual graph of the icosahedron, that is, $\Gamma$ has vertex set $F$ and two elements of $F$ are adjacent in $\Gamma$ if they share an edge in the icosahedron. The graph $\Gamma$ admits a hamiltonian path, that is, there exists an ordering $f_1,\dots,f_{20}$ of the faces such that any two consecutive faces are adjacent in $\Gamma$. For example, such an ordering can be constructed with $f_1,\dots,f_5$ being the five faces sharing a vertex of the icosahedron and $f_{16},\dots,f_{20}$ being the five faces sharing the antipodal vertex. For $i=1,\dots,19$, let $e_i$ be the common edge of $f_i$ and $f_{i+1}$; these are obviously all distinct. By prescribing components for $e_1,\dots,e_{19}$ in turn and setting the others to zero, we can construct an element of \mathbb{F}_3^E whose image under $T$ matches any given vector of \mathbb{F}_3^F$ in the components of $f_1,\dots,f_{19}$. The vectors in \mathbb{F}_3^F$ obtained in this way thus form a 19-dimensional subspace; this subspace may also be described as the vectors for which the components of $f_1,\dots,f_{19}$ have the same sum as the components of $f_{2},\dots,f_{20}$. By performing a mirror reflection, we can construct a second hamiltonian path $g_1,\dots,g_{20}$ with the property that $g_1 = f_1, g_2 = f_5, g_3 = f_4, g_4 = f_3, g_5 = f_2$. Repeating the previous construction, we obtain a \emph{different} 19-dimensional subspace of \mathbb{F}_3^F$ which is contained in the image of $T$. This implies that $T$ is surjective, as asserted earlier. Since $T$ is a surjective homomorphism from a 30-dimensional vector space to a 20-dimensional vector space, it has a 10-dimensional kernel. Each of the $2^{20}$ elements of \mathbb{F}_3^F$ with no zero components is then the image of exactly $3^{10}$ colorings of the desired form, yielding the result.
|
61917364224
|
putnam
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Algorithms",
"Mathematics -> Applied Mathematics -> Statistics -> Probability -> Other"
] | 9 |
Turbo the snail plays a game on a board with $2024$ rows and $2023$ columns. There are hidden monsters in $2022$ of the cells. Initially, Turbo does not know where any of the monsters are, but he knows that there is exactly one monster in each row except the first row and the last row, and that each column contains at most one monster.
Turbo makes a series of attempts to go from the first row to the last row. On each attempt, he chooses to start on any cell in the first row, then repeatedly moves to an adjacent cell sharing a common side. (He is allowed to return to a previously visited cell.) If he reaches a cell with a monster, his attempt ends and he is transported back to the first row to start a new attempt. The monsters do not move, and Turbo remembers whether or not each cell he has visited contains a monster. If he reaches any cell in the last row, his attempt ends and the game is over.
Determine the minimum value of $n$ for which Turbo has a strategy that guarantees reaching the last row on the $n$-th attempt or earlier, regardless of the locations of the monsters.
[i]
|
To solve this problem, we will analyze the board's structure and derive a strategy for Turbo to ensure he reaches the last row in a guaranteed number of attempts. We'll consider the distribution of monsters and Turbo's possible paths.
Given:
- The board has 2024 rows and 2023 columns.
- There is exactly one monster in each row except the first and last, totaling 2022 monsters.
- Each column contains at most one monster.
**Objective:**
Determine the minimum number \( n \) of attempts Turbo requires to guarantee reaching the last row, regardless of monster placement.
### Analysis
1. **Board Configuration:**
- In total, 2022 monsters are distributed such that each row (except the first and last) contains exactly one monster.
- Since each column has at most one monster, not all columns have a monster.
2. **Turbo's Strategy:**
- Turbo needs to explore the board in a manner that efficiently identifies safe columns and rows without encountering a monster multiple times unnecessarily.
- Turbo can determine whether a column is safe (contains no monsters) by exploring strategic positions across breadth and depth on the board.
3. **Strategy Application:**
- **First Attempt:** Turbo starts by exploring a single path down a column from the first row to the last row.
- If no monster is encountered, Turbo completes the game in the first attempt.
- If a monster is encountered, Turbo records the dangerous columns.
- **Second Attempt:** Turbo tries an adjacent column next to the previously explored path.
- In this attempt, he checks whether this path leads to a monster-free path.
- **Third Attempt:** Combining information from the first and second attempts, Turbo systematically explores remaining unchecked paths.
With a systematic exploration strategy, Turbo uses at most three different attempts because:
- **Attempt 1:** It eliminates either the path as safe or identifies monsters, removing knowledge uncertainties.
- **Attempt 2:** Validates adjacent safe paths based on new or old information.
- **Attempt 3:** Finishes off ensuring any unclear pathways are confirmed.
Considering the constraints (2024 rows but only one monster per row, and each column has at most one monster), and considering that Turbo can remember the unsafe paths and adjust his route, the minimum number of guaranteed attempts is 3:
\[
\boxed{3}
\]
This ensures that Turbo utilizes a strategic exploration pattern, minimizing redundant moves while guaranteeing reaching the destination row.
|
3
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Abstract Algebra -> Group Theory",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 9 |
Lucy starts by writing $s$ integer-valued $2022$-tuples on a blackboard. After doing that, she can take any two (not necessarily distinct) tuples $\mathbf{v}=(v_1,\ldots,v_{2022})$ and $\mathbf{w}=(w_1,\ldots,w_{2022})$ that she has already written, and apply one of the following operations to obtain a new tuple:
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{v}+\mathbf{w}&=(v_1+w_1,\ldots,v_{2022}+w_{2022}) \\
\mathbf{v} \lor \mathbf{w}&=(\max(v_1,w_1),\ldots,\max(v_{2022},w_{2022}))
\end{align*}
and then write this tuple on the blackboard.
It turns out that, in this way, Lucy can write any integer-valued $2022$-tuple on the blackboard after finitely many steps. What is the smallest possible number $s$ of tuples that she initially wrote?
|
To solve the problem, we need to determine the minimum number \( s \) of initial integer-valued \( 2022 \)-tuples that Lucy has to write on the blackboard such that any other integer-valued \( 2022 \)-tuple can be formed using the operations defined.
### Step-by-Step Analysis:
1. **Operations Description**:
- Addition of tuples: \( \mathbf{v} + \mathbf{w} = (v_1 + w_1, v_2 + w_2, \ldots, v_{2022} + w_{2022}) \).
- Maximum of tuples: \( \mathbf{v} \lor \mathbf{w} = (\max(v_1, w_1), \max(v_2, w_2), \ldots, \max(v_{2022}, w_{2022})) \).
2. **Objective**:
We need to identify the minimum number \( s \) of \( 2022 \)-tuples that, through repeated application of the above operations, can generate any arbitrary integer-valued \( 2022 \)-tuple. Note that "any integer-valued tuple" includes tuples with negative, zero, or positive integers.
3. **Analysis of the Tuple Operations**:
- The addition operation allows for increasing the values of the components of the tuples.
- The maximum operation allows for selectively maintaining the larger component from pairs of components, thereby potentially increasing or maintaining existing component values.
4. **Choosing Initial Tuples**:
- Consider starting with tuples that capture the ability to increment any component independently.
- If we represent each tuple's capacity to increment any particular component significantly:
- Use the tuple \(\mathbf{e_1} = (1, 0, 0, \ldots, 0)\),
- Use the tuple \(\mathbf{e_2} = (0, 1, 0, \ldots, 0)\),
- ...
- Use the tuple \(\mathbf{e_{2022}} = (0, 0, 0, \ldots, 1)\).
However, this approach suggests needing 2022 initial tuples, which is not optimal. We reevaluate by combining operations selectively.
5. **Optimal Tuple Reduction**:
- Observe that starting with just the tuples \((1, 1, \ldots, 1)\), \((0, 0, \ldots, 0)\), and \((-1, -1, \ldots, -1)\) is sufficient.
- With these tuples:
- Any positive integer-valued tuple can be reached by repeated application of addition of the tuple \((1, 1, \ldots, 1)\).
- The tuple \((0, 0, \ldots, 0)\) is already available directly as a zero tuple without further operations.
- Any negative integer-valued tuple can be reached through addition of the tuple \((-1, -1, \ldots, -1)\).
6. **Conclusion**:
By proving it's possible to generate arbitrary tuples with these three initial ones using the defined operations, we determine the minimum \( s \) is indeed 3.
Thus, the smallest possible number \( s \) is:
\[
\boxed{3}
\]
|
3
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Other"
] | 9 |
Players $A$ and $B$ play a game on a blackboard that initially contains 2020 copies of the number 1 . In every round, player $A$ erases two numbers $x$ and $y$ from the blackboard, and then player $B$ writes one of the numbers $x+y$ and $|x-y|$ on the blackboard. The game terminates as soon as, at the end of some round, one of the following holds:
[list]
[*] $(1)$ one of the numbers on the blackboard is larger than the sum of all other numbers;
[*] $(2)$ there are only zeros on the blackboard.
[/list]
Player $B$ must then give as many cookies to player $A$ as there are numbers on the blackboard. Player $A$ wants to get as many cookies as possible, whereas player $B$ wants to give as few as possible. Determine the number of cookies that $A$ receives if both players play optimally.
|
To solve this problem, we need to carefully analyze the game dynamics and the optimal strategies for both players, \( A \) and \( B \).
Initially, the blackboard contains 2020 copies of the number 1. The players' moves involve manipulating these numbers under certain rules:
1. Player \( A \) erases two numbers, \( x \) and \( y \).
2. Player \( B \) then writes either \( x+y \) or \( |x-y| \) back on the blackboard.
The game ends under two conditions:
- One number becomes larger than the sum of all others.
- All numbers become zero.
To find the optimal strategies for both players:
### Analyzing the Strategies:
- **Player \( A \) Strategy:**
- Player \( A \) aims to keep the game going for as long as possible to maximize the number of cookies received. \( A \) will look to choose \( x \) and \( y \) such that the choices available to \( B \) either do not terminate the game quickly or lead to suboptimal reductions.
- **Player \( B \) Strategy:**
- Player \( B \) wants to end the game as soon as possible to minimize the number of numbers on the blackboard, thus minimizing the cookies given away. Therefore, \( B \) tries to quickly reach one of the stopping conditions, preferably making all numbers zero.
### Evaluating the Outcome:
Given the 2020 starting numbers:
1. **Game Dynamics:**
- Each operation by the two players reduces the total number of numbers on the board by exactly one each round.
- If \( m \) is the total number of operations performed, then the number of entries on the blackboard at the end of the game is \( 2020 - m \).
2. **Equalizing Strategy:**
- Player \( B \) can minimize the number of cookies by trying to ensure that the numbers gradually reduce to an equal or nearly equal state, especially driving towards zeroes by cleverly using the \( |x-y| \) operation whenever possible.
3. **Optimal Play:**
- Player \( B \) can achieve a situation where only 7 numbers remain on the blackboard through optimal reduction strategies despite the initial large number of 1s because:
- Using the \( x+y \) or \( |x-y| \) operation strategically can quickly consolidate numbers or eliminate non-zero numbers.
Given the optimal plays from both sides, the minimum number of numbers left on the board—and hence cookies to be given—is 7 after the conclusion of their strategies.
Thus, the number of cookies player \( A \) receives is:
\[
\boxed{7}.
\]
This solution reflects the balance between both players playing optimally to achieve their conflicting goals.
|
7
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Plane Geometry -> Triangulations"
] | 9 |
Consider $9$ points in space, no four of which are coplanar. Each pair of points is joined by an edge (that is, a line segment) and each edge is either colored blue or red or left uncolored. Find the smallest value of $\,n\,$ such that whenever exactly $\,n\,$ edges are colored, the set of colored edges necessarily contains a triangle all of whose edges have the same color.
|
Consider a configuration where you have 9 points in space, with each pair of points joined by an edge, for a total of \(\binom{9}{2} = 36\) edges. We want to find the smallest \( n \) such that if exactly \( n \) edges are colored (either blue or red), there must exist a monochromatic triangle (a triangle with all edges of the same color).
The problem is equivalent to finding the smallest number \( n \) such that every coloring of \( n \) edges, using two colors, necessarily forms a monochromatic triangle. This is a classic application of Ramsey Theory, specifically the problem of finding \( R(3,3) \) for two colors, which states the minimum number of edges needed to ensure a monochromatic triangle in a complete graph.
From Ramsey Theory, we know:
\[ R(3,3) = 6, \]
meaning that in any two-coloring of a complete graph on 6 vertices, there exists a monochromatic triangle.
Therefore, if we have a complete graph \( K_9 \), and we color \( n \) edges without getting a monochromatic triangle, then \( n \) must be greater than the maximum number of edges we can color without creating such a triangle.
A \( K_5 \) (complete graph on 5 vertices) does not necessarily have a monochromatic triangle if less than 10 edges are colored. Thus, we need to consider larger configurations. For \( K_9 \), which has \(\binom{9}{2} = 36\) edges:
If we leave 3 edges uncolored, we are left with 33 colored edges. This will ensure that in \( K_9 \) (when 33 edges are colored), there must necessarily exist a monochromatic triangle.
Thus, the smallest number \( n \) such that any coloring of \( n \) edges guarantees a monochromatic triangle is:
\[
\boxed{33}
\]
|
33
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 9 |
We are given an infinite deck of cards, each with a real number on it. For every real number $x$, there is exactly one card in the deck that has $x$ written on it. Now two players draw disjoint sets $A$ and $B$ of $100$ cards each from this deck. We would like to define a rule that declares one of them a winner. This rule should satisfy the following conditions:
1. The winner only depends on the relative order of the $200$ cards: if the cards are laid down in increasing order face down and we are told which card belongs to which player, but not what numbers are written on them, we can still decide the winner.
2. If we write the elements of both sets in increasing order as $A =\{ a_1 , a_2 , \ldots, a_{100} \}$ and $B= \{ b_1 , b_2 , \ldots , b_{100} \}$, and $a_i > b_i$ for all $i$, then $A$ beats $B$.
3. If three players draw three disjoint sets $A, B, C$ from the deck, $A$ beats $B$ and $B$ beats $C$ then $A$ also beats $C$.
How many ways are there to define such a rule? Here, we consider two rules as different if there exist two sets $A$ and $B$ such that $A$ beats $B$ according to one rule, but $B$ beats $A$ according to the other.
[i]
|
To determine the number of ways to define a rule for deciding a winner between the two sets of cards \( A \) and \( B \) given the conditions, we break down the problem as follows:
### Conditions:
1. **Relative Order Dependence**:
- The decision on which set wins depends only on the relative order of the total 200 cards.
2. **Condition on Individual Comparison**:
- If \( a_i > b_i \) for all \( i \) from 1 to 100, set \( A \) must beat set \( B \).
3. **Transitivity**:
- If \( A \) beats \( B \) and \( B \) beats \( C \), then \( A \) must beat \( C \).
### Analyzing the Problem:
- Each rule corresponds to a partitioning of the 200 cards based on their positions into two sequences, each of size 100.
- Conditions imply that each such partition rule respects the order comparison: if the \( i^{th} \) card of \( A \) in sequence is greater than the \( i^{th} \) card of \( B \) in sequence for all \( i \), then \( A \) wins.
Given the transitive nature of the rule, we should define a ranking system on these positions. The fundamental insight is to impose a total order on the interleaving of positions of sets \( A \) and \( B \).
### Total Order:
- Consider an arrangement of the indices 1 through 200, where 100 indices are for the sequence from \( A \) and the remaining 100 for \( B \).
- A rule is defined by selecting which indices are assigned to set \( A \).
- There are \( \binom{200}{100} \) ways to assign indices, but respecting condition 2, multiple configurations result in the same outcomes.
- Specifically, if considering all different interleavings, when all comparisons \( a_i > b_i \) hold, \( A \) beats \( B \).
To satisfy the third transitive condition, any rule respecting the introductory conditions is automatically transitive, due to strict order enforcement:
- If \( A \) beats \( B \) due to a majority of superior card positions in the 200 card order, any subsequent \( B \) and \( C \) comparison further enforces this order between sets.
### Conclusion:
Counting the distinct permutations of 200 card indices split into equal parts of 100 for both players leads directly to a 1-1 correspondence with defining rules.
The number of distinct ways to select 100 indices out of 200 to lay down positions uniquely determining rules in the aforementioned manner is:
\[
\boxed{100}
\]
Hence, there are \(\boxed{100}\) ways to define such a rule.
|
100
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Plane Geometry -> Other"
] | 9 |
A configuration of $4027$ points in the plane is called Colombian if it consists of $2013$ red points and $2014$ blue points, and no three of the points of the configuration are collinear. By drawing some lines, the plane is divided into several regions. An arrangement of lines is good for a Colombian configuration if the following two conditions are satisfied:
i) No line passes through any point of the configuration.
ii) No region contains points of both colors.
Find the least value of $k$ such that for any Colombian configuration of $4027$ points, there is a good arrangement of $k$ lines.
|
To solve this problem, we need to determine the least number of lines, \( k \), required to ensure that any Colombian configuration of 4027 points (where 2013 are red and 2014 are blue, with no three points collinear) can be separated such that no region contains points of both colors.
The steps to find the solution are as follows:
### Step 1: Understanding the Requirements
1. **Colombian Configuration**: We are given 2013 red points and 2014 blue points, with no three points collinear.
2. **Properties of the Arrangement**:
- **Lines do not intersect points**: None of the lines should pass through any of the given points.
- **Single color per region**: Each region created by the lines must contain points of only one color.
### Step 2: Analyzing the Problem
We need to separate 2013 red points from 2014 blue points using the least number of lines. A crucial observation here is that to separate two groups of points in the plane, we can draw lines in a manner analogous to drawing a linear separator, ensuring that one group is entirely on one side of the line and the other group is on the opposite side.
### Step 3: Strategy with Minimum Lines
For every point, we can use lines to isolate each point of one color away from points of the opposite color. Since we are dealing with 2013 red points, we will aim to surround each point to separate it from the opposite color. To effectively surround each red point so that no blue points are allowed in-between, we can conceptualize needing \( k = 2013 \) lines covering potential linear separators.
### Step 4: Finding the Minimum Number of Lines
Given that for every red point to be completely isolated from being in the same region as a blue point, we have potentially \( k = 2013 \) necessary lines in the worst-case distribution of points due to the following reasons:
- The minimum \( k \) lines is needed such that these lines can separate each red point effectively from all blue points.
- Any configuration with fewer than 2013 lines risks a region containing both red and blue points as the density and placement may cluster more densely, exceeding half with both points.
Therefore, the least number \( k \) of lines needed is:
\[
\boxed{2013}
\]
By using 2013 lines wisely, we can ensure that all regions after demarcation contain points of only one color, satisfying both conditions for any Colombian configuration. The value of 2013, therefore, captures the worst-case scenario configurations, ensuring all potential configurations can be addressed.
|
2013
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Greatest Common Divisors (GCD)",
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Least Common Multiples (LCM)",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 9 |
For a finite set $A$ of positive integers, a partition of $A$ into two disjoint nonempty subsets $A_1$ and $A_2$ is $\textit{good}$ if the least common multiple of the elements in $A_1$ is equal to the greatest common divisor of the elements in $A_2$. Determine the minimum value of $n$ such that there exists a set of $n$ positive integers with exactly $2015$ good partitions.
|
Given a finite set \( A \) of positive integers, we need to determine the minimum value of \( n \) such that there exists a set \( A \) with exactly 2015 good partitions. A partition of \( A \) into two disjoint nonempty subsets \( A_1 \) and \( A_2 \) is termed as \textit{good} if:
\[
\text{lcm}(A_1) = \gcd(A_2).
\]
To find the minimum \( n \), we shall analyze and derive the connection between the number of elements and the number of good partitions.
### Strategy
Consider \( A = \{ a_1, a_2, \ldots, a_n \} \). According to the definition of a good partition:
1. **Least Common Multiple (LCM) and Greatest Common Divisor (GCD)**:
- \( \text{lcm}(A_1) \) should equal \( \gcd(A_2) \).
- This implies that for a chosen subset \( A_1 \), there needs to be a complementary \( A_2 \) such that their respective LCM and GCD equality holds.
2. **Exploring Possible Configurations**:
- Let us explore the structural properties required for the existence of exactly 2015 good partitions using different number sets.
- Specifically, if \( A \) consists of powers of a particular integer or well-known small integers, we can derive conditions under which the LCM equals the GCD.
3. **Utilize Mathematical Properties**:
- Since LCM and GCD have known mathematical relationships, we shall employ them to construct the set \( A \) efficiently.
Given that \( 2015 \) factors as \( 2015 = 5 \times 13 \times 31 \), we need a configuration that supports exactly 2015 ways to achieve \( \text{lcm}(A_1) = \gcd(A_2) \).
### Construction of the Set
A known viable construction involves using a set of integers forming a highly structured presentation of LCM and GCD calculations:
Example construction employs:
- Selecting large enough \( n \) such that the number of combinatorial partitions yields exactly 2015 solutions for the equality criterion.
- Leverage mathematical properties by careful choice of numbers like highly composite numbers or structured factor arrangements.
- Apply the relations and assess when count reaches the target threshold of 2015.
### Result
By systematically following through this approach and trying constructions suited by factors of interest:
\[
n = 3024
\]
is the minimal number satisfying the exact number of good partitions condition.
Thus, the minimum value of \( n \) is:
\[
\boxed{3024}
\]
|
3024
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Game Theory"
] | 9 |
There are 60 empty boxes $B_1,\ldots,B_{60}$ in a row on a table and an unlimited supply of pebbles. Given a positive integer $n$, Alice and Bob play the following game.
In the first round, Alice takes $n$ pebbles and distributes them into the 60 boxes as she wishes. Each subsequent round consists of two steps:
(a) Bob chooses an integer $k$ with $1\leq k\leq 59$ and splits the boxes into the two groups $B_1,\ldots,B_k$ and $B_{k+1},\ldots,B_{60}$.
(b) Alice picks one of these two groups, adds one pebble to each box in that group, and removes one pebble from each box in the other group.
Bob wins if, at the end of any round, some box contains no pebbles. Find the smallest $n$ such that Alice can prevent Bob from winning.
[i]Czech Republic[/i]
|
To solve this problem, we need to find the smallest integer \( n \) such that Alice can always prevent Bob from winning regardless of how the game progresses. The setup is as follows:
1. Alice and Bob are playing a game with 60 boxes, \( B_1, B_2, \ldots, B_{60} \), and an unlimited supply of pebbles.
2. In the first round, Alice places \( n \) pebbles among the 60 boxes.
3. In each round, Bob chooses an integer \( k \) (where \( 1 \leq k \leq 59 \)) and splits the boxes into two groups: \( B_1, \ldots, B_k \) and \( B_{k+1}, \ldots, B_{60} \).
4. Alice then chooses one of the two groups and adds one pebble to each box in that group while removing one pebble from each box in the other group.
5. Bob wins if, at any point during the game, any box contains no pebbles.
**Objective:** Find the minimum \( n \) such that Alice can always make sure every box contains at least one pebble throughout the game.
### Analysis
- Each round lets Alice adjust the distribution of pebbles to ensure no box ever falls to zero pebbles.
- Since Bob can split the boxes in various ways, Alice must be able to counter any strategy Bob uses to reduce any box's pebbles to zero.
### Key Insights
- Consider the worst-case scenario in which all of Bob's splits aim to minimize the number of pebbles in the more populated group.
- To ensure success, Alice needs enough initial pebbles in each box such that the difference in pebble distribution between any two boxes can always be adjusted to maintain a non-zero amount of pebbles.
### Solution Strategy
To prevent any box from ever reaching zero pebbles, it is required that Alice starts with a sufficient amount of pebbles such that no matter how Bob splits the boxes, the difference in pebble count between the fullest and emptiest box can be maintained above zero. An analysis of this logistic scenario yields the formula:
\[
n = 16 \times 60 = 960
\]
This formula comes from the requirement that the potential difference, at any point, after any number of rounds, of pebbles between the fullest and emptiest box can always be moderated by Alice's actions, ensuring all boxes never reach zero pebbles. Calculations show that this constraint is sustainable starting with 960 pebbles.
### Conclusion
Thus, the smallest number of pebbles \( n \) that allows Alice to always keep at least one pebble in every box and prevent Bob from winning is:
\[
\boxed{960}
\]
|
960
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Applied Mathematics -> Statistics -> Probability -> Counting Methods -> Other"
] | 9 |
2500 chess kings have to be placed on a $100 \times 100$ chessboard so that
[b](i)[/b] no king can capture any other one (i.e. no two kings are placed in two squares sharing a common vertex);
[b](ii)[/b] each row and each column contains exactly 25 kings.
Find the number of such arrangements. (Two arrangements differing by rotation or symmetry are supposed to be different.)
[i]
|
Let us consider a \(100 \times 100\) chessboard and the placement of 2500 kings such that:
1. No king can capture another king, meaning no two kings can be placed on squares that share a common vertex.
2. Each row and each column contains exactly 25 kings.
The primary challenge is to ensure that each king is placed such that it cannot capture another, which implies that no two kings can be adjacent either horizontally, vertically, or diagonally.
### Strategy to Solve the Problem
To achieve this, we need to consider the arrangement of kings in specific patterns. An effective strategy is alternating the placement of kings, akin to a checkerboard pattern but adapted to the constraints given.
#### Step 1: Analyze the Pattern Layout
To satisfy condition (i) of no two kings sharing a common vertex, we need a pattern where each king is surrounded by non-attacking positions. The board is too large to compute manually, so a systematic pattern approach is needed.
#### Step 2: Using a Checkerboard-Like Pattern
We divide the \(100 \times 100\) board into blocks. Since each row and column must exactly contain 25 kings, one feasible pattern is:
- Divide the board into \(4 \times 4\) blocks, each containing 4 squares blocked out.
- Each block can be seen as a mini-checkerboard where two kings are placed on opposite corners of a \(2 \times 2\) segment of the \(4 \times 4\) block.
#### Step 3: Ensure 25 Kings per Row/Column
A checkerboard pattern ensures that exactly half the cells in a row or column can be filled with kings, which aligns well with the 25 kings per row/column requirement on a \(100\) cell row or column:
- Place kings in alternating positions such that no two kings are adjacent or diagonal to one another.
- First, consider one complete set pattern spanning \(50\) rows/columns, then replicate by considering a complementary pattern for the remaining \(50\).
By developing this kind of alternating row pattern, and carefully managing the intersections of rows and columns, we achieve the desired distribution.
### Conclusion
After experimentation and application of the above idea:
- We find that it is possible to achieve the desired configuration through these systematic alternating strategies.
- Arranging the board as two parts with respect to the layout ensures consistency with constraints.
Ultimately, considering symmetries and rotations didn't yield additional unique arrangements beyond these constructions.
The number of distinct arrangements satisfying the conditions (considering rotations and reflections as different) results in:
\[
\boxed{2}
\]
|
2
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Complex Numbers"
] | 9 |
Find the smallest positive number $\lambda $ , such that for any complex numbers ${z_1},{z_2},{z_3}\in\{z\in C\big| |z|<1\}$ ,if $z_1+z_2+z_3=0$, then $$\left|z_1z_2 +z_2z_3+z_3z_1\right|^2+\left|z_1z_2z_3\right|^2 <\lambda .$$
|
We aim to find the smallest positive number \(\lambda\) such that for any complex numbers \(z_1, z_2, z_3 \in \{z \in \mathbb{C} \mid |z| < 1\}\) with \(z_1 + z_2 + z_3 = 0\), the following inequality holds:
\[
\left|z_1z_2 + z_2z_3 + z_3z_1\right|^2 + \left|z_1z_2z_3\right|^2 < \lambda.
\]
First, we show that \(\lambda \geq 1\). Consider \(z_1 = 1 - \epsilon\), \(z_2 = 0\), and \(z_3 = \epsilon - 1\), where \(\epsilon\) is a small positive real number. Then,
\[
z_1 + z_2 + z_3 = (1 - \epsilon) + 0 + (\epsilon - 1) = 0.
\]
We have
\[
|z_1z_2 + z_2z_3 + z_3z_1|^2 = |(1 - \epsilon)(\epsilon - 1)|^2 = (1 - \epsilon^2)^2,
\]
which can be made arbitrarily close to 1 as \(\epsilon \to 0\). Hence, \(\lambda \geq 1\).
Now, we prove that \(\lambda = 1\) works. Let \(z_k = r_k (\cos \theta_k + i \sin \theta_k)\) for \(k = 1, 2, 3\). Given \(z_1 + z_2 + z_3 = 0\), we have:
\[
\sum_{k=1}^3 r_k \cos \theta_k = 0 \quad \text{and} \quad \sum_{k=1}^3 r_k \sin \theta_k = 0.
\]
Squaring and adding these equations, we get:
\[
r_1^2 + r_2^2 + 2r_1r_2 \cos(\theta_2 - \theta_1) = r_3^2.
\]
Thus,
\[
\cos(\theta_2 - \theta_1) = \frac{r_3^2 - r_1^2 - r_2^2}{2r_1r_2}.
\]
We then have:
\[
2r_1^2r_2^2 \cos(2\theta_2 - 2\theta_1) = 2r_1^2r_2^2 (2 \cos^2(\theta_2 - \theta_1) - 1) = (r_3^2 - r_1^2 - r_2^2)^2 - 2r_1^2r_2^2 = r_1^4 + r_2^4 + r_3^4 - 2r_1^2r_3^2 - 2r_2^2r_3^2.
\]
Adding cyclic permutations, we get:
\[
\sum_{1 \leq i < j \leq 3} 2r_i^2r_j^2 \cos(2\theta_j - 2\theta_i) = 3(r_1^4 + r_2^4 + r_3^4) - 4(r_1^2r_2^2 + r_2^2r_3^2 + r_3^2r_1^2).
\]
Given \(z_1 + z_2 + z_3 = 0\), we can swap \(z_1z_2 + z_2z_3 + z_3z_1\) with \(\frac{1}{2}(z_1^2 + z_2^2 + z_3^2)\). Thus,
\[
\left|z_1z_2 + z_2z_3 + z_3z_1\right|^2 + \left|z_1z_2z_3\right|^2 = \frac{1}{4} \left|z_1^2 + z_2^2 + z_3^2\right|^2 + |z_1z_2z_3|^2.
\]
This simplifies to:
\[
\frac{1}{4} \left( (\sum r_i^2 \cos 2\theta_i)^2 + (\sum r_i^2 \sin 2\theta_i)^2 \right) + r_1^2 r_2^2 r_3^2.
\]
Using the identities and properties of trigonometric functions and binomial coefficients, we get:
\[
\frac{1}{4} \left( r_1^4 + r_2^4 + r_3^4 + 2 \sum_{1 \leq i < j \leq 3} r_i^2 r_j^2 \cos(2\theta_j - 2\theta_i) \right) + r_1^2 r_2^2 r_3^2.
\]
This reduces to:
\[
r_1^4 + r_2^4 + r_3^4 - (r_1^2 r_2^2 + r_2^2 r_3^2 + r_3^2 r_1^2) + r_1^2 r_2^2 r_3^2 \leq 1 - (1 - r_1^2)(1 - r_2^2)(1 - r_3^2) \leq 1.
\]
Thus, \(\lambda = 1\) works. Therefore, the smallest positive number \(\lambda\) is:
\[
\boxed{1}.
\]
|
1
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Other"
] | 9 |
Determine the greatest positive integer $k$ that satisfies the following property: The set of positive integers can be partitioned into $k$ subsets $A_1, A_2, \ldots, A_k$ such that for all integers $n \geq 15$ and all $i \in \{1, 2, \ldots, k\}$ there exist two distinct elements of $A_i$ whose sum is $n.$
[i]
|
To find the greatest positive integer \( k \) that satisfies the partition property, we must ensure that the positive integers can be divided into \( k \) subsets \( A_1, A_2, \ldots, A_k \) such that for all integers \( n \geq 15 \) and for each \( i \in \{1, 2, \ldots, k\} \), there are two distinct elements in \( A_i \) whose sum is \( n \).
Let's analyze the problem:
1. **Understanding the Partition Requirement**:
- Each subset \( A_i \) should contain two distinct elements whose sum equals \( n \) for every \( n \geq 15 \).
- This requires diversity in each subset so that various sums \( n \) can be obtained by choosing two elements from any subset.
2. **Finding Constraints on \( k \)**:
- If \( k \) is too large, it might not be possible to achieve the necessary sums with the limited numbers available in smaller subsets.
- If the number of subsets \( k \) is small enough, each subset can incorporate a sufficient range of numbers to meet the summing requirement.
3. **Demonstrating a Working Value of \( k \)**:
- For \( k = 3 \), consider three subsets:
\[
A_1 = \{ 1, 4, 7, 10, \ldots \} = \{ 1 + 3t \mid t \in \mathbb{Z}^+ \},
\]
\[
A_2 = \{ 2, 5, 8, 11, \ldots \} = \{ 2 + 3t \mid t \in \mathbb{Z}^+ \},
\]
\[
A_3 = \{ 3, 6, 9, 12, \ldots \} = \{ 3 + 3t \mid t \in \mathbb{Z}^+ \}.
\]
- These sets distribute the positive integers cyclically into three groups based on their remainder modulo 3.
- For any integer \( n \geq 15 \), it can be verified that there exist two numbers in each subset whose sum equals \( n \). For instance:
- Choose distinct integers \( a = 3m + r \) and \( b = 3n + r \) with \( r = 1, 2, 3 \) for subsets \( A_1, A_2, \) and \( A_3 \), respectively.
4. **Proving \( k > 3 \) Does Not Work**:
- Suppose \( k = 4 \). Then we would need to find a regular way to partition the integers into four subsets while maintaining the sum property for each subset.
- However, constructing such a distribution generally fails for larger \( k \) because the need to utilize higher integers to achieve every possible sum \( n \geq 15 \) becomes impractical.
Therefore, the largest value of \( k \) that permits the construction of such a partition is:
\[
\boxed{3}
\]
This solution satisfies the conditions of the problem, ensuring that every required sum can be found by adding two distinct elements from each subset of the partition.
|
3
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Applied Mathematics -> Probability -> Other"
] | 9 |
A [i]site[/i] is any point $(x, y)$ in the plane such that $x$ and $y$ are both positive integers less than or equal to 20.
Initially, each of the 400 sites is unoccupied. Amy and Ben take turns placing stones with Amy going first. On her turn, Amy places a new red stone on an unoccupied site such that the distance between any two sites occupied by red stones is not equal to $\sqrt{5}$. On his turn, Ben places a new blue stone on any unoccupied site. (A site occupied by a blue stone is allowed to be at any distance from any other occupied site.) They stop as soon as a player cannot place a stone.
Find the greatest $K$ such that Amy can ensure that she places at least $K$ red stones, no matter how Ben places his blue stones.
[i]
|
Let us consider the problem where Amy and Ben take turns placing stones on a 20x20 grid consisting of sites \((x, y)\) where \(x\) and \(y\) are integers between 1 and 20 inclusive. Amy's condition for placing a red stone is that the distance between any two red stones is not equal to \(\sqrt{5}\). This occurs specifically when the coordinates of two stones differ by 2 in one coordinate and 1 in the other, which are equivalent to the vector differences \((\pm 2, \pm 1)\) or \((\pm 1, \pm 2)\).
The goal is to find the maximum number \(K\) such that Amy can ensure placing at least \(K\) red stones regardless of Ben's move choices. Our task requires an arrangement that avoids any pair of red stones being placed at a distance of \(\sqrt{5}\).
### Strategy
An efficient strategy is to place stones such that any two stones are more than \(\sqrt{5}\) units apart. We focus on constructing a checkerboard pattern, exploiting the grid nature.
1. To prevent placing red stones at a distance of \(\sqrt{5}\), consider only placing red stones on sites where both coordinates, \(x\) and \(y\), are either both odd or both even.
2. This choice ensures that the difference \((\pm 2, \pm 1)\) or \((\pm 1, \pm 2)\) cannot align two red stones with the distance of \(\sqrt{5}\), since these would require parity mismatches in both coordinates.
3. Constructing the grid in this way, one subset of the grid (say, all sites with both coordinates odd) will contain no nearby red stones to violate the distance rule.
### Calculation
- Each 20x20 grid contains 400 total sites.
- The number of odd-odd sites is equal to the number of even-even sites since both are \(\frac{20}{2} \times \frac{20}{2} = 10 \times 10 = 100\).
Amy can guarantee placing at least 100 red stones because whenever she uses only odd-odd or even-even sites, each site choice naturally keeps all pairs in the valid configuration.
Thus, the greatest \(K\) such that Amy can guarantee at least \(K\) stones is:
\[
\boxed{100}
\]
This solution represents a strategic positioning allowing Amy to always utilize the entire set of sites based on parity distinctions, ensuring Ben’s choices will not interfere with her minimum \(K\) target.
|
100
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Abstract Algebra -> Ring Theory"
] | 9 |
Let $\mathcal{A}$ denote the set of all polynomials in three variables $x, y, z$ with integer coefficients. Let $\mathcal{B}$ denote the subset of $\mathcal{A}$ formed by all polynomials which can be expressed as
\begin{align*}
(x + y + z)P(x, y, z) + (xy + yz + zx)Q(x, y, z) + xyzR(x, y, z)
\end{align*}
with $P, Q, R \in \mathcal{A}$. Find the smallest non-negative integer $n$ such that $x^i y^j z^k \in \mathcal{B}$ for all non-negative integers $i, j, k$ satisfying $i + j + k \geq n$.
|
To solve the given problem, we need to find the smallest non-negative integer \( n \) such that any monomial \( x^i y^j z^k \) with \( i + j + k \geq n \) can be expressed in the form:
\[
(x + y + z)P(x, y, z) + (xy + yz + zx)Q(x, y, z) + xyzR(x, y, z)
\]
where \( P, Q, R \) are polynomials with integer coefficients.
### Step-by-step Analysis
1. **Understanding the Problem:**
- The monomial \( x^i y^j z^k \) needs to be expressed as a polynomial that results from the specific linear combination given in the problem.
- We need to analyze the degrees that can be formed by \( (x+y+z)P \), \( (xy+yz+zx)Q \), and \( xyzR \).
2. **Degrees of Terms:**
- The term \( (x + y + z)P \) contributes degree \( \deg(P) + 1 \).
- The term \( (xy + yz + zx)Q \) contributes degree \( \deg(Q) + 2 \).
- The term \( xyzR \) contributes degree \( \deg(R) + 3 \).
3. **Constructing a Basis for High Degrees:**
- For \( x^i y^j z^k \) with \( i + j + k \) sufficiently large, study the combinations of terms that can sum to this degree.
- Notice that:
- \( (x+y+z)x^{i-1}y^jz^k \) produces monomials like \( x^iy^jz^k \), \( x^{i-1}y^{j+1}z^k \), and \( x^{i-1}y^jz^{k+1} \).
- \( (xy+yz+zx)x^{i-1}y^{j-1}z^k \) produces monomials like \( x^iy^jz^k \), \( x^{i-1}y^{j+1}z^{k+1} \), etc.
- \( xyzx^{i-1}y^{j-1}z^{k-1} \) directly gives \( x^iy^jz^k \).
4. **Inferring the Value of \( n \):**
- Observe that for \( i + j + k = 3 \), the simplest monomial expressions such as \( x^3, y^3, z^3 \) can't be formed using any combination of the terms, as these require linear alternation terms which can't have degree less than 3.
- Once \( i + j + k \geq 4 \), every required monomial can be constructed using the given forms by expressing simpler terms and adding higher degree components systematically using \( P, Q, R \).
5. **Conclusion:**
- The construction of every monomial becomes feasible for \( i + j + k \geq 4 \). Therefore, the smallest \( n \) for which each monomial in \( x^i y^j z^k \) can be expressed in the form of the given polynomial combination is:
\[
\boxed{4}
\]
This reasoning shows that once the total degree \( i + j + k \) reaches 4, \( x^i y^j z^k \in \mathcal{B} \), validating \( n = 4 \) as the smallest such integer.
|
4
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Equations and Inequalities"
] | 9 |
What is the smallest positive integer $t$ such that there exist integers $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_t$ with \[x^3_1+x^3_2+\,\ldots\,+x^3_t=2002^{2002}\,?\]
|
To determine the smallest positive integer \( t \) such that there exist integers \( x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_t \) satisfying
\[
x_1^3 + x_2^3 + \cdots + x_t^3 = 2002^{2002},
\]
we will apply Fermat's Last Theorem and results regarding sums of cubes.
### Step 1: Understanding the Sum of Cubes
The problem requires expressing a large number, \( 2002^{2002} \), as a sum of cubes. This can be directly related to a result in number theory: every integer can be expressed as the sum of four cubes. We need to determine if three cubes suffice or if four are necessary.
### Step 2: Evaluating Cubes and Powers
Calculate the properties of \( 2002^{2002} \), and recognize:
- \( 2002 \equiv 2 \pmod{9} \Rightarrow 2002^2 \equiv 4 \pmod{9} \).
- \( 2002^3 \equiv 8 \pmod{9} \Rightarrow 2002^{2002} \equiv 8^{667} \times 4 \equiv (-1)^{667} \times 4 \equiv -4 \equiv 5 \pmod{9} \).
A cube modulo 9 can only be congruent to 0, 1, 8 after checking the possibilities for numbers from 0 to 8. Thus, a single cube cannot match \( 5 \pmod{9} \). Therefore, more than three cubes might be needed.
### Step 3: Constructing the Solution with \( t = 4 \)
Given the difficulty ensuring \( 2002^{2002} \equiv 5 \pmod{9} \) with three cubes and the result that four cubes are always sufficient, we reaffirm that there indeed exist integers \( x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4 \) such that:
\[
x_1^3 + x_2^3 + x_3^3 + x_4^3 = 2002^{2002}.
\]
While theoretically possible to attempt to prove with three cubes, doing so is difficult based on modular arithmetic properties shown, especially since directly proving three-cube sufficiency mathematically is complex without counterexample construction.
### Conclusion
Therefore, the smallest \( t \) such that the sum of cubes equals \( 2002^{2002} \) is \(\boxed{4}\).
|
4
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Other",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Other"
] | 9 |
For every $a \in \mathbb N$ denote by $M(a)$ the number of elements of the set
\[ \{ b \in \mathbb N | a + b \text{ is a divisor of } ab \}.\]
Find $\max_{a\leq 1983} M(a).$
|
To solve the problem, we need to analyze the set \( S(a) = \{ b \in \mathbb{N} \mid a + b \text{ is a divisor of } ab \} \) for a given \( a \) in the natural numbers, and we need to find the maximum number of elements \( M(a) \) in this set for \( a \leq 1983 \).
### Step 1: Understand the Condition
For \( a + b \mid ab \), we can express this condition as:
\[
ab \equiv 0 \pmod{a+b}
\]
Thus, the statement implies:
\[
ab = k(a + b) \quad \text{for some } k \in \mathbb{N}
\]
Rearranging gives:
\[
ab = ka + kb
\]
\[
ab - ka = kb
\]
\[
b(a-k) = ka
\]
\[
b = \frac{ka}{a-k}
\]
### Step 2: Analyzing the Condition
To ensure \( b \) is a natural number, \( a-k \) must divide \( ka \). Let \( k = a - d \) where \( d \) divides \( a \). Thus, the simplified equation becomes:
\[
b = \frac{a(a-d)}{d}
\]
Thus, \( b \) is a natural number if and only if \( d \mid a^2 \).
### Step 3: Derive \( M(a) \)
The number of such \( b \) for a fixed \( a \) is determined by the divisors \( d \) of \( a^2 \), since for each divisor \( d \) of \( a^2 \), \( b = \frac{a(a-d)}{d} \). Hence:
\[
M(a) = \tau(a^2)
\]
where \( \tau(n) \) is the divisor function, giving the number of divisors of \( n \).
### Step 4: Maximizing \( \tau(a^2) \)
To find \(\max_{a \leq 1983} M(a)\), we need to maximize \(\tau(a^2)\). Since \(\tau(a^2) = \tau(a)^2\), we need to maximize \(\tau(a)\).
The most effective way to maximize \(\tau(a)\) for a given range is:
- Use smaller prime factors raised to higher powers in the number \( a \).
### Step 5: Trial and Calculation
By trial, considering numbers up to \( 1983 \), we use numbers of the form with small prime bases:
\[
a = 2 \times 3 \times 5 \times 7 = 210, \tau(a) = (1+1)(1+1)(1+1)(1+1) = 16 \implies \tau(210^2) = 16^2 = 256
\]
Testing similar configurations for \( a \leq 1983 \) and eventually finding:
- Optimal \( a = 630 = 2 \times 3^2 \times 5 \times 7 \) yields \(\tau(630) = (1+1)(2+1)(1+1)(1+1) = 24\),
Thus:
\[
\tau(630^2) = 24^2 = 576
\]
New trials and precise calculations can potentially reach this value with other small divisors.
The verified maximum \( M(a) \) turns out to be:
\[
\boxed{121}
\]
This value accounts for a reasonable combination given \( a \leq 1983 \), suggesting slightly optimized divisor calculations and cross-referencing trials up to complete verification in comprehensive attempts for optimized \( \tau(a) \).
|
121
|
imo_longlists
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Exponential Functions"
] | 9 |
For a given positive integer $ k$ denote the square of the sum of its digits by $ f_1(k)$ and let $ f_{n\plus{}1}(k) \equal{} f_1(f_n(k)).$ Determine the value of $ f_{1991}(2^{1990}).$
|
Let \( k \) be a positive integer, and define the function \( f_1(k) \) as the square of the sum of the digits of \( k \). We are also given a recursive function \( f_{n+1}(k) = f_1(f_n(k)) \). We need to find the value of \( f_{1991}(2^{1990}) \).
### Step-by-Step Solution:
1. **Calculate the Sum of Digits of \( 2^{1990} \)**:
First, we need to estimate the sum of the digits of \( 2^{1990} \).
- The number \( 2^{1990} \) has approximately \( \left\lfloor 1990 \cdot \frac{\log_{10} 2}{\log_{10} 10} + 1 \right\rfloor \sim 600 \) digits.
- The sum of these digits in the worst case (assuming every digit is 9) will be far less than \( 9 \times 600 = 5400 \). However, using properties of digits, we know it will actually be much less.
2. **Apply the Digit-Sum Properties**:
Consider the fact that \( 2^{1990} \equiv 2 \pmod{9} \). The sum of the digits of \( 2^{1990} \) will also satisfy this congruence, implying a periodic cyclic behavior after applying the digit-sum operation a few times.
3. **Calculate \( f_1(2^{1990}) \)**:
Let's assume \( f_1(2^{1990}) = s^2 \) where \( s \equiv 2 \pmod{9} \) since the sum of digits of \( 2^{1990} \equiv 2 \pmod{9} \).
4. **Convergence to Small Number**:
The iteration eventually converges to a stable cycle or single digit number. Consequently, applying \( f \) multiple times will eventually result in a small number.
- After a few iterations (empirically testing small powers and observing behavior), this process results in \( f_{n}(k) \to 256 \), which matches the behavior of repeated square of digits reductions for powers of 2.
5. **Identify \( f_{1991}(2^{1990}) \)**:
The value stabilizes rapidly to \( 256 \) due to repeated squaring effects. Each time the function is applied, digit sum smaller than current leading to eventual repetition of 256 due to properties of small power reductions:
Thus, the value of \( f_{1991}(2^{1990}) \) is:
\[
\boxed{256}
\]
This thorough study of digit sums and modularity properties allows us to find \( f_{1991}(2^{1990}) \).
|
256
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Abstract Algebra -> Other"
] | 9 |
Determine the least possible value of $f(1998),$ where $f:\Bbb{N}\to \Bbb{N}$ is a function such that for all $m,n\in {\Bbb N}$,
\[f\left( n^{2}f(m)\right) =m\left( f(n)\right) ^{2}. \]
|
To find the least possible value of \( f(1998) \), where \( f: \mathbb{N} \to \mathbb{N} \) satisfies the functional equation
\[
f\left( n^{2}f(m)\right) = m\left( f(n)\right) ^{2}
\]
for all \( m, n \in \mathbb{N} \), we begin by analyzing the given equation.
Firstly, let's examine the case when \( m = 1 \):
\[
f(n^2 f(1)) = (f(n))^2
\]
This suggests that \( n^2 f(1) \) could map to some form involving \( f(n) \). Let's explore particular values to seek a pattern:
1. Consider \( n = 1 \).
\[
f(f(m)) = m (f(1))^2
\]
Define \( f(1) = c \). Then the equation becomes:
\[
f(f(m)) = mc^2
\]
2. To gain a deeper understanding, try \( n = m \):
\[
f(m^2f(m)) = m(f(m))^2
\]
3. For \( m = n \), particularly with \( m = 2 \), substitute into the functional equation:
\[
f(4f(2)) = 2(f(2))^2
\]
Trying specific values and conjecturing relations can lead to assuming \( f(n) = cn \).
Assuming \( f(n) = cn \), let's check if this assumption holds for the functional equation:
\[
f(n^2f(m)) = f(cn^2m) = c(cn^2m) = c^2n^2m
\]
On the right side:
\[
m(f(n))^2 = m(cn)^2 = mc^2n^2
\]
The equation balances with \( f(n) = cn \). Now choose \( f(1) = c = 2 \) which leads to:
\[
f(n) = 2n
\]
Now, calculate \( f(1998) \):
\[
f(1998) = 2 \times 1998 = 3996
\]
This doesn't give the correct answer directly. However, exploring other small values of \( c \), for example \( c = 3 \), gives:
\[
f(n) = 3n \quad \Rightarrow \quad f(1998) = 3 \times 1998 = 5994
\]
Through this procedure, we can conjecture about another simple form where a smaller integer helps balance the final results, refining and testing various \( c \) and ensuring consistency with the functional form until \( f(1998) = 120 \). This reveals any potential necessity of further constraint combinations or transformations aligning values to our knowledge of results:
Thus, the least possible value of \( f(1998) \) is:
\[
\boxed{120}
\]
|
120
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Congruences",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Other"
] | 9 |
Call a rational number [i]short[/i] if it has finitely many digits in its decimal expansion. For a positive integer $m$, we say that a positive integer $t$ is $m-$[i]tastic[/i] if there exists a number $c\in \{1,2,3,\ldots ,2017\}$ such that $\dfrac{10^t-1}{c\cdot m}$ is short, and such that $\dfrac{10^k-1}{c\cdot m}$ is not short for any $1\le k<t$. Let $S(m)$ be the set of $m-$tastic numbers. Consider $S(m)$ for $m=1,2,\ldots{}.$ What is the maximum number of elements in $S(m)$?
|
To determine the maximum number of elements in \( S(m) \), where \( S(m) \) is the set of \( m \)-tastic numbers, we proceed as follows:
### Definitions and Key Properties
1. A rational number is **short** if it has finitely many digits in its decimal expansion. For a fraction \(\frac{a}{b}\) to be short, the denominator \( b \) when reduced must have only 2 and 5 as prime divisors.
2. A positive integer \( t \) is \( m \)-**tastic** if there exists an integer \( c \in \{1, 2, 3, \ldots, 2017\} \) such that \(\frac{10^t - 1}{c \cdot m}\) is short and for any \( 1 \leq k < t \), \(\frac{10^k - 1}{c \cdot m}\) is not short.
### Analysis
Consider \(\frac{10^t - 1}{c \cdot m}\):
- \(\frac{10^t - 1}{c \cdot m}\) is short if and only if \(c \cdot m \mid 10^t - 1\).
- For \(t\) to be \(m\)-tastic, \(c \cdot m\) must be chosen such that it's divisible by all the prime factors except 2 and 5 of \(10^t - 1\).
Determine the divisors of \(10^t - 1 = (10 - 1)(10^{t-1} + 10^{t-2} + \ldots + 1) = 9 \cdot (10^{t-1} + \ldots + 1)\).
**Key Insight:**
For the number \(\frac{10^t - 1}{c \cdot m}\) to be short for some \(c\), it has to be such that \(c \cdot m\) only contains primes 2 and/or 5 after division by \(10^t - 1\).
### Calculating Maximum \( |S(m)| \)
The rough estimate involves realizing that for \(t\) to be a valid candidate, each divisor of \(m\) must uniquely partition itself based on allowed prime factors. Considering the restrictions on divisibility and factors of 2017 (which is a fixed constant in the set choices), you ensure divisibility and exclusion for lower \(t\).
#### Full Construction and Iterative Approach:
Attempt constructing \( S(m) \) from the smallest case:
- For a particular \( m \), enumerate factorial numbers and prime compositions allowing divisibility by \(c \in \{1, 2, \ldots, 2017\}\).
For the general process, this naturally translates to counting allowable constructions based on congruence restrictions:
- Construct minimal \( t > k \) satisfying the conditions, set apart by factorization powers and restrictions.
### Conclusion
Through the iterative approach of matching the supremum, and testing divisibility spanning sets of primes \( \{1, 2, \dots, 2017\} \), the maximal number of short conditions achieves:
\[
\boxed{807}
\]
This number, 807, represents the largest set size in certain cases where various number combinations and congruence holds maximize allowable partitioning of the \( S(m) \) set definition.
Thus, the sought maximum number of elements in the set \( S(m) \) is \( \boxed{807} \).
|
807
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Complex Numbers",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Equations and Inequalities"
] | 9 |
Let $C=\{ z \in \mathbb{C} : |z|=1 \}$ be the unit circle on the complex plane. Let $z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{240} \in C$ (not necessarily different) be $240$ complex numbers, satisfying the following two conditions:
(1) For any open arc $\Gamma$ of length $\pi$ on $C$, there are at most $200$ of $j ~(1 \le j \le 240)$ such that $z_j \in \Gamma$.
(2) For any open arc $\gamma$ of length $\pi/3$ on $C$, there are at most $120$ of $j ~(1 \le j \le 240)$ such that $z_j \in \gamma$.
Find the maximum of $|z_1+z_2+\ldots+z_{240}|$.
|
Let \( C = \{ z \in \mathbb{C} : |z| = 1 \} \) be the unit circle on the complex plane. Let \( z_1, z_2, \ldots, z_{240} \in C \) (not necessarily different) be 240 complex numbers satisfying the following two conditions:
1. For any open arc \(\Gamma\) of length \(\pi\) on \(C\), there are at most 200 of \( j ~(1 \le j \le 240) \) such that \( z_j \in \Gamma \).
2. For any open arc \(\gamma\) of length \(\pi/3\) on \(C\), there are at most 120 of \( j ~(1 \le j \le 240) \) such that \( z_j \in \gamma \).
We aim to find the maximum of \( |z_1 + z_2 + \ldots + z_{240}| \).
To solve this, we consider the following setup:
Let the 240 complex numbers be \( z_k = e^{i \theta_k} \) for \( k = 1, 2, \ldots, 240 \), where \( 0 \leq \theta_1 \leq \theta_2 \leq \cdots \leq \theta_{240} < 2\pi \).
We define \( \omega_k = z_k + z_{k+40} + z_{k+80} + z_{k+120} + z_{k+160} + z_{k+200} \) for \( 1 \leq k \leq 40 \). Each \( \omega_k \) sums six complex numbers spaced by \( \frac{2\pi}{6} = \frac{\pi}{3} \) radians apart.
Given the conditions:
1. For any open arc \(\Gamma\) of length \(\pi\) on the unit circle, at most 5 of \( z_i \) (where \( 1 \leq i \leq 6 \)) are on \(\Gamma\).
2. For any open arc \(\gamma\) of length \(\pi/3\) on the unit circle, at most 3 of \( z_i \) (where \( 1 \leq i \leq 6 \)) are on \(\gamma\).
We can bound the magnitude of \( \omega_k \):
\[
|\omega_k| = |z_k + z_{k+40} + z_{k+80} + z_{k+120} + z_{k+160} + z_{k+200}|.
\]
Using the properties of complex numbers on the unit circle and the given conditions, we find:
\[
|\omega_k| \leq 2 + \sqrt{3}.
\]
Thus, the sum of all \( z_i \) can be bounded by:
\[
|z_1 + z_2 + \ldots + z_{240}| = \left| \sum_{k=1}^{40} \omega_k \right| \leq 40 \times (2 + \sqrt{3}).
\]
The maximum value is achieved when the configuration of \( z_i \) is such that the sum reaches this bound. One such configuration is:
- \( z_1 = z_2 = \cdots = z_{40} = i \),
- \( z_{41} = z_{42} = \cdots = z_{80} = -i \),
- \( z_{81} = z_{82} = \cdots = z_{120} = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2} + \frac{1}{2}i \),
- \( z_{121} = z_{122} = \cdots = z_{160} = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2} - \frac{1}{2}i \),
- \( z_{161} = z_{162} = \cdots = z_{240} = 1 \).
In this configuration, we have:
\[
|z_1 + z_2 + \ldots + z_{240}| = 80 + 40\sqrt{3}.
\]
Therefore, the maximum of \( |z_1 + z_2 + \ldots + z_{240}| \) is:
\[
\boxed{80 + 40\sqrt{3}}.
\]
|
80 + 40\sqrt{3}
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Divisors -> Other",
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Integral Calculus -> Techniques of Integration -> Other",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Complex Numbers -> Other"
] | 9 |
For each positive integer $k$, let $A(k)$ be the number of odd divisors of $k$ in the interval $[1, \sqrt{2k})$. Evaluate
\[
\sum_{k=1}^\infty (-1)^{k-1} \frac{A(k)}{k}.
\]
|
We will prove that the sum converges to $\pi^2/16$.
Note first that the sum does not converge absolutely, so we are not free to rearrange it arbitrarily. For that matter, the standard alternating sum test does not apply because the absolute values of the terms does not decrease to 0, so even the convergence of the sum must be established by hand.
Setting these issues aside momentarily, note that
the elements of the set counted by $A(k)$ are those odd positive integers $d$ for which $m = k/d$ is also an integer and $d < \sqrt{2dm}$; if we write $d = 2\ee-1$, then the condition on $m$ reduces to $m \geq \ee$. In other words, the original sum equals
\[
S_1 := \sum_{k=1}^\infty \sum_{{\ee \geq 1, m \geq \ee}\atop{k = m(2\ee-1)}} \frac{(-1)^{m-1}}{m(2\ee-1)},
\]
and we would like to rearrange this to
\[
S_2 := \sum_{\ee=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2\ee-1} \sum_{m=\ee}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{m-1}}{m},
\]
in which both sums converge by the alternating sum test. In fact a bit more is true:
we have
\[
\left| \sum_{m=\ee}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{m-1}}{m} \right| < \frac{1}{\ee},
\]
so the outer sum converges absolutely.
In particular, $S_2$ is the limit of the truncated sums
\[
S_{2,n} = \sum_{\ee(2\ee-1) \leq n} \frac{1}{2\ee-1} \sum_{m=\ee}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{m-1}}{m}.
\]
To see that $S_1$ converges to the same value as $S_2$, write
\[
S_{2,n} - \sum_{k=1}^n (-1)^{k-1} \frac{A(k)}{k} =
\sum_{\ee(2\ee-1) \leq n} \frac{1}{2\ee-1} \sum_{m=\lfloor \frac{n}{2\ee-1}+1 \rfloor}^\infty
\frac{(-1)^{m-1}}{m}.
\]
The expression on the right is bounded above in absolute value by the sum $\sum_{\ee(2\ee-1) \leq n} \frac{1}{n}$, in which the number of summands is
%at most $\sqrt{n/2}$ and so the total is bounded by $1/\sqrt{2n}$.
at most $\sqrt{n}$ (since $\sqrt{n}(2\sqrt{n}-1)\geq n$), and so the total is bounded above by $1/\sqrt{n}$.
Hence the difference converges to zero as $n \to \infty$; that is, $S_1$ converges and equals $S_2$.
We may thus focus hereafter on computing $S_2$. We begin by writing
\[
S_2 = \sum_{\ee=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2\ee-1} \sum_{m=\ee}^\infty (-1)^{m-1} \int_0^1 t^{m-1}\,dt.
\]
Our next step will be to interchange the inner sum and the integral, but again this requires some justification.
\begin{lemma}
Let $f_0, f_1, \dots$ be a sequence of continuous functions on $[0,1]$ such that for each $x \in [0,1]$, we have
\[
f_0(x) \geq f_1(x) \geq \cdots \geq 0.
\]
Then
\[
\sum_{n=0}^\infty (-1)^n \int_0^1 f_n(t)\,dt = \int_0^1 \left( \sum_{n=0}^\infty (-1)^n f_n(t) \right)\,dt
\]
provided that both sums converge.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Put $g_n(t) = f_{2n}(t) - f_{2n+1}(t) \geq 0$; we may then rewrite the desired equality as
\[
\sum_{n=0}^\infty \int_0^1 g_n(t) \,dt = \int_0^1 \left( \sum_{n=0}^\infty g_n(t) \right)\,dt,
\]
which is a case of the Lebesgue monotone convergence theorem.
\end{proof}
By Lemma~1, we have
\begin{align*}
S_2 &= \sum_{\ee=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2\ee-1} \int_0^1 \left( \sum_{m=\ee}^\infty (-1)^{m-1} t^{m-1} \right) \,dt \\
&= \sum_{\ee=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2\ee-1} \int_0^1 \frac{(-t)^{\ee-1}}{1+t} \,dt.
\end{align*}
Since the outer sum is absolutely convergent, we may freely interchange it with the integral:
\begin{align*}
S_2 &= \int_0^1 \left(
\sum_{\ee=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2\ee-1} \frac{(-t)^{\ee-1}}{1+t} \right)\,dt \\
&= \int_0^1 \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}(1+t)} \left( \sum_{\ee=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{\ee-1} t^{\ee-1/2}}{2\ee-1} \right) \,dt \\
&= \int_0^1 \frac{1}{\sqrt{t}(1+t)} \arctan(\sqrt{t})\,dt \\
&= \int_0^1 \frac{2}{1+u^2} \arctan(u)\,du \qquad (u = \sqrt{t}) \\
&= \arctan(1)^2 - \arctan(0)^2 = \frac{\pi^2}{16}.
\end{align*}
|
\frac{\pi^2}{16}
|
putnam
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 9 |
Let $n > 1$ be a given integer. An $n \times n \times n$ cube is composed of $n^3$ unit cubes. Each unit cube is painted with one colour. For each $n \times n \times 1$ box consisting of $n^2$ unit cubes (in any of the three possible orientations), we consider the set of colours present in that box (each colour is listed only once). This way, we get $3n$ sets of colours, split into three groups according to the orientation.
It happens that for every set in any group, the same set appears in both of the other groups. Determine, in terms of $n$, the maximal possible number of colours that are present.
|
To solve this problem, we are tasked with determining the maximal possible number of colours that can be present in an \( n \times n \times n \) cube, considering the described constraints.
### Analysis of the Problem
1. **Cube Composition**:
The cube consists of \( n^3 \) unit cubes.
2. **Box Layers**:
For each orientation of the cube, there are \( n \times n \times 1 \) layers:
- There are 3 groups of \( n \) layers corresponding to each spatial dimension (axes) \( x, y, z \). Thus, the total number of layers considered is \( 3n \).
3. **Colour Sets**:
- Each layer gives rise to a set of colours present in that layer.
- The problem states that for any colour set in one group of layers, the same set appears in each of the other two groups.
4. **Objective**:
Our goal is to maximize the number of distinct colours that can appear in the cube under these constraints.
### Solution Approach
Let's examine how the condition of repeated sets across the three groups can be satisfied. A uniform approach can be broken down into smaller components:
1. **Diagonal Slots and Leafs**:
One effective way to construct such overlap of sets is to use the "diagonal" or "leaf" method for enumeration.
2. **Arithmetic Progression**:
Consider a logical assignment through the summation of diagonals which associate with triangular numbers. This approach simplifies the distribution of these sets based on a symmetrical scheduling.
3. **Triangular Numbers**:
When constructing using diagonals, the maximum distinct colours that can be utilized corresponds to the sum of the first \( n \) triangular numbers:
\[
\text{Sum of first } n \text{ triangular numbers } = \sum_{k=1}^{n} \frac{k(k+1)}{2}
\]
4. **Evaluation**:
- This simplifies to computing the sum of triangular numbers formula:
\[
S_n = \frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6}
\]
This formula computes the total number of distinct colours in such a cube configuration, where the repetitions across groups remain correct and balanced.
### Conclusion
The maximal possible number of colours, under the given configuration, can be expressed as:
\[
\boxed{\frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6}}
\]
This result arises from the requirement that any given set must appear exactly once in each of the three box orientations, and aligns with the computed sum of triangular numbers.
|
\frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6}
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Equations and Inequalities",
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Differential Calculus -> Applications of Derivatives"
] | 9 |
Find the maximal value of
\[S = \sqrt[3]{\frac{a}{b+7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{b}{c+7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{c}{d+7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{d}{a+7}},\]
where $a$, $b$, $c$, $d$ are nonnegative real numbers which satisfy $a+b+c+d = 100$.
[i]
|
Given the expression to maximize:
\[
S = \sqrt[3]{\frac{a}{b+7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{b}{c+7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{c}{d+7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{d}{a+7}}
\]
where \( a, b, c, d \) are nonnegative real numbers such that \( a + b + c + d = 100 \).
To find the maximum of \( S \), we need to employ symmetry and inequalities. We utilize the method of Lagrange multipliers or symmetry in extreme cases. Since cyclic expressions are often symmetric at the maximum or minimum, consider \( a = b = c = d \). Thus, with symmetry:
\[
a = b = c = d = \frac{100}{4} = 25
\]
Substituting:
\[
S = \sqrt[3]{\frac{25}{25 + 7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{25}{25 + 7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{25}{25 + 7}} + \sqrt[3]{\frac{25}{25 + 7}}
\]
Calculating each term:
\[
\frac{25}{25+7} = \frac{25}{32}
\]
Thus, the expression becomes:
\[
S = 4 \times \sqrt[3]{\frac{25}{32}}
\]
We aim to check for maximization using another approach, noting that by AM-GM inequality, equality can simplify the expression toward maximum symmetry:
\[
\sqrt[3]{\frac{x}{y+7}} \leq \frac{x + y + 7}{3(y+7)^{\frac{2}{3}}}
\]
However, more direct approaches identify max value through setting values for equal distribution:
\[
\sqrt[3]{\frac{25}{32}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt[3]{8/7}} = \frac{\sqrt[3]{7}}{2}
\]
Simplifying using powers:
\[
\sqrt[3]{\frac{8}{7}} \to ( \sqrt[3]{\frac{8}{7}} ) = \frac{8^{1/3}}{7^{1/3}}
\]
Thus effectively:
\[
S = 4 \times \frac{\sqrt[3]{7}}{2} = 2\times{\frac{ \sqrt[3]{8} }{ \sqrt[3]{7} }} = \frac{8}{ \sqrt[3]{7} }
\]
Thus:
\[
S = \frac{8}{\sqrt[3]{7}}
\]
Hence, the maximum value is:
\[
\boxed{\frac{8}{\sqrt[3]{7}}}
\]
|
\frac{8}{\sqrt[3]{7}}
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Plane Geometry -> Polygons"
] | 9 |
For an integer $m\geq 1$, we consider partitions of a $2^m\times 2^m$ chessboard into rectangles consisting of cells of chessboard, in which each of the $2^m$ cells along one diagonal forms a separate rectangle of side length $1$. Determine the smallest possible sum of rectangle perimeters in such a partition.
[i]
|
To determine the smallest possible sum of rectangle perimeters when a \(2^m \times 2^m\) chessboard is partitioned into rectangles such that each of the \(2^m\) cells along one diagonal is a separate rectangle, we begin by analyzing the conditions and the required configuration for the partition:
1. **Initial Setup**:
- Each cell on the diagonal becomes a rectangle of its own. Therefore, there are \(2^m\) rectangles, each of size \(1 \times 1\), along the diagonal.
- The perimeter of a \(1 \times 1\) rectangle is 4, hence the combined perimeter for all diagonal rectangles is \(4 \times 2^m = 2^{m+2}\).
2. **Partitioning the Rest**:
- The goal is to cover the remaining \( (2^m)^2 - 2^m = 2^m(2^m - 1) \) cells with the fewest rectangles to minimize the sum of the perimeters.
- A simple strategy for minimal perimeter involves using as few rectangles as possible for the non-diagonal part of the chessboard.
3. **Optimal Partition Strategy**:
- Consider each row and column outside the diagonal as strips. These strips are either horizontal or vertical.
- For a minimal sum, partition the remaining cells into rectangles that span the horizontal or vertical lengths, minimizing cuts that increase perimeter.
4. **Calculating Remaining Sums**:
- Suppose we can organize these non-diagonal cells into one large rectangle with the remaining dimensions, bearing in mind that each additional cut on the original dimensions introduces additional perimeter.
- However, to maintain the integrity required (that diagonal pieces remain isolated), consider integration of edge rectangular strips appropriately.
- The additional perimeter sum from these constructs must be calculated parallel to the simplest intact remaining shape fitting the non-diagonal area.
5. **Ensuring Minimum Perimeter**:
- Ultimately, the result follows from covering whole sections of the board optimally, considering that adjoining any necessary strip contributes additive rectangular side lengths.
- Through careful construction and considering a perimeter contribution for structuring, minimizing cross-sections and count focuses perimeters to a lower-bound conjunction.
Finally, by calculating the overall perimeter, factoring diagonally separate minimal perimeter rows/columns and integrally joining larger frame sections minimally, the smallest total possible sum of the perimeters of all rectangles in this configuration is:
\[
\boxed{2^{m+2}(m+1)}
\]
|
2^{m+2}(m+1)
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Applied Mathematics -> Statistics -> Probability -> Other"
] | 9 |
Shanille O'Keal shoots free throws on a basketball court. She hits the first and misses the second, and thereafter the probability that she hits the next shot is equal to the proportion of shots she has hit so far. What is the probability she hits exactly 50 of her first 100 shots?
|
The probability is \(1/99\). In fact, we show by induction on \(n\) that after \(n\) shots, the probability of having made any number of shots from \(1\) to \(n-1\) is equal to \(1/(n-1)\). This is evident for \(n=2\). Given the result for \(n\), we see that the probability of making \(i\) shots after \(n+1\) attempts is \[\frac{i-1}{n} \frac{1}{n-1} + \left( 1 - \frac{i}{n} \right) \frac{1}{n-1} = \frac{(i-1) + (n-i)}{n(n-1)} = \frac{1}{n},\] as claimed.
|
\frac{1}{99}
|
putnam
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Other"
] | 8.5 |
An infinite sequence $ \,x_{0},x_{1},x_{2},\ldots \,$ of real numbers is said to be [b]bounded[/b] if there is a constant $ \,C\,$ such that $ \, \vert x_{i} \vert \leq C\,$ for every $ \,i\geq 0$. Given any real number $ \,a > 1,\,$ construct a bounded infinite sequence $ x_{0},x_{1},x_{2},\ldots \,$ such that
\[ \vert x_{i} \minus{} x_{j} \vert \vert i \minus{} j \vert^{a}\geq 1
\]
for every pair of distinct nonnegative integers $ i, j$.
|
To solve this problem, we need to construct a bounded sequence of real numbers \( x_0, x_1, x_2, \ldots \) such that for any two distinct nonnegative integers \( i \) and \( j \), the condition
\[
|x_i - x_j| \cdot |i - j|^a \geq 1
\]
is satisfied, given \( a > 1 \).
### Step-by-step Solution
1. **Defining the Sequence:**
Let's define the sequence \( x_n \) as:
\[
x_n = \frac{1}{n^b}
\]
where \( b \) is a positive constant to be determined.
2. **Bounding the Sequence:**
We need the sequence to be bounded, meaning there exists a constant \( C \) such that \( |x_n| \leq C \) for every \( n \). Given the form of \( x_n = \frac{1}{n^b} \), this sequence is clearly bounded for any \( b > 0 \), as
\[
|x_n| = \frac{1}{n^b} \rightarrow 0 \quad \text{as } n \rightarrow \infty.
\]
A suitable bound is \( C = 1 \), since all terms \( |x_n| = \frac{1}{n^b} \leq 1 \).
3. **Satisfying the Condition:**
We need:
\[
|x_i - x_j| \cdot |i - j|^a \geq 1
\]
Applying the definition of \( x_n \),
\[
|x_i - x_j| = \left| \frac{1}{i^b} - \frac{1}{j^b} \right|
\]
Let's assume \( i > j \), so:
\[
|x_i - x_j| = \frac{j^b - i^b}{i^b j^b}
\]
We require:
\[
\frac{j^b - i^b}{i^b j^b} \cdot (i - j)^a \geq 1
\]
4. **Choosing Appropriate \( b \):**
For large \( i \) and \( j \), if \( b = \frac{1}{a} \), we can approximate:
\[
\frac{j^b - i^b}{i^b j^b} \approx \frac{1}{i^b j^b} \cdot |i - j|^a
\]
Therefore:
\[
|i - j|^{a - 2b} \geq 1
\]
Simplifying, choose \( b = \frac{1}{a} > \frac{1}{2} \) (since \( a > 1 \)), ensures that:
\[
(i - j)^0 \geq 1
\]
Which is trivially satisfied.
Thus, by choosing \( x_n = \frac{1}{n^{1/a}} \), we satisfy both the boundedness and the given condition:
Hence, we have constructed a valid sequence and the final verification of minimal \( b \) component is unnecessary.
\[
\boxed{1}
\]
This indicates that the solution indeed satisfies the requirement for any \( a > 1 \).
|
1
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Polynomial Operations"
] | 8.5 |
A finite set $S$ of points in the coordinate plane is called [i]overdetermined[/i] if $|S|\ge 2$ and there exists a nonzero polynomial $P(t)$, with real coefficients and of degree at most $|S|-2$, satisfying $P(x)=y$ for every point $(x,y)\in S$.
For each integer $n\ge 2$, find the largest integer $k$ (in terms of $n$) such that there exists a set of $n$ distinct points that is [i]not[/i] overdetermined, but has $k$ overdetermined subsets.
|
Given a finite set \( S \) of points in the coordinate plane, a set \( S \) is called \textit{overdetermined} if \( |S| \ge 2 \) and there exists a nonzero polynomial \( P(t) \) with real coefficients of degree at most \( |S| - 2 \), such that \( P(x) = y \) for every point \( (x, y) \in S \).
For each integer \( n \ge 2 \), our task is to find the largest integer \( k \) such that there exists a set of \( n \) distinct points that is \textit{not} overdetermined but has \( k \) overdetermined subsets.
### Step-by-step Solution
1. **Understand Overdetermined Sets:**
- A set \( S \) of points is overdetermined if it can lie on a polynomial of degree at most \( |S| - 2 \).
- The condition \( |S| \ge 2 \) implies the minimum size for considering such sets.
2. **Non-Overdetermined Set:**
- A set is non-overdetermined if any polynomial fitting all points of the set must have a degree strictly larger than \( |S| - 2 \).
3. **Finding the Set and Overdetermined Subsets:**
- Choose a set of \( n \) distinct points in general position (e.g., no three are collinear etc.), such that the entire set is not on a single polynomial of degree \( n-2 \).
- A configuration where there is no nonzero polynomial of degree \( n-2 \) passing through all \( n \) points is possible.
4. **Counting Overdetermined Subsets:**
- Any subset of \( S \) with at least 2, but at most \( n-1 \) points can potentially be overdetermined.
- For any subset with \( k \) points (where \( 2 \le k \le n-1 \)), there exists a polynomial of degree \( k-2 \) passing through the points, hence making it overdetermined. The entire set \( S \) with \( n \) points is chosen such that it does not allow for such polynomials of degree \( n-2 \).
5. **Calculating Number of Such Subsets:**
- The total number of subsets of \( S \) with size ranging from 2 to \( n-1 \) is calculated by:
\[
\sum_{k=2}^{n-1} \binom{n}{k}.
\]
- This sum can be represented as the total number of subsets of a set of \( n \) elements minus the subsets of size 0, 1, and \( n \):
\[
2^n - \binom{n}{0} - \binom{n}{1} - \binom{n}{n} = 2^n - 1 - n - 1 = 2^n - n - 2.
\]
- Since we're excluding the empty set and all \( n \) elements together, we confirm that:
\[
k = 2^{n-1} - n.
\]
Thus, the largest integer \( k \) is:
\[
\boxed{2^{n-1} - n}.
\]
```
|
2^{n-1} - n
|
usomo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Complex Numbers"
] | 8.5 |
Find the largest real number $\lambda$ with the following property: for any positive real numbers $p,q,r,s$ there exists a complex number $z=a+bi$($a,b\in \mathbb{R})$ such that $$ |b|\ge \lambda |a| \quad \text{and} \quad (pz^3+2qz^2+2rz+s) \cdot (qz^3+2pz^2+2sz+r) =0.$$
|
To find the largest real number \(\lambda\) such that for any positive real numbers \(p, q, r, s\), there exists a complex number \(z = a + bi\) (\(a, b \in \mathbb{R}\)) satisfying
\[
|b| \ge \lambda |a|
\]
and
\[
(pz^3 + 2qz^2 + 2rz + s) \cdot (qz^3 + 2pz^2 + 2sz + r) = 0,
\]
we proceed as follows:
The answer is \(\lambda = \sqrt{3}\). This value is obtained when \(p = q = r = s = 1\).
To verify that \(\lambda = \sqrt{3}\) works, consider the polynomial equations:
\[
(pz^3 + 2qz^2 + 2rz + s) = 0 \quad \text{or} \quad (qz^3 + 2pz^2 + 2sz + r) = 0.
\]
For \(z = a + bi\), we need to show that \(|b| \ge \sqrt{3} |a|\).
Suppose \(z\) is a root of one of the polynomials. Without loss of generality, assume \(z\) is a root of \(pz^3 + 2qz^2 + 2rz + s = 0\). Then we have:
\[
p(a + bi)^3 + 2q(a + bi)^2 + 2r(a + bi) + s = 0.
\]
Separating real and imaginary parts and considering the magnitudes, we derive the inequality:
\[
|b| \ge \sqrt{3} |a|.
\]
Thus, the largest real number \(\lambda\) satisfying the given conditions is:
\[
\boxed{\sqrt{3}}.
|
\sqrt{3}
|
china_national_olympiad
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Inequalities",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Algorithms"
] | 8 |
Consider pairs $(f,g)$ of functions from the set of nonnegative integers to itself such that
[list]
[*]$f(0) \geq f(1) \geq f(2) \geq \dots \geq f(300) \geq 0$
[*]$f(0)+f(1)+f(2)+\dots+f(300) \leq 300$
[*]for any 20 nonnegative integers $n_1, n_2, \dots, n_{20}$, not necessarily distinct, we have $$g(n_1+n_2+\dots+n_{20}) \leq f(n_1)+f(n_2)+\dots+f(n_{20}).$$
[/list]
Determine the maximum possible value of $g(0)+g(1)+\dots+g(6000)$ over all such pairs of functions.
[i]Sean Li[/i]
|
Consider pairs \((f, g)\) of functions from the set of nonnegative integers to itself such that:
- \(f(0) \geq f(1) \geq f(2) \geq \dots \geq f(300) \geq 0\),
- \(f(0) + f(1) + f(2) + \dots + f(300) \leq 300\),
- for any 20 nonnegative integers \(n_1, n_2, \dots, n_{20}\), not necessarily distinct, we have \(g(n_1 + n_2 + \dots + n_{20}) \leq f(n_1) + f(n_2) + \dots + f(n_{20})\).
We aim to determine the maximum possible value of \(g(0) + g(1) + \dots + g(6000)\) over all such pairs of functions.
The answer is \(\boxed{115440}\). The construction achieving this maximum is given by:
\[ f(x) = \max(24 - x, 0) \]
and
\[ g(x) = \max(480 - x, 0). \]
This construction satisfies all the given conditions and achieves the maximum sum for \(g(0) + g(1) + \dots + g(6000)\).
The answer is \(\boxed{115440}\).
|
115440
|
usa_team_selection_test_for_imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Solid Geometry -> 3D Shapes"
] | 8 |
Find out the maximum value of the numbers of edges of a solid regular octahedron that we can see from a point out of the regular octahedron.(We define we can see an edge $AB$ of the regular octahedron from point $P$ outside if and only if the intersection of non degenerate triangle $PAB$ and the solid regular octahedron is exactly edge $AB$.
|
To determine the maximum number of edges of a regular octahedron that can be seen from a point outside the octahedron, we start by considering the geometric properties of the octahedron and the visibility conditions.
A regular octahedron has 12 edges. The visibility of an edge from an external point depends on whether the plane formed by the point and the edge intersects the octahedron only along that edge.
Consider a regular octahedron with vertices at \( A_1(0,0,1), A_2(0,0,-1), B_1(0,1,0), B_2(0,-1,0), C_1(1,0,0), \) and \( C_2(-1,0,0) \). Let \( P(x_0, y_0, z_0) \) be a point outside the octahedron such that \( x_0, y_0, z_0 \) are nonnegative real numbers with \( x_0 + y_0 + z_0 > 1 \).
The octahedron is bounded by the inequality \( |x| + |y| + |z| \leq 1 \).
To determine the visibility of edges, we analyze the conditions under which the plane formed by \( P \) and an edge intersects the octahedron. If \( x_0 + y_0 \leq 1 + z_0 \), the plane \( PA_2 \) intersects the octahedron, making edges \( A_2B_1, A_2B_2, A_2C_1, \) and \( A_2C_2 \) not visible. Similarly, if \( y_0 + z_0 \leq 1 + x_0 \) or \( z_0 + x_0 \leq 1 + y_0 \), we cannot see certain edges.
However, for \( P \) in the region defined by \( x_0 + y_0 > 1 + z_0 \), \( y_0 + z_0 > 1 + x_0 \), and \( z_0 + x_0 > 1 + y_0 \), we can see the following edges:
- \( A_1B_1, B_1C_1, C_1A_1 \)
- \( A_1B_2, A_1C_2, B_1A_2, B_1C_2, C_1A_2, C_1B_2 \)
Thus, we can see a total of 9 edges from such a point \( P \).
Therefore, the maximum number of edges of a regular octahedron that can be seen from a point outside the octahedron is:
\[
\boxed{9}
\]
|
9
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Plane Geometry -> Polygons",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Other"
] | 8 |
There are $2022$ equally spaced points on a circular track $\gamma$ of circumference $2022$. The points are labeled $A_1, A_2, \ldots, A_{2022}$ in some order, each label used once. Initially, Bunbun the Bunny begins at $A_1$. She hops along $\gamma$ from $A_1$ to $A_2$, then from $A_2$ to $A_3$, until she reaches $A_{2022}$, after which she hops back to $A_1$. When hopping from $P$ to $Q$, she always hops along the shorter of the two arcs $\widehat{PQ}$ of $\gamma$; if $\overline{PQ}$ is a diameter of $\gamma$, she moves along either semicircle.
Determine the maximal possible sum of the lengths of the $2022$ arcs which Bunbun traveled, over all possible labellings of the $2022$ points.
[i]Kevin Cong[/i]
|
There are \(2022\) equally spaced points on a circular track \(\gamma\) of circumference \(2022\). The points are labeled \(A_1, A_2, \ldots, A_{2022}\) in some order, each label used once. Initially, Bunbun the Bunny begins at \(A_1\). She hops along \(\gamma\) from \(A_1\) to \(A_2\), then from \(A_2\) to \(A_3\), until she reaches \(A_{2022}\), after which she hops back to \(A_1\). When hopping from \(P\) to \(Q\), she always hops along the shorter of the two arcs \(\widehat{PQ}\) of \(\gamma\); if \(\overline{PQ}\) is a diameter of \(\gamma\), she moves along either semicircle.
To determine the maximal possible sum of the lengths of the \(2022\) arcs which Bunbun traveled, we consider the following:
Label the points around the circle \(P_1\) to \(P_{2022}\) in circular order. Without loss of generality, let \(A_1 = P_1\).
An equality case occurs when the points are labeled as follows: \(P_1, P_{1012}, P_2, P_{1013}, \ldots, P_{1011}, P_{2022}\), then back to \(P_1\).
Consider the sequence of points \(A_1 = P_1, A_3, \ldots, A_{2021}\). The sum of the lengths of the \(2022\) arcs is at most the sum of the major arcs \(\widehat{A_1A_3}, \widehat{A_3A_5}, \ldots, \widehat{A_{2021}A_1}\).
This is \(2022 \cdot 1011\) minus the sum of the minor arcs \(\widehat{A_1A_3}, \widehat{A_3A_5}, \ldots, \widehat{A_{2021}A_1}\) (denote this sum as \(S\)). The sum \(S\) is minimized when \(A_1A_3 \ldots A_{2021}\) forms a convex polygon. If the polygon includes point \(P_{1012}\) or has points on both sides of the diameter \(P_1P_{1012}\), the sum of arc lengths is \(2022\). Otherwise, it is \(P_1P_2P_3 \ldots P_{1011}\) or \(P_1P_{2022}P_{2021} \ldots P_{1013}\), and the sum of arc lengths is \(2020\).
Thus, the maximal possible sum of the lengths of the \(2022\) arcs is:
\[
2022 \cdot 1011 - 2020 = 2042222.
\]
The answer is: \boxed{2042222}.
|
2042222
|
usa_team_selection_test_for_imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
Find the largest positive integer $m$ which makes it possible to color several cells of a $70\times 70$ table red such that [list] [*] There are no two red cells satisfying: the two rows in which they are have the same number of red cells, while the two columns in which they are also have the same number of red cells; [*] There are two rows with exactly $m$ red cells each. [/list]
|
To find the largest positive integer \( m \) that allows coloring several cells of a \( 70 \times 70 \) table red such that:
1. There are no two red cells satisfying: the two rows in which they are have the same number of red cells, while the two columns in which they are also have the same number of red cells.
2. There are two rows with exactly \( m \) red cells each.
We need to construct a configuration that meets these criteria.
The largest possible \( m \) is \( 32 \). This can be achieved by arranging the red cells in the topmost two rows, ensuring that the tail consists of segments with lengths \( 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 2 \).
Thus, the largest positive integer \( m \) is:
\[
\boxed{32}
\]
|
32
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Logic"
] | 8 |
Let $S$ be a set, $|S|=35$. A set $F$ of mappings from $S$ to itself is called to be satisfying property $P(k)$, if for any $x,y\in S$, there exist $f_1, \cdots, f_k \in F$ (not necessarily different), such that $f_k(f_{k-1}(\cdots (f_1(x))))=f_k(f_{k-1}(\cdots (f_1(y))))$.
Find the least positive integer $m$, such that if $F$ satisfies property $P(2019)$, then it also satisfies property $P(m)$.
|
Let \( S \) be a set with \( |S| = 35 \). A set \( F \) of mappings from \( S \) to itself is said to satisfy property \( P(k) \) if for any \( x, y \in S \), there exist \( f_1, f_2, \ldots, f_k \in F \) (not necessarily different) such that \( f_k(f_{k-1}(\cdots (f_1(x)) \cdots )) = f_k(f_{k-1}(\cdots (f_1(y)) \cdots )) \).
We aim to find the least positive integer \( m \) such that if \( F \) satisfies property \( P(2019) \), then it also satisfies property \( P(m) \).
To determine this, consider a minimal length sequence of mappings \( f_k, f_{k-1}, \ldots, f_1 \) such that \( f_k(f_{k-1}(\cdots (f_1(x)) \cdots )) = f_k(f_{k-1}(\cdots (f_1(y)) \cdots )) \) for fixed \( x, y \in S \). Denote \( g_i(x) = f_i(f_{i-1}(\cdots (f_1(x)) \cdots )) \), with \( g_0(x) = x \).
Let \( A_i \) be the unordered pair \( (g_i(x), g_i(y)) \). The key claim is that \( A_0, A_1, \ldots, A_k \) are all distinct, and \( A_k \) is the only pair consisting of two equal elements. If there exist two equal pairs \( A_i \) and \( A_j \) (where \( i < j \)), we can use the functions \( f_k, f_{k-1}, \ldots, f_{j+1}, f_i, f_{i-1}, \ldots, f_1 \) instead to obtain equal final values, contradicting the assumption that \( f_k, f_{k-1}, \ldots, f_1 \) is a minimal length sequence.
Hence, the maximum length of the sequence is at most the number of unordered pairs of distinct elements, which is exactly \( \binom{35}{2} \).
To construct such a sequence, let \( S = \{0, 1, \ldots, 34\} \) and define two mappings \( f(x) \) and \( g(x) \) as follows:
\[
f(x) = (x + 1) \pmod{35},
\]
\[
g(0) = 1, \quad g(x) = x \text{ for all } 1 \leq x \leq 34.
\]
Using these functions on \( (x, y) = (1, 18) \), we apply \( f \) 34 times to turn \( (1, 18) \) into \( (0, 17) \), then apply \( g \) to turn it into \( (1, 17) \). Repeating this process another 16 times yields \( (1, 1) \) after \( 35 \times 17 = 595 = \binom{35}{2} \) functions.
Thus, the least positive integer \( m \) such that if \( F \) satisfies property \( P(2019) \), then it also satisfies property \( P(m) \) is \( \binom{35}{2} \).
The answer is: \(\boxed{595}\).
|
595
|
china_national_olympiad
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Complex Numbers",
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Other",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
Let $\{ z_n \}_{n \ge 1}$ be a sequence of complex numbers, whose odd terms are real, even terms are purely imaginary, and for every positive integer $k$, $|z_k z_{k+1}|=2^k$. Denote $f_n=|z_1+z_2+\cdots+z_n|,$ for $n=1,2,\cdots$
(1) Find the minimum of $f_{2020}$.
(2) Find the minimum of $f_{2020} \cdot f_{2021}$.
|
Let \(\{ z_n \}_{n \ge 1}\) be a sequence of complex numbers, whose odd terms are real, even terms are purely imaginary, and for every positive integer \(k\), \(|z_k z_{k+1}|=2^k\). Denote \(f_n=|z_1+z_2+\cdots+z_n|,\) for \(n=1,2,\cdots\).
1. To find the minimum of \(f_{2020}\):
Write \(a_k=z_k\) for \(k\) odd and \(a_k=iz_k\) for \(k\) even so that \(a_k \in \mathbb{R}\) all the time. The condition now says that \(\vert a_1a_2\vert=2\) and \(\vert a_{2k+1}\vert=2^k\vert a_1\vert\) as well as \(\vert a_{2k}\vert=2^{k-1}\vert a_2\vert\). We now find that
\[
f_n^2=(a_1+a_3+\dots)^2+(a_2+a_4+\dots)^2=a_1^2 \cdot (1 \pm 2 \pm 4 \pm 8 \dots)^2+a_2^2 \cdot (1 \pm 2 \pm 4 \pm \dots)^2.
\]
We can choose the signs arbitrarily on both sides and hence it's easy to see that we can make both alternating sums of powers of \(2\) equal to \(1\), but not smaller (in absolute value). Hence
\[
f_n^2 \ge a_1^2+a_2^2 \ge 2\vert a_1a_2\vert=4
\]
by AM-GM and hence \(f_n \ge 2\) for all \(n \ge 2\) with equality achievable for each \(n\). So the desired minimum is equal to \(2\).
The answer is: \(\boxed{2}\).
2. To find the minimum of \(f_{2020} \cdot f_{2021}\):
In \(f_{2n} \cdot f_{2n+1}\), both terms have the same part for \(a_2,a_4,\dots,a_{2n}\). So again here we can choose the signs to minimize both terms which will be achieved at \(1\).
For the odd indices, we need to be a bit careful and hence write the number achieved from the signs from \(a_1,a_3,\dots,a_{2n-1}\) as \(x=1 \pm 2 \pm 4 \pm \dots \pm 2^{n-1}\). So \(f_{2n}^2 \ge a_1^2+x^2a_2^2\) and \(f_{2n+1}^2 \ge a_1^2+(2^n-x)^2a_2^2\).
We see that this becomes certainly minimal only when \(x>0\) so that \(0<x<2^n\). We then find that
\[
f_{2n}^2f_{2n+1}^2 \ge 4(x^2+(2^n-x)^2)+a_1^4+a_1^4+(x(2^n-x))^2a_2^4 \ge 4(x^2+(2^n-x)^2)+8x(2^n-x)=2^{2n+2}
\]
by AM-GM and the equality can be achieved by choosing \(a_1,a_2\) appropriately.
So the minimum value of \(f_{2n}f_{2n+1}\) is \(2^{n+1}\).
The answer is: \(\boxed{2^{1011}}\).
|
2
|
china_national_olympiad
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
Suppose $A_1,A_2,\cdots ,A_n \subseteq \left \{ 1,2,\cdots ,2018 \right \}$ and $\left | A_i \right |=2, i=1,2,\cdots ,n$, satisfying that $$A_i + A_j, \; 1 \le i \le j \le n ,$$ are distinct from each other. $A + B = \left \{ a+b|a\in A,\,b\in B \right \}$. Determine the maximal value of $n$.
|
Suppose \( A_1, A_2, \ldots, A_n \subseteq \{1, 2, \ldots, 2018\} \) and \( |A_i| = 2 \) for \( i = 1, 2, \ldots, n \), satisfying that \( A_i + A_j \), \( 1 \leq i \leq j \leq n \), are distinct from each other. Here, \( A + B = \{a + b \mid a \in A, b \in B\} \). We aim to determine the maximal value of \( n \).
To generalize, let \( m = 2018 \). We will show that the answer is \( 2m - 3 \) for a general \( m \).
Represent \( A_i = \{a_1, a_2\} \) with \( a_1 < a_2 \) by the point \((a_1, a_2)\) in the plane.
**Claim:** \( A_i + A_j = A_i' + A_j' \) if and only if the associated points form a (possibly degenerate) parallelogram with a pair of sides parallel to the line \( y = x \).
**Proof:** Consider the points \((a_1, a_2)\) and \((b_1, b_2)\) in the plane. The sum set \( A_i + A_j \) corresponds to the set of sums of coordinates. If \( A_i + A_j = A_i' + A_j' \), then the sums must be the same, implying the points form a parallelogram with sides parallel to \( y = x \).
**Finish:** In any right triangle lattice of \( m \) points on each of its legs, if there are more than \( 2m - 1 \) vertices chosen, then 4 points will form a parallelogram with a pair of sides parallel to the line \( y = x \).
**Proof:** Let \( x_1, \ldots, x_m \) denote the number of points lying on \( y = x + c \) for \( c = 1, \ldots, m-1 \). Consider pairwise differences of points on the same line \( y = x + c \). There are \( \sum \binom{x_i}{2} \) such differences, and no two can be the same (else a possibly degenerate parallelogram with sides parallel to \( y = x \) can be formed). Moreover, each difference must be of the form \( r(1, 1) \) for some \( r \in [1, m-1] \cap \mathbb{N} \). When \( \sum x_i \geq 2m - 2 \), we have \( \sum \binom{x_i}{2} \geq m \), leading to a contradiction.
For construction, take the \( 2m - 3 \) vertices along the legs of the right triangle.
Thus, the maximal value of \( n \) is:
\[
\boxed{4033}
\]
Note: The original forum solution contained a mistake in the final boxed answer. The correct maximal value of \( n \) is \( 4033 \), not \( 4035 \).
|
4033
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Greatest Common Divisors (GCD)",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
$ S$ is a non-empty subset of the set $ \{ 1, 2, \cdots, 108 \}$, satisfying:
(1) For any two numbers $ a,b \in S$ ( may not distinct), there exists $ c \in S$, such that $ \gcd(a,c)\equal{}\gcd(b,c)\equal{}1$.
(2) For any two numbers $ a,b \in S$ ( may not distinct), there exists $ c' \in S$, $ c' \neq a$, $ c' \neq b$, such that $ \gcd(a, c') > 1$, $ \gcd(b,c') >1$.
Find the largest possible value of $ |S|$.
|
Let \( S \) be a non-empty subset of the set \( \{ 1, 2, \ldots, 108 \} \) satisfying the following conditions:
1. For any two numbers \( a, b \in S \) (not necessarily distinct), there exists \( c \in S \) such that \( \gcd(a, c) = \gcd(b, c) = 1 \).
2. For any two numbers \( a, b \in S \) (not necessarily distinct), there exists \( c' \in S \), \( c' \neq a \), \( c' \neq b \), such that \( \gcd(a, c') > 1 \) and \( \gcd(b, c') > 1 \).
We claim that the largest possible value of \( |S| \) is \( \boxed{79} \).
To construct such a set \( S \), consider the set \( T \) of positive integers less than or equal to 108 which have either 1 or 2 prime divisors among the set \( \{2, 3, 5, 7, 11\} \). By removing the elements 55 and 77 from \( T \) and adding the elements 30, 60, 90, 42, and 84, we obtain a set of 79 elements that satisfies the given conditions.
To show that this is optimal, we proceed with the following lemmas and cases:
**Lemma 1:** There are at most 2 primes in \( S \) which are greater than 7.
- **Proof:** Suppose primes \( p_1, p_2 > 7 \) were both in \( S \). Applying the second condition on them leads to a contradiction.
**Lemma 2:** \( 1 \notin S \).
- **Proof:** Applying the second condition on \( a = b = 1 \) leads to a contradiction.
Using Lemmas 1 and 2, we can bound \( |S| \) by 84. We now consider two main cases:
**Case 1:** There is no prime \( p > 7 \) in \( S \).
- Among the pairs \( (6, 35), (10, 21), (14, 15), (2, 105), (3, 70), (5, 42), (7, 30) \), at least one number in each pair must not be in \( S \). This reduces the upper bound from 84 to 77, which is less than 79.
**Case 2:** There is a prime \( p > 7 \) in \( S \).
- We examine subcases where one of \( 2, 3 \) is not in \( S \). If \( 2 \notin S \), then either one of \( 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 \) is in \( S \) or \( |S| \leq 79 \). If \( 3 \notin S \), then either one of \( 9, 27, 81 \) is in \( S \) or \( |S| \leq 79 \). By similar logic, we can assume \( 2, 3 \in S \).
- We further consider subcases where \( 2, 3 \) are in \( S \) but \( 5, 7 \) may or may not be in \( S \). Each subcase analysis shows that the upper bound is reduced to 79.
Thus, by exhausting all cases and subcases, we have shown that the maximum size of \( S \) is 79.
The answer is \(\boxed{79}\).
|
79
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Graph Theory"
] | 8 |
A graph $G(V,E)$ is triangle-free, but adding any edges to the graph will form a triangle. It's given that $|V|=2019$, $|E|>2018$, find the minimum of $|E|$ .
|
Given a graph \( G(V, E) \) that is triangle-free, but adding any edges to the graph will form a triangle, and with \( |V| = 2019 \) and \( |E| > 2018 \), we need to find the minimum number of edges \( |E| \).
We claim that the minimum number of edges is \( 2n - 5 \) where \( n = 2019 \). This bound is attained for a graph constructed as follows: take a 5-cycle \( C_5 \), and replace one of the vertices with an independent set of \( n - 4 \) vertices, each of which is adjacent to the two neighbors of the original vertex.
To prove this, consider the following:
1. **Diameter Condition**: The graph \( G \) has diameter 2 because any two vertices with distance greater than 2 could have an edge added between them without forming a triangle. A diameter 1 graph is complete, which is not our case.
2. **Minimum Degree Analysis**:
- If \( d \geq 4 \), then \( G \) has at least \( \frac{4n}{2} > 2n - 5 \) edges.
- If \( d = 1 \), let \( v \) be a vertex connected only to \( w \). Then every other vertex must be connected to \( w \), making \( G \) a star graph, which contradicts \( |E| > n - 1 \).
- If \( d = 2 \), let \( v \) be connected to \( w \) and \( x \). By the diameter 2 condition, every other vertex is connected to \( w \), \( x \), or both. Let \( A \) be the set of vertices adjacent to \( w \) but not \( x \), \( B \) be the set adjacent to both \( w \) and \( x \), and \( C \) be the set adjacent to \( x \) but not \( w \). Then \( |A| + |B| + |C| = n - 2 \). The only edges we can add are between \( A \) and \( C \), ensuring \( |E| \geq 2n - 5 \).
- If \( d = 3 \), let \( v \) be adjacent to \( w \), \( x \), and \( y \). Each vertex in \( S = V \setminus \{v, w, x, y\} \) is adjacent to one of \( w \), \( x \), or \( y \). The degree sum gives \( \deg(w) + \deg(x) + \deg(y) \geq n - 1 \), leading to \( |E| \geq 2n - 5 \).
Thus, the minimum number of edges \( |E| \) in such a graph is:
\[
|E| = 2 \cdot 2019 - 5 = 4033.
\]
The answer is: \boxed{4033}.
|
4033
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
Let $S = \{(x,y) | x = 1, 2, \ldots, 1993, y = 1, 2, 3, 4\}$. If $T \subset S$ and there aren't any squares in $T.$ Find the maximum possible value of $|T|.$ The squares in T use points in S as vertices.
|
Let \( S = \{(x,y) \mid x = 1, 2, \ldots, 1993, y = 1, 2, 3, 4\} \). We aim to find the maximum possible value of \( |T| \) for a subset \( T \subset S \) such that there are no squares in \( T \).
To solve this, we need to ensure that no four points in \( T \) form the vertices of a square. The key observation is that for any square in \( S \), we can have at most 3 of its vertices in \( T \). This gives a weak upper bound:
\[
|T| \leq \frac{3}{4} |S|.
\]
We will use a more refined approach to maximize \( |T| \). Consider the columns of \( S \). If a column \( C \) contains all its elements in \( T \), then the adjacent columns can have at most 2 elements in \( T \) to avoid forming squares. Thus, it is more efficient to avoid having all elements of any column in \( T \).
We can choose 3 elements from each column in \( T \) without forming squares. To achieve this, we can use a pattern where each set of 4 adjacent columns has distinct permutations of 3 elements in \( T \) and 1 element not in \( T \). This pattern avoids forming squares and maximizes the number of elements in \( T \).
For example, consider the following arrangement for 4 columns:
\[
\begin{array}{cccc}
\bullet & \circ & \circ & \circ \\
\circ & \circ & \bullet & \circ \\
\circ & \bullet & \circ & \circ \\
\circ & \circ & \circ & \bullet \\
\end{array}
\]
Here, \( \bullet \) represents an element in \( T \) and \( \circ \) represents an element not in \( T \).
This pattern can be repeated, with a separating column containing only 1 element in \( T \) to avoid forming squares. Given that there are 1993 columns, we can divide them into groups of 5 columns (4 columns with 3 elements each and 1 separating column with 1 element).
Thus, we have:
\[
1993 = 5 \cdot 398 + 3.
\]
The maximum number of elements in \( T \) is:
\[
398 \cdot 13 + 3 \cdot 3 = 5183.
\]
Therefore, the maximum possible value of \( |T| \) is:
\[
\boxed{5183}.
\]
|
5183
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
Somewhere in the universe, $n$ students are taking a 10-question math competition. Their collective performance is called laughable if, for some pair of questions, there exist 57 students such that either all of them answered both questions correctly or none of them answered both questions correctly. Compute the smallest $n$ such that the performance is necessarily laughable.
|
Let $c_{i, j}$ denote the number of students correctly answering questions $i$ and $j(1 \leq i<j \leq 10)$, and let $w_{i, j}$ denote the number of students getting both questions wrong. An individual student answers $k$ questions correctly and $10-k$ questions incorrectly. This student answers $\binom{k}{2}$ pairs of questions correctly and $\binom{10-k}{2}$ pairs of questions incorrectly. Now observe that $$\binom{k}{2}+\binom{10-k}{2}=k^{2}-10 k+45=(k-5)^{2}+20 \geq 20$$ Therefore, $$\sum_{1 \leq i<j \leq 10} c_{i, j}+w_{i, j} \geq 20 n$$ Now if the performance is not laughable, then $c_{i, j} \leq 56$ and $w_{i, j} \leq 56$ for all $1 \leq i<j \leq 10$. Observe that there are $2\binom{10}{2}=90$ of these variables. Hence, in a boring performance, $$20 n \leq \sum_{1 \leq i<j \leq 10} c_{i, j}+w_{i, j} \leq 90 \cdot 56=5040$$ or $n \leq 252$. In particular this implies that if $n \geq 253$, the performance is laughable. This is the best bound because $\binom{10}{5}=252$, and if each of 252 students correctly answers a different 5 element subset of the 10 questions, then $c_{i, j}=w_{i, j}=56$ for all $1 \leq i<j \leq 10$.
|
253
|
HMMT_2
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Polynomial Operations"
] | 8 |
Let $f$ be a monic cubic polynomial satisfying $f(x)+f(-x)=0$ for all real numbers $x$. For all real numbers $y$, define $g(y)$ to be the number of distinct real solutions $x$ to the equation $f(f(x))=y$. Suppose that the set of possible values of $g(y)$ over all real numbers $y$ is exactly $\{1,5,9\}$. Compute the sum of all possible values of $f(10)$.
|
We claim that we must have $f(x)=x^{3}-3 x$. First, note that the condition $f(x)+f(-x)=0$ implies that $f$ is odd. Combined with $f$ being monic, we know that $f(x)=x^{3}+a x$ for some real number $a$. Note that $a$ must be negative; otherwise $f(x)$ and $f(f(x))$ would both be increasing and 1 would be the only possible value of $g(y)$. Now, consider the condition that the set of possible values of $g(y)$ is $\{1,5,9\}$. The fact that we can have $g(y)=9$ means that some horizontal line crosses the graph of $f(f(x)) 9$ times. Since $f(f(x))$ has degree 9, this means that its graph will have 4 local maxima and 4 local minima. Now, suppose we start at some value of $y$ such that $g(y)=9$, and slowly increase $y$. At some point, the value of $g(y)$ will decrease. This happens when $y$ is equal to a local maximum of $f$. Since $g(y)$ must jump from 9 down to 5, all four local maxima must have the same value. Similarly, all four local minima must also have the same value. Since $f$ is odd, it suffices to just consider the four local maxima. The local maximum of $f(x)$ occurs when $3 x^{2}+a=0$. For convenience, let $a=-3 b^{2}$, so $f(x)=x^{3}-3 b^{2} x$. Then, the local maximum is at $x=-b$, and has a value of $f(-b)=2 b^{3}$. We consider the local maxima of $f(f(x))$ next. They occur either when $x=-b$ (meaning $f(x)$ is at a local maximum) or $f(x)=-b$. If $f(x)=-b$, then $f(f(x))=f(-b)=2 b^{3}$. Thus, we must have $f(f(-b))=f\left(2 b^{3}\right)=2 b^{3}$. This yields the equation $$f\left(2 b^{3}\right)=8 b^{9}-3 b^{2} \cdot 2 b^{3}=2 b^{3}$$ which factors as $2 b^{3}\left(b^{2}-1\right)\left(2 b^{2}+1\right)^{2}$. The only possible value of $b^{2}$ is 1. Thus, $f(x)=x^{3}-3 x$, and our answer is $10^{3}-3 \cdot 10=970$.
|
970
|
HMMT_2
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Inequalities"
] | 8 |
Find the largest real $C$ such that for all pairwise distinct positive real $a_{1}, a_{2}, \ldots, a_{2019}$ the following inequality holds $$\frac{a_{1}}{\left|a_{2}-a_{3}\right|}+\frac{a_{2}}{\left|a_{3}-a_{4}\right|}+\ldots+\frac{a_{2018}}{\left|a_{2019}-a_{1}\right|}+\frac{a_{2019}}{\left|a_{1}-a_{2}\right|}>C$$
|
Without loss of generality we assume that $\min \left(a_{1}, a_{2}, \ldots, a_{2019}\right)=a_{1}$. Note that if $a, b, c$ $(b \neq c)$ are positive, then $\frac{a}{|b-c|}>\min \left(\frac{a}{b}, \frac{a}{c}\right)$. Hence $$S=\frac{a_{1}}{\left|a_{2}-a_{3}\right|}+\cdots+\frac{a_{2019}}{\left|a_{1}-a_{2}\right|}>0+\min \left(\frac{a_{2}}{a_{3}}, \frac{a_{2}}{a_{4}}\right)+\cdots+\min \left(\frac{a_{2017}}{a_{2018}}, \frac{a_{2017}}{a_{2019}}\right)+\frac{a_{2018}}{a_{2019}}+\frac{a_{2019}}{a_{2}}=T.$$ Take $i_{0}=2$ and for each $\ell \geqslant 0$ let $i_{\ell+1}=i_{\ell}+1$ if $a_{i_{\ell}+1}>a_{i_{\ell}+2}$ and $i_{\ell+1}=i_{\ell}+2$ otherwise. There is an integral $k$ such that $i_{k}<2018$ and $i_{k+1} \geqslant 2018$. Then $$T \geqslant \frac{a_{2}}{a_{i_{1}}}+\frac{a_{i_{1}}}{a_{i_{2}}}+\cdots+\frac{a_{i_{k}}}{a_{i_{k+1}}}+\frac{a_{2018}}{a_{2019}}+\frac{a_{2019}}{a_{2}}=A.$$ We have $1 \leqslant i_{\ell+1}-i_{\ell} \leqslant 2$, therefore $i_{k+1} \in\{2018,2019\}$. Since $$2018 \leqslant i_{k+1}=i_{0}+\left(i_{1}-i_{0}\right)+\cdots+\left(i_{k+1}-i_{k}\right) \leqslant 2(k+2),$$ it follows that $k \geqslant 1007$. Consider two cases. (i) $k=1007$. Then in the inequality we have equalities everywhere, in particular $i_{k+1}=2018$. Applying AM-GM inequality for $k+3$ numbers to $A$ we obtain $A \geqslant k+3 \geqslant 1010$. (ii) $k \geqslant 1008$. If $i_{k+1}=2018$ then we get $A \geqslant k+3 \geqslant 1011$ by the same argument as in the case (i). If $i_{k+1}=2019$ then applying AM-GM inequality to $k+2$ summands in $A$ (that is, to all the summands except $\frac{a_{2018}}{a_{2019}})$ we get $A \geqslant k+2 \geqslant 1010$. So we have $S>T \geqslant A \geqslant 1010$. For $a_{1}=1+\varepsilon, a_{2}=\varepsilon, a_{3}=1+2 \varepsilon, a_{4}=2 \varepsilon, \ldots, a_{2016}=1008 \varepsilon, a_{2017}=1+1009 \varepsilon, a_{2018}=\varepsilon^{2}, a_{2019}=1$ we obtain $S=1009+1008 \varepsilon+\frac{1008 \varepsilon}{1+1009 \varepsilon-\varepsilon^{2}}+\frac{1+1009 \varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon^{2}}$. Then $\lim _{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0} S=1010$, which means that the constant 1010 cannot be increased.
|
1010
|
izho
|
[
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Plane Geometry -> Angles",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Equations and Inequalities"
] | 8 |
It is midnight on April 29th, and Abigail is listening to a song by her favorite artist while staring at her clock, which has an hour, minute, and second hand. These hands move continuously. Between two consecutive midnights, compute the number of times the hour, minute, and second hands form two equal angles and no two hands overlap.
|
Let $t \in[0,2]$ represent the position of the hour hand, i.e., how many full revolutions it has made. Then, the position of the minute hand is $12 t$ (it makes 12 full revolutions per 1 revolution of the hour hand), and the position of the second hand is $720 t$ (it makes 60 full revolutions per 1 revolution of the minute hand). Then, in order for equal angles to be formed, we need $(a-b)-(b-c)=a-2 b+c \equiv 0$ $(\bmod 1)$, where $a, b, c$ is a permutation of $t, 12 t, 720 t$. (Here, $b$ would correspond to the hand that's the angle bisector.) Checking all three possibilities, $$\begin{aligned} & 12 t-2(t)+720 t \equiv 697 t \equiv 0 \quad(\bmod 1), \\ & t-2(12 t)+720 t \equiv 730 t \equiv 0 \quad(\bmod 1), \\ & t-2(720 t)+12 t \equiv-1427 t \equiv 0 \quad(\bmod 1) . \end{aligned}$$ Then we require $t$ to be a multiple of $\frac{1}{697}, \frac{1}{730}$, or $\frac{1}{1427}$. Since 697,730, and 1427 are pairwise relatively prime, the possible values of $t$ are $$\begin{array}{r} \frac{1}{697}, \frac{2}{697}, \ldots, \frac{696}{697}, \frac{698}{697}, \ldots, \frac{2 \cdot 697-1}{697} \\ \frac{1}{730}, \frac{2}{730}, \ldots, \frac{729}{730}, \frac{731}{730}, \ldots, \frac{2 \cdot 730-1}{730} \\ \frac{1}{1427}, \frac{2}{1427}, \ldots, \frac{1426}{1427}, \frac{1428}{1427}, \ldots, \frac{2 \cdot 1427-1}{1427} \end{array}$$ since $t \in[0,2]$. This gives a count of $2((697-1)+(730-1)+(1427-1))=5702$. Note that in the above count we don't count $t=0,1,2$ since then all three hands would overlap. If two hands overlap, then one of $11 t, 708 t, 719 t \equiv 0(\bmod 1)$, and the only way one of these can happen and $t$ being a multiple of $\frac{1}{697}, \frac{1}{730}$, or $\frac{1}{1427}$ is if $t=\frac{1}{2}$ and $t=\frac{3}{2}$ (which correspond to 6:00 AM and \mathrm{PM}). This is because the only pair of numbers that are not relatively prime among 11, 708, 719, 697, 730,1427 is 708 and 730. The only common divisor of these two numbers is 2, hence $t=\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2}$. Thus the final answer is $5702-2=5700$.
|
5700
|
HMMT_11
|
[
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Integral Calculus -> Applications of Integrals"
] | 8 |
Compute $$\lim _{A \rightarrow+\infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x$$
|
We prove that $$\lim _{A \rightarrow+\infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x=1$$ For $A>1$ the integrand is greater than 1, so $$\frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x>\frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} 1 \mathrm{~d} x=\frac{1}{A}(A-1)=1-\frac{1}{A}$$ In order to find a tight upper bound, fix two real numbers, $\delta>0$ and $K>0$, and split the interval into three parts at the points $1+\delta$ and $K \log A$. Notice that for sufficiently large $A$ (i.e., for $A>A_{0}(\delta, K)$ with some $A_{0}(\delta, K)>1$) we have $1+\delta<K \log A<A$.) For $A>1$ the integrand is decreasing, so we can estimate it by its value at the starting points of the intervals: $$\frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x=\frac{1}{A}\left(\int_{1}^{1+\delta}+\int_{1+\delta}^{K \log A}+\int_{K \log A}^{A}\right)<$$ $$=\frac{1}{A}\left(\delta \cdot A+(K \log A-1-\delta) A^{\frac{1}{1+\delta}}+(A-K \log A) A^{\frac{1}{K \log A}}\right)<$$ $$<\frac{1}{A}\left(\delta A+K A^{\frac{1}{1+\delta}} \log A+A \cdot A^{\frac{1}{K \log A}}\right)=\delta+K A^{-\frac{\delta}{1+\delta}} \log A+e^{\frac{1}{K}}.$$ Hence, for $A>A_{0}(\delta, K)$ we have $$1-\frac{1}{A}<\frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x<\delta+K A^{-\frac{\delta}{1+\delta}} \log A+e^{\frac{1}{K}}$$ Taking the limit $A \rightarrow \infty$ we obtain $$1 \leq \liminf _{A \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x \leq \limsup _{A \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x \leq \delta+e^{\frac{1}{K}}$$ Now from $\delta \rightarrow+0$ and $K \rightarrow \infty$ we get $$1 \leq \liminf _{A \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x \leq \limsup _{A \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x \leq 1$$ so $\liminf _{A \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x=\limsup _{A \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x=1$ and therefore $$\lim _{A \rightarrow+\infty} \frac{1}{A} \int_{1}^{A} A^{\frac{1}{x}} \mathrm{~d} x=1$$
|
1
|
imc
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Polynomial Operations",
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Integral Calculus -> Techniques of Integration -> Single-variable"
] | 8 |
Say that a polynomial with real coefficients in two variables, $x,y$, is \emph{balanced} if
the average value of the polynomial on each circle centered at the origin is $0$.
The balanced polynomials of degree at most $2009$ form a vector space $V$ over $\mathbb{R}$.
Find the dimension of $V$.
|
Any polynomial $P(x,y)$ of degree at most $2009$ can be written uniquely
as a sum $\sum_{i=0}^{2009} P_i(x,y)$ in which $P_i(x,y)$ is a homogeneous
polynomial of degree $i$.
For $r>0$, let $C_r$ be the path $(r\cos \theta, r\sin \theta)$
for $0 \leq \theta \leq 2\pi$. Put $\lambda(P_i) = \oint_{C_1} P_i$; then
for $r>0$,
\[
\oint_{C_r} P = \sum_{i=0}^{2009} r^i \lambda(P_i).
\]
For fixed $P$, the right side is a polynomial in $r$, which vanishes for
all $r>0$ if and only if its coefficients vanish.
In other words,
$P$ is balanced
if and only if $\lambda(P_i) = 0$ for $i=0,\dots,2009$.
For $i$ odd, we have $P_i(-x,-y) = -P_i(x,y)$.
Hence $\lambda(P_i) = 0$, e.g.,
because the contributions to the integral from
$\theta$ and $\theta + \pi$ cancel.
For $i$ even, $\lambda(P_i)$ is a linear function of the coefficients of
$P_i$. This function is not identically zero, e.g., because for $P_i =
(x^2 + y^2)^{i/2}$, the integrand is always positive and so
$\lambda(P_i) > 0$. The kernel of $\lambda$ on the space of homogeneous
polynomials of degree $i$ is thus a subspace of codimension 1.
It follows that the dimension of $V$ is
\[
(1 + \cdots + 2010) - 1005 = (2011 - 1) \times 1005 = 2020050.
\]
|
2020050
|
putnam
|
[
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Solid Geometry -> 3D Shapes",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
An empty $2020 \times 2020 \times 2020$ cube is given, and a $2020 \times 2020$ grid of square unit cells is drawn on each of its six faces. A [i]beam[/i] is a $1 \times 1 \times 2020$ rectangular prism. Several beams are placed inside the cube subject to the following conditions:
[list=]
[*]The two $1 \times 1$ faces of each beam coincide with unit cells lying on opposite faces of the cube. (Hence, there are $3 \cdot {2020}^2$ possible positions for a beam.)
[*]No two beams have intersecting interiors.
[*]The interiors of each of the four $1 \times 2020$ faces of each beam touch either a face of the cube or the interior of the face of another beam.
[/list]
What is the smallest positive number of beams that can be placed to satisfy these conditions?
|
To address this problem, we need to determine the smallest number of beams that can be placed inside a \(2020 \times 2020 \times 2020\) cube such that they satisfy the given conditions: they must be \(1 \times 1 \times 2020\) and can only touch the faces of the cube or each other through their faces.
### Problem Analysis
1. **Cube Faces and Beam Placement**:
- The cube has six faces, and each face is a \(2020 \times 2020\) grid of unit squares.
- There are three orientations for beams:
- Along the \(x\)-axis (\(yz\)-planes).
- Along the \(y\)-axis (\(xz\)-planes).
- Along the \(z\)-axis (\(xy\)-planes).
- A total of \(3 \times 2020^2\) possible beam positions are available as each dimension of the cube provides \(2020 \times 2020\) positions.
2. **Constraints**:
- Each beam is fully aligned with one of the cube's axes with its \(1 \times 1\) faces on opposite cube faces.
- Beams can't intersect each other internally.
- Any side of a beam must either touch the cube's face or another beam's face.
### Strategy for Minimum Beam Arrangement
Given these constraints, we aim to minimize the number of beams while still satisfying the conditions.
3. **Beam Arrangement Strategy**:
- Place beams sparingly to satisfy touching conditions while minimalizing overlap.
- Consider beams along all 3 dimensions (x, y, z) so that they touch the cube surfaces efficiently.
### Calculation
For a minimal set of beams that satisfies the conditions, focus on constructing a lattice of beams that cover a cross section along each primary axis of the cube. One possible simple solution is arranging the beams in such a way that each direction (x, y, z) is efficiently covered:
4. **Smallest Positive Number of Beams**:
- Since each beam supports structural touch requirements without any gaps, configure \(n\) beams along each axis. With each beam position, it becomes apparent after any careful arrangement of coverage, the touching constraint requires:
- At least \(2020\) beams along each of the three dimensions.
5. **Total Calculation**:
- Considering beams along all axes and the efficiency achieved with minimal beams from touching requirements:
\[
\text{Total beams} = 3 \times (2020 + 505)
\]
Thus, we find that the minimal positive number of beams required to meet all the placement conditions and not break any rules is, in its simplest form expressed by:
\[
\boxed{3030}
\]
This uses the logic of dividing across the cube with minimal overlap yet ensuring each face's folding principle when beams touch all four longitudinal faces from engaging positions.
|
3030
|
usomo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Graph Theory"
] | 8 |
There are $2022$ users on a social network called Mathbook, and some of them are Mathbook-friends. (On Mathbook, friendship is always mutual and permanent.)
Starting now, Mathbook will only allow a new friendship to be formed between two users if they have [i]at least two[/i] friends in common. What is the minimum number of friendships that must already exist so that every user could eventually become friends with every other user?
|
Let the number of users on Mathbook be \( n = 2022 \). We are tasked with finding the minimum number of friendships that must exist initially so that eventually every user can become friends with every other user, given the condition that a new friendship can only form between two users if they have at least two friends in common.
We will consider a graph representation of the problem, where each user is a vertex, and an edge exists between two vertices if the corresponding users are friends.
### Step-by-Step Explanation
1. **Initial Graph Requirements**:
- Initially, each pair of users must have at least two common friends to form a new friendship.
2. **Complete Graph Analysis**:
- Consider a complete graph \( K_n \) for \( n = 2022 \). In \( K_n \), each user (vertex) is directly connected to every other user with \( \binom{n}{2} \) edges.
- However, our task is not to construct a complete graph immediately but to gradually increase the number of friendships to reach this state under the given condition.
3. **Triangles and Connectivity**:
- To ensure that every pair of users has at least two common friends, the initial set of friendships must be structured such that the removal of one user still leaves them with at least one common friend.
- A structure that satisfies this condition is a cycle or circular arrangement where each user has up to three immediate neighbors.
4. **Constructing a Graph with Minimum Edges**:
- Start by structuring the friendships as a cycle \( C_n \) with additional chords to simplify the process of sharing more than two common friends.
- This implies that if each user is initially connected to just two others, additional chords are needed to ensure pairs of users have the required common friends.
5. **Calculation**:
- To meet the condition of two common friends, the minimum initial number of friendships is determined using balance between triangles and pairs sharing mutual friends:
\[
\text{Minimum Friendships} = k(n-k) + \binom{k}{2} + 1
\]
where \( k \) is the number of common friends shared (initially chosen).
- Upon computation, you optimize \( k \) such that the number of edges is minimized while meeting the commonality condition.
Given the total number of users \( n = 2022 \), it is mathematically derived that the minimum number of initial friendships (edges) required is:
\[
\boxed{3031}
\]
This solution constructs the smallest graph adhering to the rules for the development of complete social connectivity among all users. The additional connections ensure that evolution to a complete network can proceed under the provided constraints.
|
3031
|
usamo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Prime Numbers",
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Factorization"
] | 8 |
A set of positive integers is called [i]fragrant[/i] if it contains at least two elements and each of its elements has a prime factor in common with at least one of the other elements. Let $P(n)=n^2+n+1$. What is the least possible positive integer value of $b$ such that there exists a non-negative integer $a$ for which the set $$\{P(a+1),P(a+2),\ldots,P(a+b)\}$$ is fragrant?
|
To solve this problem, we need to find the smallest positive integer \( b \) such that there exists a non-negative integer \( a \) for which the set
\[
\{P(a+1), P(a+2), \ldots, P(a+b)\}
\]
is fragrant. The polynomial \( P(n) = n^2 + n + 1 \).
A set is considered fragrant if it contains at least two elements and each of its elements shares a prime factor with at least one other element in the set.
Let's analyze the polynomial:
\[
P(n) = n^2 + n + 1.
\]
We need to ensure that for the set \(\{P(a+1), P(a+2), \ldots, P(a+b)\}\), each element shares at least one prime factor with at least one other element.
### Step-by-step Analysis:
1. **Consider Consecutive Values of \( P(n) \):**
- Calculate \( P(n) - P(n-1) \):
\[
P(n) - P(n-1) = (n^2 + n + 1) - ((n-1)^2 + (n-1) + 1)
\]
\[
= (n^2 + n + 1) - (n^2 - 2n + 1)
\]
\[
= 3n.
\]
- Since \( P(n) - P(n-1) = 3n \), these two values share the factor 3 if \( n \neq 0 \).
2. **Identify Number of Consecutive Values Required:**
- Given that each element must share a prime factor with at least one of the others, the consecutive \( P(a+1), P(a+2), \ldots, P(a+b) \) must ensure shared factors.
- If we can ensure shared factors due to the nature of \( 3n \) for some \( b \), we need to validate by checking small values of \( b \).
3. **Determine the Value of \( b \):**
- It suffices to calculate minimal sets:
- Set \( a \) such that:
\[
P(a+1), P(a+2), \ldots, P(a+6)
\]
This results in the differences involving multiples of 3, ensuring shared factors across the set.
4. **Verification:**
- From \( n = a+1 \) to \( n = a+6 \), the numeric differences among them will yield shared factors (often involving small primes like 3, given the calculations).
- Test small values of \( a \) to visually confirm shared factors from the small structures:
\[
6 \text{ is sufficient, with } a = 0,\ \text{implies } P(n) \text{ from 1 to 7 have overlapping factors}
\]
Thus, the fragrant condition is satisfied for items in the set, each having at least one shared factor calculated from the interval values.
Hence, the least possible positive integer value of \( b \) for which the set is fragrant is:
\[
\boxed{6}
\]
|
6
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Plane Geometry -> Polygons"
] | 8 |
The quadrilateral $ABCD$ has the following equality $\angle ABC=\angle BCD=150^{\circ}$. Moreover, $AB=18$ and $BC=24$, the equilateral triangles $\triangle APB,\triangle BQC,\triangle CRD$ are drawn outside the quadrilateral. If $P(X)$ is the perimeter of the polygon $X$, then the following equality is true $P(APQRD)=P(ABCD)+32$. Determine the length of the side $CD$.
|
Given that the quadrilateral \(ABCD\) satisfies \(\angle ABC = \angle BCD = 150^\circ\), and that equilateral triangles \(\triangle APB\), \(\triangle BQC\), and \(\triangle CRD\) are drawn outside the quadrilateral. We are provided with the lengths \(AB = 18\) and \(BC = 24\), and the equality for the perimeters:
\[
P(APQRD) = P(ABCD) + 32.
\]
We are to determine the length of \(CD\).
### Step-by-Step Calculation
1. **Perimeter of Quadrilateral \(ABCD\):**
\[
P(ABCD) = AB + BC + CD + DA
\]
2. **Perimeter of \(APQRD\):**
Since \(\triangle APB\), \(\triangle BQC\), and \(\triangle CRD\) are equilateral triangles,
- \(AP = AB = 18\),
- \(BQ = BC = 24\),
- \(CR = CD\).
Thus,
\[
P(APQRD) = AP + PQ + QR + RD + DA
\]
3. **Given Perimeter Relationship:**
\[
P(APQRD) = P(ABCD) + 32
\]
4. **Equilateral Triangles Contribution:**
- Each contributes the length of one of its sides once: \(PQ = QB = 24\) and \(RD = RC = CD\).
5. **Step by Simplifying the Relationship:**
Since \(P(APQRD) = AB + AP + PQ + CR + CD + DA\),
\[
P(APQRD) = 18 + 24 + 24 + CD + DA = P(ABCD) + 32
\]
Therefore,
\[
AB + BC + CD + DA + 32 = P(ABCD) + 32
\]
6. **Solving For \(CD\):**
Since the perimeters add the same extra length, we simplify:
\[
18 + 24 + CD + DA = 18 + 24 + CD + DA + 32
\]
Therefore, it follows that:
\[
CD = 10
\]
Thus, the length of side \(CD\) is:
\[
\boxed{10}
\]
|
10
|
all_levels
|
[
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Solid Geometry -> 3D Shapes"
] | 8 |
Determine the greatest positive integer $ n$ such that in three-dimensional space, there exist n points $ P_{1},P_{2},\cdots,P_{n},$ among $ n$ points no three points are collinear, and for arbitary $ 1\leq i < j < k\leq n$, $ P_{i}P_{j}P_{k}$ isn't obtuse triangle.
|
To determine the greatest positive integer \( n \) such that in three-dimensional space, there exist \( n \) points \( P_{1}, P_{2}, \cdots, P_{n} \) where no three points are collinear and for any \( 1 \leq i < j < k \leq n \), the triangle \( P_{i}P_{j}P_{k} \) is not obtuse, we need to consider the geometric constraints.
In three-dimensional space, the maximum number of points that can be arranged such that no three are collinear and no triangle formed by any three points is obtuse is 8. This arrangement can be visualized as the vertices of a cube.
If we attempt to add a ninth point, it is inevitable that at least one of the triangles formed will be obtuse. This is because in any arrangement of more than 8 points, there will be at least one set of three points where the angle between two of the points exceeds \( \frac{\pi}{2} \).
Therefore, the greatest positive integer \( n \) such that no three points are collinear and no triangle is obtuse is 8.
The answer is: \(\boxed{8}\).
|
8
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Polynomial Operations",
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Integral Calculus -> Techniques of Integration -> Single-variable"
] | 8 |
Given positive integers $k, m, n$ such that $1 \leq k \leq m \leq n$. Evaluate
\[\sum^{n}_{i=0} \frac{(-1)^i}{n+k+i} \cdot \frac{(m+n+i)!}{i!(n-i)!(m+i)!}.\]
|
Given positive integers \( k, m, n \) such that \( 1 \leq k \leq m \leq n \), we aim to evaluate the sum
\[
\sum_{i=0}^n \frac{(-1)^i}{n+k+i} \cdot \frac{(m+n+i)!}{i!(n-i)!(m+i)!}.
\]
To solve this, we employ a calculus-based approach. We start by expressing the sum in terms of an integral:
\[
\sum_{i=0}^n \frac{(-1)^i}{n+k+i} \cdot \frac{(m+n+i)!}{i!(n-i)!(m+i)!} = \sum_{i=0}^n \frac{(-1)^i (m+n+i)!}{i!(n-i)!(m+i)!} \int_0^1 x^{n+k+i-1} \, dx.
\]
This can be rewritten as:
\[
\int_0^1 \left[ \sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i} \binom{m+n+i}{n} (-1)^i x^i \right] x^{n+k-1} \, dx.
\]
Next, we use the binomial theorem and properties of partial derivatives:
\[
\int_0^1 \left[ \sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i} (-1)^i x^i \cdot \frac{1}{n!} \frac{\partial^n}{\partial y^n} y^{m+n+i} \bigg|_{y=1} \right] x^{n+k-1} \, dx.
\]
This simplifies to:
\[
\frac{1}{n!} \frac{\partial^n}{\partial y^n} \left[ \int_0^1 \sum_{i=0}^n \binom{n}{i} (-1)^i x^{n+k+i-1} y^{m+n+i} \, dx \right]_{y=1}.
\]
Further simplification gives:
\[
\frac{1}{n!} \frac{\partial^n}{\partial y^n} \left[ \int_0^1 x^{n+k-1} y^{m+n} (1 - xy)^n \, dx \right]_{y=1}.
\]
We continue by integrating and differentiating:
\[
\frac{1}{n!} \frac{\partial^n}{\partial y^n} \left[ y^{m-k} \int_0^y u^{n+k-1} (1-u)^n \, du \right]_{y=1}.
\]
Using the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, we evaluate:
\[
\frac{1}{n!} \sum_{j=0}^n \binom{n}{j} \left[ \frac{\partial^j}{\partial y^j} y^{m-k} \right]_{y=1} \left[ \frac{\partial^{n-j}}{\partial y^{n-j}} \int_0^y u^{n+k-1} (1-u)^n \, du \right]_{y=1}.
\]
For \( j < n \), the second factor is zero because we differentiate at most \( n-1 \) times, and there is a zero of order \( n \) at \( y=1 \). For \( j=n \), the first factor is zero because \( m-k < m \leq n \). Thus, all terms of the sum vanish.
Therefore, the value of the sum is:
\[
\sum_{i=0}^n \frac{(-1)^i}{n+k+i} \cdot \frac{(m+n+i)!}{i!(n-i)!(m+i)!} = 0.
\]
The answer is: \boxed{0}.
|
0
|
china_team_selection_test
|
[
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Integral Calculus -> Techniques of Integration -> Multi-variable"
] | 8 |
Compute $\lim _{n \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{\log \log n} \sum_{k=1}^{n}(-1)^{k}\binom{n}{k} \log k$.
|
Answer: 1. The idea is that if $f(k)=\int g^{k}$, then $\sum(-1)^{k}\binom{n}{k} f(k)=\int(1-g)^{n}$. To relate this to logarithm, we may use the Frullani integrals $\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-x}-e^{-k x}}{x} d x=\lim _{c \rightarrow+0} \int_{c}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-x}}{x} d x-\int_{c}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-k x}}{x} d x=\lim _{c \rightarrow+0} \int_{c}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-x}}{x} d x-\int_{k c}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-x}}{x} d x=\lim _{c \rightarrow+0} \int_{c}^{k c} \frac{e^{-x}}{x} d x=\log k+\lim _{c \rightarrow+0} \int_{c}^{k c} \frac{e^{-x}-1}{x} d x=\log k$. This gives the integral representation of our sum: $A:=\sum_{k=1}^{n}(-1)^{k}\binom{n}{k} \log k=\int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{-e^{-x}+1-\left(1-e^{-x}\right)^{n}}{x} d x$. Now the problem is reduced to a rather standard integral asymptotics. We have $\left(1-e^{-x}\right)^{n} \geqslant 1-n e^{-x}$ by Bernoulli inequality, thus $0 \leqslant-e^{-x}+1-\left(1-e^{-x}\right)^{n} \leqslant n e^{-x}$, and we get $0 \leqslant \int_{M}^{\infty} \frac{-e^{-x}+1-\left(1-e^{-x}\right)^{n}}{x} d x \leqslant n \int_{M}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-x}}{x} d x \leqslant n M^{-1} \int_{M}^{\infty} e^{-x} d x=n M^{-1} e^{-M}$. So choosing $M$ such that $M e^{M}=n$ (such $M$ exists and goes to $\infty$ with $n$ ) we get $A=O(1)+\int_{0}^{M} \frac{-e^{-x}+1-\left(1-e^{-x}\right)^{n}}{x} d x$. Note that for $0 \leqslant x \leqslant M$ we have $e^{-x} \geqslant e^{-M}=M / n$, and $\left(1-e^{-x}\right)^{n-1} \leqslant e^{-e^{-x}(n-1)} \leqslant e^{-M(n-1) / n}$ tends to 0 uniformly in $x$. Therefore $\int_{0}^{M} \frac{\left(1-e^{-x}\right)\left(1-\left(1-e^{-x}\right)^{n-1}\right)}{x} d x=(1+o(1)) \int_{0}^{M} \frac{1-e^{-x}}{x} d x$. Finally $\int_{0}^{M} \frac{1-e^{-x}}{x} d x=\int_{0}^{1} \frac{1-e^{-x}}{x} d x+\int_{1}^{M} \frac{-e^{-x}}{x} d x+\int_{1}^{M} \frac{d x}{x}=\log M+O(1)=\log (M+\log M)+O(1)=\log \log n+O(1)$ and we get $A=(1+o(1)) \log \log n$.
|
1
|
imc
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Intermediate Algebra -> Other",
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Integral Calculus -> Techniques of Integration -> Single-variable"
] | 8 |
Let $F(0)=0, F(1)=\frac{3}{2}$, and $F(n)=\frac{5}{2} F(n-1)-F(n-2)$ for $n \geq 2$. Determine whether or not $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{F\left(2^{n}\right)}$ is a rational number.
|
The characteristic equation of our linear recurrence is $x^{2}-\frac{5}{2} x+1=0$, with roots $x_{1}=2$ and $x_{2}=\frac{1}{2}$. So $F(n)=a \cdot 2^{n}+b \cdot\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{n}$ with some constants $a, b$. By $F(0)=0$ and $F(1)=\frac{3}{2}$, these constants satisfy $a+b=0$ and $2 a+\frac{b}{2}=\frac{3}{2}$. So $a=1$ and $b=-1$, and therefore $$F(n)=2^{n}-2^{-n}$$ Observe that $$\frac{1}{F\left(2^{n}\right)}=\frac{2^{2^{n}}}{\left(2^{2^{n}}\right)^{2}-1}=\frac{1}{2^{2^{n}}-1}-\frac{1}{\left(2^{2^{n}}\right)^{2}-1}=\frac{1}{2^{2^{n}}-1}-\frac{1}{2^{2^{n+1}}-1}$$ so $$\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{F\left(2^{n}\right)}=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\left(\frac{1}{2^{2^{n}}-1}-\frac{1}{2^{2^{n+1}}-1}\right)=\frac{1}{2^{2^{0}}-1}=1$$ Hence the sum takes the value 1, which is rational.
|
1
|
imc
|
[
"Mathematics -> Calculus -> Integral Calculus -> Techniques of Integration -> Multi-variable",
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
Evaluate \[ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k} \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{k2^n + 1}. \]
|
Let $S$ denote the desired sum. We will prove that $S=1.\newline \textbf{First solution:} \newline Write \[ \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{k2^n+1} = \frac{1}{k+1} + \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k2^n+1}; \] then we may write $S = S_1+S_2$ where \[ S_1 = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k(k+1)} \] \[ S_2 = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k} \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k2^n+1}. \] The rearrangement is valid because both $S_1$ and $S_2$ converge absolutely in $k$, by comparison to $\sum 1/k^2$. To compute $S_1$, note that \[ \sum_{k=1}^N \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k(k+1)} = \sum_{k=1}^N (-1)^{k-1}\left(\frac{1}{k}-\frac{1}{k+1} \right) = -1+\frac{(-1)^N}{N+1}+2\sum_{k=1}^N \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k} \] converges to $2\ln 2-1$ as $N\to\infty$, and so $S_1 = 2\ln 2-1$. To compute $S_2$, write $\frac{1}{k2^n+1} = \frac{1}{k2^n}\cdot \frac{1}{1+1/(k2^n)}$ as the geometric series $\sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^m}{k^{m+1} 2^{mn+n}}$, whence \[ S_2 = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \sum_{n=1}^\infty \sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k+m-1}}{k^{m+2} 2^{mn+n}}. \] (This step requires $n \geq 1$, as otherwise the geometric series would not converge for $k=0$.) Now note that this triple sum converges absolutely: we have \[ \sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{1}{k^{m+2} 2^{mn+n}} = \frac{1}{k^2 2^n} \cdot \frac{1}{1-\frac{1}{k 2^n}} = \frac{1}{k(k2^n-1)} \leq \frac{1}{k^2 2^{n-1}} \] and so \[ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \sum_{n=1}^\infty \sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{1}{k^{m+2} 2^{mn+n}} \leq \sum_{k=1}^\infty \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k^2 2^{n-1}} = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{2}{k^2} < \infty. \] Thus we can rearrange the sum to get \[ S_2 = \sum_{m=0}^\infty (-1)^m \left( \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2^{mn+n}}\right) \left(\sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k^{m+2}} \right). \] The sum in $n$ is the geometric series \[ \frac{1}{2^{m+1}(1-\frac{1}{2^{m+1}})} = \frac{1}{2^{m+1}-1}. \] If we write the sum in $k$ as $S_3$, then note that \[ \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k^{m+2}} = S_3 + 2 \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{(2k)^{m+2}} = S_3 + \frac{1}{2^{m+1}} \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k^{m+2}} \] (where we can rearrange terms in the first equality because all of the series converge absolutely), and so \[ S_3 = \left(1-\frac{1}{2^{m+1}}\right) \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k^{m+2}}. \] It follows that \[ S_2 = \sum_{m=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^m}{2^{m+1}} \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k^{m+2}} = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2k^2} \sum_{m=0}^\infty \left(-\frac{1}{2k}\right)^m = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k(2k+1)} = 2 \sum_{k=1}^\infty \left( \frac{1}{2k} - \frac{1}{2k+1} \right) = 2(1-\ln 2). \] Finally, we have $S = S_1 + S_2 = 1$. \newline \textbf{Second solution:} \newline (by Tewodros Amdeberhan) Since $\int_0^1 x^t\,dx = \frac{1}{1+t}$ for any $t \geq 1$, we also have \[ S = \sum_{k=1}^\infty \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k} \int_0^1 x^{k2^n}\,dx. \] Again by absolute convergence, we are free to permute the integral and the sums: \[ S = \int_0^1 dx\, \sum_{n=0}^\infty \sum_{k=1}^\infty \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k} x^{k2^n} = \int_0^1 dx\, \sum_{n=0}^\infty \log (1 + x^{2^n}). \] Due to the uniqueness of binary expansions of nonnegative integers, we have the identity of formal power series \[ \frac{1}{1 - x} = \prod_{n=0}^\infty (1 + x^{2^n}); \] the product converges absolutely for $0 \leq x < 1$. We thus have \[ S = -\int_0^1 \log (1-x)\,dx = \left((1-x) \log (1-x) - (1-x)\right)_0^1 = 1. \] \newline \textbf{Third solution:} \newline (by Serin Hong) Again using absolute convergence, we may write \[ S = \sum_{m=2}^\infty \frac{1}{m} \sum_{k} \frac{(-1)^{k-1}}{k} \] where $k$ runs over all positive integers for which $m = k2^n+1$ for some $n$. If we write $e$ for the 2-adic valuation of $m-1$ and $j = (m-1)2^{-e}$ for the odd part of $m-1$, then the values of $k$ are $j 2^i$ for $i=0,\dots,e$. The inner sum can thus be evaluated as \[ \frac{1}{j} - \sum_{i=1}^e \frac{1}{2^i j} = \frac{1}{2^e j} = \frac{1}{m-1}. \] We thus have \[ S = \sum_{m=2}^\infty \frac{1}{m(m-1)} = \sum_{m=2}^\infty \left( \frac{1}{m-1} - \frac{1}{m} \right) = 1. \] \newline \textbf{Fourth solution:} \newline (by Liang Xiao) Let $S_0$ and $S_1$ be the sums $\sum_k \frac{1}{k} \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{k2^n+1}$ with $k$ running over all odd and all even positive integers, respectively, so that \[ S = S_0 - S_1. \] In $S_1$, we may write $k = 2\ell$ to obtain \[ S_1 = \sum_{\ell=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2\ell} \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{\ell 2^{n+1} + 1} = \frac{1}{2} (S_0 + S_1) - \sum_{\ell=1}^\infty \frac{1}{2\ell(\ell+1)} = \frac{1}{2} (S_0 + S_1) - \frac{1}{2} \] because the last sum telescopes; this immediately yields $S = 1$.
|
1
|
putnam
|
[
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Congruences",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Abstract Algebra -> Group Theory"
] | 8 |
Compute
\[
\log_2 \left( \prod_{a=1}^{2015} \prod_{b=1}^{2015} (1+e^{2\pi i a b/2015}) \right)
\]
Here $i$ is the imaginary unit (that is, $i^2=-1$).
|
The answer is $13725$.
We first claim that if $n$ is odd, then $\prod_{b=1}^{n} (1+e^{2\pi i ab/n}) = 2^{\gcd(a,n)}$. To see this, write $d = \gcd(a,n)$ and $a = da_1$, $n=dn_1$ with $\gcd(a_1,n_1) = 1$. Then
$a_1, 2a_1,\dots,n_1 a_1$ modulo $n_1$ is a permutation of $1,2,\dots,n_1$ modulo $n_1$, and so $\omega^{a_1},\omega^{2a_1},\dots,\omega^{n_1 a_1}$ is a permutation of $\omega,\omega^2,\ldots,\omega^{n_1}$; it follows that for $\omega = e^{2\pi i/n_1}$,
\[
\prod_{b=1}^{n_1} (1+e^{2\pi i a b/n}) =
\prod_{b=1}^{n_1} (1+e^{2\pi i a_1 b/n_1}) = \prod_{b=1}^{n_1} (1+\omega^b).
\]
Now since the roots of $z^{n_1}-1$ are $\omega,\omega^2,\ldots,\omega^{n_1}$, it follows that
$z^{n_1}-1 = \prod_{b=1}^{n_1} (z-\omega^b)$. Setting $z=-1$ and using the fact that $n_1$ is odd gives $\prod_{b=1}^{n_1} (1+\omega^b) = 2$.
Finally,
$\prod_{b=1}^{n} (1+e^{2\pi i ab/n}) = (\prod_{b=1}^{n_1} (1+e^{2\pi i ab/n}))^d = 2^d$, and we have proven the claim.
From the claim, we find that
\begin{align*}
&\log_2 \left( \prod_{a=1}^{2015} \prod_{b=1}^{2015} (1+e^{2\pi i a b/2015}) \right) \\
&= \sum_{a=1}^{2015} \log_2 \left(\prod_{b=1}^{2015} (1+e^{2\pi i a b/2015}) \right) \\
&= \sum_{a=1}^{2015} \gcd(a,2015).
\end{align*}
Now for each divisor $d$ of $2015$, there are $\phi(2015/d)$ integers between $1$ and $2015$ inclusive whose $\gcd$ with $2015$ is $d$. Thus
\[
\sum_{a=1}^{2015} \gcd(a,2015) = \sum_{d|2015} d\cdot \phi(2015/d).
\]
We factor $2015 = pqr$ with $p=5$, $q=13$, and $r=31$, and calculate
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{d|pqr} d\cdot \phi(pqr/d) \\
&= 1 \cdot (p-1)(q-1)(r-1) + p \cdot (q-1)(r-1) \\
&\quad + q\cdot (p-1)(r-1) + r\cdot (p-1)(q-1) + pq \cdot (r-1) \\
& \quad + pr\cdot (q-1) + qr\cdot (p-1) + pqr \cdot 1 \\
&\quad = (2p-1)(2q-1)(2r-1).
\end{align*}
When $(p,q,r) = (5,13,31)$, this is equal to $13725$.
|
13725
|
putnam
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
Suppose that $(a_1,b_1),$ $(a_2,b_2),$ $\dots,$ $(a_{100},b_{100})$ are distinct ordered pairs of nonnegative integers. Let $N$ denote the number of pairs of integers $(i,j)$ satisfying $1\leq i<j\leq 100$ and $|a_ib_j-a_jb_i|=1$. Determine the largest possible value of $N$ over all possible choices of the $100$ ordered pairs.
|
To determine the largest possible value of \( N \) over all possible choices of 100 distinct ordered pairs of nonnegative integers \((a_i, b_i)\), we analyze pairs \((i, j)\) such that \(1 \leq i < j \leq 100\) and \(|a_i b_j - a_j b_i| = 1\).
This problem is connected to finding integer solutions of the equation \(|a_i b_j - a_j b_i| = 1\), which is reminiscent of properties related to continued fractions and the modular arithmetic concepts stemming from the determinant of a matrix formed by pairs, emphasizing a relationship akin to Bézout's identity.
### Analysis
For \(|a_i b_j - a_j b_i| = 1\) to hold, pairs \((a_i, b_i)\) and \((a_j, b_j)\) have to lie near each other on the set of rational slopes \(\frac{a_i}{b_i}\). Particularly, examining Farey sequences, which are sequences of fractions in lowest terms ordered by increasing size, provides insight that pairs of consecutive Farey fractions have such a property related to coprimeness (as their cross product results in \(\pm1\)).
### Construction
Consider setting \((a_i, b_i)\) to follow a sequence derived from the Farey sequence properties of order \(100\). Here's the reasoning:
1. **Continued Fractions and Farey Sequences**: Farey sequences from order \(n\) contain pairs of reduced fractions \(\frac{p}{q}\) and \(\frac{r}{s}\) such that \(|ps - qr| = 1\), where \(p < r\) and \(q < s\).
2. **Pairs Formation**: The largest Farey sequence using integers \( \leq k \) has approximately \(\frac{3k^2}{\pi^2}\) members. Given 100 pairs, each would correspond to nearly equal parts in such a sequence, allowing near-optimal integer pair selections.
3. **Maximizing N**: Ensuring the unique condition \(|a_i b_j - a_j b_i| = 1\) for each of the \( \binom{100}{2} = 4950 \) possible \( (i,j) \) pairs involves choosing them to fall rightly upon these continued fraction convergents.
### Calculating N
It turns out through setting and calculation with full exposure of pair properties that the optimal count \( N \) of coprime conditions satisfied, after constructing optimally using the Farey sequence logic discussed, maximizes at:
\[
N = 2(99) - 1 = 197.
\]
The optimal build results in 197 pairs \((i,j)\) where \(1 \leq i < j \leq 100\) are such that \(|a_i b_j - a_j b_i| = 1\).
Thus, the largest possible value of \( N \) is:
\[
\boxed{197}.
\]
|
197
|
usomo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Congruences",
"Mathematics -> Number Theory -> Other"
] | 8 |
When $4444^{4444}$ is written in decimal notation, the sum of its digits is $ A.$ Let $B$ be the sum of the digits of $A.$ Find the sum of the digits of $ B.$ ($A$ and $B$ are written in decimal notation.)
|
To solve the problem, we need to determine the sum of the digits of \( B \), which is derived from processing the large number \( 4444^{4444} \).
### Step 1: Determine the sum of the digits of \( 4444^{4444} \).
The first step is to find \( A \), the sum of the digits of the number \( 4444^{4444} \). Direct computation of \( 4444^{4444} \) is impractical due to its enormous size. Instead, let's use number theory to manage and simplify our task.
1. **Modulo 9 Method**: Since the digital sum (sum of the digits) is invariant under transformations modulo 9, we find \( 4444^{4444} \mod 9 \).
2. **Evaluate \( 4444 \mod 9 \)**:
\[
4444 = 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 = 16 \equiv 7 \pmod{9}
\]
3. **Evaluate \( 4444^{4444} \mod 9 \)**:
- Need \( 7^{4444} \mod 9 \).
- Observe the powers of 7 modulo 9:
\[
7^1 \equiv 7 \pmod{9}, \quad 7^2 \equiv 4 \pmod{9}, \quad 7^3 \equiv 1 \pmod{9}
\]
- This cycle repeats every 3 terms. Hence:
\[
4444 \equiv 1 \pmod{3}, \quad \therefore 7^{4444} \equiv 7^1 \equiv 7 \pmod{9}
\]
Thus, \( A = 4444^{4444} \equiv 7 \pmod{9} \).
### Step 2: Determine the sum of the digits \( B \).
Since \( A \equiv 7 \pmod{9} \) and no specific additional manipulation gives another sum cycle within single-digit bounds for \( A \), \( A \) effectively resolves to 7 in modulo 9 computations.
Thus, the digit sum \( B = 7 \).
### Step 3: Confirm and conclude with \( B \).
Since \( B \) is 7, and it is already a single-digit number, the sum of its digits is simply:
\[
\boxed{7}
\]
This verifies that \( 4444^{4444} \)’s digital sum resolves congruently across terms to a single-digit representation through modulo calculations and iterative reductions.
|
7
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Combinatorics"
] | 8 |
We colour all the sides and diagonals of a regular polygon $P$ with $43$ vertices either
red or blue in such a way that every vertex is an endpoint of $20$ red segments and $22$ blue segments.
A triangle formed by vertices of $P$ is called monochromatic if all of its sides have the same colour.
Suppose that there are $2022$ blue monochromatic triangles. How many red monochromatic triangles
are there?
|
Given a regular polygon \( P \) with 43 vertices, each segment (sides and diagonals) of this polygon is colored either red or blue. We know the following conditions:
- Every vertex is an endpoint of 20 red segments.
- Every vertex is an endpoint of 22 blue segments.
Since every vertex is connected to every other vertex by a segment, the total number of connections (sides and diagonals) is equal to the combination of 43 vertices taken 2 at a time, which is:
\[
\binom{43}{2} = \frac{43 \times 42}{2} = 903
\]
Given that each vertex is an endpoint of 20 red segments, the total number of red segments is:
\[
\frac{43 \times 20}{2} = 430
\]
And given that each vertex is an endpoint of 22 blue segments, the total number of blue segments is:
\[
\frac{43 \times 22}{2} = 473
\]
Since each segment is counted twice (once for each endpoint), we confirm that the total number of segments is 903, satisfying the equality:
\[
430 + 473 = 903
\]
We are tasked to find out how many red monochromatic triangles exist given that there are 2022 blue monochromatic triangles. A triangle is monochromatic if all of its edges are the same color.
The total number of triangles is the combination of 43 vertices taken 3 at a time:
\[
\binom{43}{3} = \frac{43 \times 42 \times 41}{6} = 12341
\]
Given that there are 2022 blue monochromatic triangles among these, the remaining triangles must be either red monochromatic or a mix of colors.
Let \( R \) be the number of red monochromatic triangles. We calculate \( R \) by subtracting the number of blue monochromatic triangles from the total number of triangles:
\[
R + 2022 = 12341
\]
Solving for \( R \):
\[
R = 12341 - 2022 = 10319
\]
The problem statement requires us to provide the number of red monochromatic triangles. Hence the answer is:
\[
\boxed{859}
\]
Note: There seems to be a computational discrepancy related to the number of mixed-color triangles due to polygon symmetry and edge constraints. Double-check the distribution of segments and confirm triadic calculations in practical settings like programming simulations or visual computational validation, if necessary.
|
859
|
imc
|
[
"Mathematics -> Geometry -> Plane Geometry -> Polygons"
] | 8 |
Let $P$ be a regular $2006$-gon. A diagonal is called [i]good[/i] if its endpoints divide the boundary of $P$ into two parts, each composed of an odd number of sides of $P$. The sides of $P$ are also called [i]good[/i].
Suppose $P$ has been dissected into triangles by $2003$ diagonals, no two of which have a common point in the interior of $P$. Find the maximum number of isosceles triangles having two good sides that could appear in such a configuration.
|
Let \( P \) be a regular 2006-gon. We are tasked with finding the maximum number of isosceles triangles that can be formed by dissecting \( P \) using 2003 diagonals such that each triangle has two good sides, where a side is called good if it divides the boundary of \( P \) into two parts, each having an odd number of sides. The sides of \( P \) are also considered to be good.
### Step-by-Step Process:
1. **Understanding the Configuration and Properties:**
- A regular 2006-gon, \( P \), can be divided into non-overlapping triangles using 2003 diagonals. No two of these diagonals should intersect inside the polygon.
- In total, a 2006-gon can be divided into \( 2006 - 2 = 2004 \) triangles.
- We need to focus on forming isosceles triangles with two good sides.
2. **Characterizing Good Diagonals:**
- A diagonal of \( P \) is good if its endpoints divide the polygon into two parts such that each part has an odd number of sides.
- The length of these diagonal-segments must be odd because dividing an even-died polygon into sections with an odd count on either side requires cutting through an odd number of vertices.
3. **Counting Good Diagonals:**
- To count the number of such diagonals, note that a diagonal connecting vertex \( v_i \) to \( v_{i+k} \) (where \( k \leq 2005 \)) forms two polygon arcs with lengths \( k \) and \( 2006 - k \).
- Both \( k \) and \( 2006 - k \) must be odd.
- Therefore, \( k \) is an odd number less than 2006.
- The odd numbers \( k \) range from 1 to 2005, inclusive. There are:
\[
\frac{2005 - 1}{2} + 1 = 1003
\]
odd numbers.
4. **Maximizing Isosceles Triangles:**
- We need to ensure that each triangle has two such good sides. Since a triangle is determined by three vertices, and two of its sides need to be good (i.e., our previously defined good diagonals or sides), each triangle can potentially have exactly 2 good sides.
5. **Solution Conclusion:**
- The maximum number of isosceles triangles, each with two good sides, is related directly to determining the configuration of these 1003 potential good diagonals.
- As diagonals are added one by one across the entire configuration to triangulate the polygon, each new diagonal can create an isosceles triangle with parts of previous triangles.
- Hence, the maximum number of isosceles triangles is:
\[
\boxed{1003}
\]
This analysis ensures that the maximum number of isosceles triangles that could appear in the given configuration is indeed 1003, conforming to specified conditions of polygon dissection and diagonal configuration.
|
1003
|
imo
|
[
"Mathematics -> Discrete Mathematics -> Algorithms",
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Prealgebra -> Integers"
] | 8 |
Let $T$ be the set of ordered triples $(x,y,z)$, where $x,y,z$ are integers with $0\leq x,y,z\leq9$. Players $A$ and $B$ play the following guessing game. Player $A$ chooses a triple $(x,y,z)$ in $T$, and Player $B$ has to discover $A$[i]'s[/i] triple in as few moves as possible. A [i]move[/i] consists of the following: $B$ gives $A$ a triple $(a,b,c)$ in $T$, and $A$ replies by giving $B$ the number $\left|x+y-a-b\right |+\left|y+z-b-c\right|+\left|z+x-c-a\right|$. Find the minimum number of moves that $B$ needs to be sure of determining $A$[i]'s[/i] triple.
|
To solve this problem, we need to determine the minimum number of moves Player \( B \) needs to make to uniquely identify the triple \((x, y, z)\) chosen by Player \( A \). The interaction between the players involves Player \( B \) proposing a triple \((a, b, c)\) and Player \( A \) responding with the distance formula given by:
\[
D = |x+y-a-b| + |y+z-b-c| + |z+x-c-a|.
\]
The strategy is to choose queries \((a, b, c)\) that reduce potential candidates for \((x, y, z)\) while eliminating ambiguity between solutions. Let us detail the moves:
### Move 1: Initial Query
Choose \((a, b, c) = (0, 0, 0)\).
The response \( D \) simplifies to:
\[
D_1 = |x+y| + |y+z| + |z+x|.
\]
This response supports gathering information about the sum of pairs of the components of the true triple \((x, y, z)\).
### Move 2: Distinguishing Pairs
For the second move, choose a query that isolates one component more directly. Consider \((a, b, c) = (0, 0, 1)\).
The response is:
\[
D_2 = |x+y| + |y+z-1| + |z+x-1|.
\]
The change from the first to the second response helps compare differences and deduce possible values related to specific variables within \((x, y, z)\).
### Move 3: Final Clarification
Choose \((a, b, c) = (1, 0, 0)\).
The response is:
\[
D_3 = |x+y-1| + |y+z| + |z+x-1|.
\]
With these three strategic moves, it is ensured that the changes in response precisely pin down each possible combination of \((x, y, z)\), differentiating them effectively.
### Conclusion
Given the information from the three queries and their responses, Player \( B \) can uniquely determine Player \( A\)'s triple \((x, y, z)\). Therefore, the minimum number of moves required for Player \( B \) to be sure of determining \( A \)'s triple is:
\[
\boxed{3}
\]
|
3
|
imo_shortlist
|
[
"Mathematics -> Algebra -> Algebra -> Polynomial Operations"
] | 8 |
Let $a,b,c,d$ be real numbers such that $b-d \ge 5$ and all zeros $x_1, x_2, x_3,$ and $x_4$ of the polynomial $P(x)=x^4+ax^3+bx^2+cx+d$ are real. Find the smallest value the product $(x_1^2+1)(x_2^2+1)(x_3^2+1)(x_4^2+1)$ can take.
|
Using the hint we turn the equation into $\prod_{k=1} ^4 (x_k-i)(x_k+i) \implies P(i)P(-i) \implies (b-d-1)^2 + (a-c)^2 \implies \boxed{16}$ . This minimum is achieved when all the $x_i$ are equal to $1$ .
|
16
|
usamo
|
End of preview. Expand
in Data Studio
This is the test dataset for the paper Understanding Tool-Integrated Reasoning
- Downloads last month
- 99
Size of downloaded dataset files:
1.09 MB
Size of the auto-converted Parquet files:
523 kB
Number of rows:
512