# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | tourist | 3856 |
2 | jiangly | 3747 |
3 | orzdevinwang | 3706 |
4 | jqdai0815 | 3682 |
5 | ksun48 | 3591 |
6 | gamegame | 3477 |
7 | Benq | 3468 |
8 | Radewoosh | 3462 |
9 | ecnerwala | 3451 |
10 | heuristica | 3431 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | cry | 167 |
2 | -is-this-fft- | 162 |
3 | Dominater069 | 160 |
4 | Um_nik | 158 |
5 | atcoder_official | 157 |
6 | Qingyu | 156 |
7 | djm03178 | 152 |
7 | adamant | 152 |
9 | luogu_official | 151 |
10 | awoo | 147 |
Name |
---|
When I see your blog, I look 'Top contributors' list immediately. And I saw you are not first..
stop it already
You said "let's assume we'll pick an odd-sized subset for now" and forgot to prove why it's optimal.
You're right, thanks for pointing this out! It's not necessarily optimal, one has to consider the even-sized subsets as well, but the solution is really similar for that case so I don't think digging into it would add much now :)
Actually in that problem one may prove that even-size subset can always be replaced with an odd-size subset without making the simple skewness smaller. Just consider removing the second middle element from the set.