# | User | Rating |
---|---|---|
1 | jiangly | 4039 |
2 | tourist | 3841 |
3 | jqdai0815 | 3682 |
4 | ksun48 | 3590 |
5 | ecnerwala | 3542 |
6 | Benq | 3535 |
7 | orzdevinwang | 3526 |
8 | gamegame | 3477 |
9 | heuristica | 3357 |
10 | Radewoosh | 3355 |
# | User | Contrib. |
---|---|---|
1 | cry | 168 |
2 | -is-this-fft- | 165 |
3 | atcoder_official | 160 |
3 | Um_nik | 160 |
5 | djm03178 | 157 |
6 | Dominater069 | 156 |
7 | adamant | 153 |
8 | luogu_official | 152 |
9 | awoo | 151 |
10 | TheScrasse | 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.