Statement:
Given two integer $$$n, k, p$$$, $$$(1 \leq k \leq n < p)$$$.
Count the number of array $$$a[]$$$ of size $$$k$$$ that satisfied
- $$$1 \leq a_1 < a_2 < \dots < a_k \leq n$$$
- $$$a_i \times a_j$$$ is perfect square $$$\forall 1 \leq i < j \leq n$$$
Since the number can be big, output it under modulo $$$p$$$.
Yet you can submit the problem for $$$k = 3$$$ here.
Solution for k = 1
The answer just simply be $$$n$$$
Solution for k = 2
Algorithm
We need to count the number of pair $$$(a, b)$$$ that $$$1 \leq a < b \leq n$$$ and $$$a \times b$$$ is perfect square.
Every positive integer $$$x$$$ can be represent uniquely as $$$x = u \times p^2$$$ for some positive integer $$$u, p$$$ and $$$u$$$ as small as possible ($$$u$$$ is squarefree number).
Let represent $$$x = u \times p^2$$$ and $$$y = v \times q^2$$$ (still, minimum $$$u$$$, $$$v$$$ ofcourse).
We can easily proove that $$$x \times y$$$ is a perfect square if and if only $$$u = v$$$.
So for a fixed squarefree number $$$u$$$. You just need to count the number of ways to choose $$$p^2$$$.
The answer will be the sum of such ways for each fixed $$$u$$$.
Implementation
Complexity
So about the complexity....
For the implementation using factorization, it is $$$O(n \log n)$$$.
For the 2 implementations below, the complexity is linear.
Solution for general k
Using the same logic above, we can easily solve the problem.
But for a fixed $$$u$$$, we can improve the counting using combinatorics.
Yet nCk is a well known problem therefore I wont describe it here.
A better solution for k = 2
Idea
In the above approach, we fix $$$u$$$ as a squarefree and count $$$p^2$$$.
But what if I fix $$$p^2$$$ to count $$$u$$$ instead ?
Yet you can see that the first loop now is $$$O(\sqrt{n})$$$, but it will still $$$O(n)$$$ total because of the second loop
Approach
Let $$$f(n)$$$ is the number of $$$(a, b)$$$ that $$$1 \leq a < b \leq n$$$ and $$$(a, b, n)$$$ is a three-term geometric progression.
Let $$$g(n)$$$ is the number of $$$(a, b)$$$ that $$$1 \leq a \leq b \leq n$$$ and $$$(a, b, n)$$$ is a three-term geometric progression.
Let $$$F(N) = \overset{n}{\underset{p=1}{\Large \Sigma}} f(p)$$$.
So it is no hard to prove that $$$g(n) = f(n) + 1$$$.
This interesting sequence $$$g(n)$$$ is A000188, having many properties, such as
- Number of solutions to $$$x^2 \equiv 0 \pmod n$$$.
- Square root of largest square dividing $$$n$$$.
- Max $$$gcd \left(d, \frac{n}{d}\right)$$$ for all divisor $$$d$$$.
Well, to make the problem whole easier, I gonna skip all the proofs to use this property (still, you can use the link in the sequence for references).
$$$g(n) = \underset{d^2 | n}{\Large \Sigma} \phi(d)$$$.
From this property, we can solve the problem in $$$O(\sqrt{n})$$$.
Yet this paper also takes you to something similar.
Implementation
My question
A: Can we also use phi function or something similar to solve for $$$k = 3$$$ in $$$O(\sqrt{n})$$$ ?
B: Can we also use phi function or something similar to solve for general $$$k$$$ in $$$O(\sqrt{n})$$$ ?
C: Can we also solve the problem where there can be duplicate: $$$a_i \leq a_j (\forall\ i < j)$$$ and no longer $$$a_i < a_j (\forall\ i < j)$$$ ?
D: Can we solve the problem where there is no restriction between $$$k, n, p$$$ ?
E: Can we solve for negative integers, whereas $$$-n \leq a_1 < a_2 < \dots < a_k < n$$$
F: Can we solve for a specific range, whereas $$$L \leq a_1 < a_2 < \dots < a_k < R$$$
G: Can we solve for cube product $$$a_i \times a_j \times a_k$$$ effectively ?
H: Can I solve if it is given $$$n$$$ and queries for $$$k$$$ ?
I: Can I solve if it is given $$$k$$$ and queries for $$$n$$$ ?