Page 1 of 1

Problem 688

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2019 8:10 pm
by KING-OLE
I have problems understanding the exact question.

Do the piles need to have different counts of plates:

1) before the new plates are added,
2) added to each pile,
3) after new plates are added
4) all or some of the above - which? _____________

Thanks.

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:56 pm
by mdean
What "new plates"? You take n plates and divide them into k piles. For each calculation of f(n,k), the total number of plates is fixed.

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:50 am
by KING-OLE
"We stack n plates into k non-empty piles where each pile is a different size."

So, the new plates are n, and the k piles are NOT empty, therefore old or existing.

EDIT: Or am I reading that wrong? - Does it simply mean that I have to place at least one plate on each pile, leaving none empty, and that the k piles are empty before you place the plates?

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:40 am
by DJohn
You might be reading "We stack n plates into k non-empty piles" as "We stack n plates onto k non-empty piles", which (to me at least) has a quite different meaning. We start with nothing but n plates. Stacking takes place. Then we have k piles, none of which are empty. The question is concerned with this final state: a total of n plates in k piles (with no two piles having the same number of plates). How they got there doesn't matter.

It might be the "non-empty" that's tripping you up. This is describing the piles after the stacking, not before. It's not something you'd say in every-day speech, but in maths a pile could contain zero plates, and that case must be excluded for this problem.

It might be better worded "We divide n plates into k non-empty piles".

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:03 pm
by KING-OLE
Thank you for clarifying DJohn.

The language had me misunderstanding the task. I would have preferred something like "Stack n plates in k piles. No pile must remain empty."

Anyway, I understand the question now, so I will now see if I can solve it. :-)

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2019 6:07 am
by vamsikal3
<deleted post>

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:04 pm
by RobertStanforth
vamsikal3 wrote: Mon Nov 18, 2019 6:07 am The problem text reads: It is impossible to divide 10 into 5 non-empty piles and hence f(10,5)=0.
Thank you for pointing this out. The wording has now been amended.

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2020 2:19 pm
by TGiordi
Hello,

I'm able to compute the exact S(100) value with a simple algorithm and an optimized algorithm. My simple algorithm gives me the same result as the optimized one till 106 or 108. Anyway, the solution for 1016 is wrong. Could you provide S(106) or S(108) in order to be able to trouble shoot my simple & optimized algorithm as I assume there should be a special case that I've not taken into account and that is not visible in S(100).

Thanks

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 9:51 am
by castrate
I came across almost the same problem as @TGiordi. I got the correct answer(12656) for S(100) and I was able to compute S(10^16) in reasonable time, but the answer was wrong. So can I PM someone in order to check my answers for higher results such as S(10^8)? Thanks :D

Re: Problem 688

Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:43 am
by castrate
Hmm...Seems that I'm stuck. I tried sending PM to several administrators, but with no replies for over three months. So could someone help confirm the following results:
S(10^6)=***xxxxxxx***
S(10^8)=***xxxxxxxxxxx***
S(10^10)=***xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx***
S(10^12)=***xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*** EDIT digits removed by moderator
where x represents a single digit.
I don't mean to spoil, but the problem has been confusing me for too long.
Thanks in advance. :D