|
|
1 495 1 5 99 Answer: Too small 1 494 1 5 99 Answer: Too small 1 397 1 5 99 Answer: Too small 1 396 1 5 99 Answer: Block the hole ответьте на вопрос: допустим есть цилиндр с размеромами: 1 на 1000 и отверсие в стене размером 2 на 4, можно ли нарезать мелкими лоскутками цилиндр на размеры 1 на 2, таких отрезков понадобиться 4 штуки, подобный ход удовлетворяеет поставленной задаче ? The sample input shows that 234 3456 is "too small" to cover 314 x 314. а в чём тогда моя ошибка ? Никак не могу пройти тест 4. В отсутствии пространственного воображения. Вы хоть намекните в чем смысл правильного решения, а то мне эта задача спать не даёт, хотя бы вышлите мне тест 4 по возможности as i understand u can rotate cylinder почти правильно сказал предыдущий автор. нужно поворачивать боковую поверхность вокруг центроида, и если её площадь "захлёстывает" прямоугольное отверстие, тогда "Block the hole" Edited by author 22.09.2017 16:36 Try this one: 1 1000000 1 1001 1000 Really right answer: Block the hole And the problem can be solved in integer numbers. thanks. it helped me a lot. Edited by author 15.05.2013 18:25 Edited by author 15.05.2013 18:25 May I to bend the cut cylinder? Errors of calculations - reason of mistakes :) If you have WA24 then swap(Li, Hi), and if you have WA30 use aspect ratio in a similar triangle)) Is fourth test correct? the problem seems to be very easy but idk, i have WA#4 too Same for me, fails at 4. Please double check. There are many fails on test 4. But it is absolutely correct, both test and answer were checked by hands multiple times. Look for error in your code. Does cylinder contains bottom and top? > Does cylinder contains bottom and top? Take a look at the sample inputs again. I've checked my formula with both kinds of formulas given in this article: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2691523?uid=3739232&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101178420913 (if someone is interested in full version of article - mailto Oracle@acm.lviv.ua) I use BigInteger in Java - should be no precision issues. Results are the same for all rectangles with 1 <= sides <= 100 and for about a billion random test cases with 1 <= side <= 1000000. And still WA#4((( Is it definitely correct? Now I wonder if the problem is exactly in checking if one rectangle fits into others? Or I've missed something? Sorry for complaint. Seems that tests are correct - I've misunderstood the statement. Have you used any formula? or some sort of binary search? Edited by author 21.10.2012 01:21 |
|
|