Maths Olympiad Prep

Library / /1 of 5

Algebra Difficulty 7.5 National olympiad, round 2 Prove it Romania

Let NN be a positive integer, and let a=(a(1),,a(N))\mathbf{a} = (a(1), \dots, a(N)) and b=(b(1),,b(N))\mathbf{b} = (b(1), \dots, b(N)) be sequences of non-negative integers, each written on a circle (so we assume a(i±N)=a(i)a(i \pm N) = a(i) and b(i±N)=b(i)b(i \pm N) = b(i)). We say a\mathbf{a} is b-harmonic, if each a(i)a(i) is the arithmetic mean of the counterclockwise nearest b(i)b(i) numbers, the clockwise nearest b(i)b(i) numbers, and a(i)a(i) itself; that is,
a(i)=12b(i)+1s=b(i)b(i)a(i+s).() a(i) = \frac{1}{2b(i) + 1} \sum_{s=-b(i)}^{b(i)} a(i + s). \quad (*)
(A term of a may appear more than once in the above sum.) Suppose that neither a nor b is constant, and that both a is b-harmonic, and b is a-harmonic. Prove that more than half of the 2N2N terms across both sequences vanish.

Solutions — 2

Solution 1

Let a=minia(i)a = \min_i a(i) and let b=minib(i)b = \min_i b(i). Since a is not constant, there exists an ii such that a=a(i)<a(i+1)a = a(i) < a(i + 1).

Claim 1. If a=a(i)<a(i+1)a = a(i) < a(i + 1), then b(i)=0b(i) = 0. Similarly, if a=a(i)<a(i1)a = a(i) < a(i - 1), then b(i)=0b(i) = 0.

Proof. Otherwise the sum in ()(\ast) contains a term a(i+1)>aa(i+1) > a but no terms smaller than aa, so the average is greater than aa. \square

Say that [i,j][i, j] is an a-segment if a(i)=a(i+1)==a(j)=0a(i) = a(i+1) = \cdots = a(j) = 0 but a(i1)0a(j+1)a(i-1) \neq 0 \neq a(j+1); define a b-segment similarly. By Claim 1, the endpoints of any such segment satisfy a(i)=b(i)=a(j)=b(j)=0a(i) = b(i) = a(j) = b(j) = 0. Since the sequences are non-constant, each ii where a(i)=0a(i) = 0 is contained in an a-segment.

Claim 2. Let [i,j][i, j] be a b-segment, and let k[i,j]k \in [i, j]. Then a(k)kia(k) \le k - i (and, similarly, a(k)jka(k) \le j - k).

Proof. Indeed, since b(k)=0b(k) = 0, the elements of b with indices from ka(k)k-a(k) to k+a(k)k+a(k) must all be zero as well. \square

We now show that every index is contained in either an a- or a b-segment. Since at least one index is contained in both, the conclusion follows.

Assume, to the contrary, that a(i)a(i) and b(i)b(i) are both positive for some index ii; call such indices bad. Among all bad indices ii, choose one maximising max(a(i),b(i))\max(a(i), b(i)); by symmetry, we may and will assume that this maximum is a(i)a(i). We may and will also assume that either the index i1i-1 is not bad, or a(i1)<a(i)a(i-1) < a(i) (otherwise change ii to i1i-1, repeat if necessary, recalling that a is not constant).

Consider the range of indices Δ=[ib(i),i+b(i)]\Delta = [i - b(i), i + b(i)], and the values a assumes at those indices. Some indices jj in Δ\Delta are bad; the corresponding values a(j)a(j) do not exceed a(i)a(i). Other indices jj in Δ\Delta are covered by several a- and b-segments. Each b-segment contributes at most b(i)b(i) members nearest to one of its endpoints, so the average value of a over those indices does not exceed (b(i)1)/2<a(i)(b(i) - 1)/2 < a(i) by Claim 2. The remaining indices jj in Δ\Delta all lie in a-segments, so the corresponding values a(j)a(j) are all zero.

Combining all this, it follows that the average in the right-hand member of ()(\ast) does not exceed a(i)a(i). Moreover, if some a- or b-segment intersects Δ\Delta, then the inequality is strict. Otherwise, i1i-1 is a bad index contained in Δ\Delta, and a(i1)<a(i)a(i-1) < a(i), so the inequality is again strict. This contradiction ends the proof and completes the solution.

Solution 2

The solution has a few well-defined steps:

Lemma 1. Assume that a(i)=M:=maxaa(i) = M := \max \mathbf{a}; then b(i+k)=0b(i+k) = 0 for all k=M,M+1,,Mk = -M, -M+1, \dots, M. In particular, b(i1)=b(i)=b(i+1)=0b(i-1) = b(i) = b(i+1) = 0, as M1M \ge 1.

Proof. Assume that a(j)=a(j+1)==a(j+s)=M>0a(j) = a(j+1) = \cdots = a(j+s) = M > 0, and a(j1),a(j+s+1)<Ma(j-1), a(j+s+1) < M, where i[j,j+s]i \in [j, j+s]. Then b(j)=0b(j) = 0, as otherwise a(j)a(j) is the mean of at least three terms, all M\le M, with at least one <M< M. For the same reason, b(j+s)=0b(j+s) = 0 also.
But then b(j)b(j) is the mean of 2M+12M + 1 terms of bb, which must therefore all also be equal to 0. So b(j+k)=0b(j + k) = 0 for all k[M,M]k \in [-M, M]. Iterating this argument gives b(j+k)=0b(j + k) = 0 for all k[M,M+s]k \in [-M, M + s], which implies the statement of the lemma. \square

Corollary. There exist ii such that a(i)=0a(i) = 0 and jj such that b(j)=0b(j) = 0.

Lemma 2. Suppose maxamaxb\max a \ge \max b. Generate aa' by replacing all copies of M=maxaM = \max a with 1 in aa. Then aa' is bb-harmonic, and bb is aa'-harmonic.

Proof. We start with another consequence of Lemma 1. Assume that a(i)Ma(i) \ne M; then none of the terms a(i+k)a(i+k) with k[b(i),b(i)]k \in [-b(i), b(i)] equals MM. Indeed, if a(i+k)=Ma(i+k) = M with kb(i)M|k| \le b(i) \le M, then by Lemma 1 we have b(i)=b((i+k)k)=0b(i) = b((i+k) - k) = 0, which yields k=0k=0 and hence a(i)=a(i+k)=Ma(i) = a(i+k) = M.
We can now check that the harmonic properties are preserved under replacing all copies of MM in aa with 1:
If a(i)Ma(i) \ne M, then the harmonic property for b(i)b(i) is unchanged. If a(i)=Ma(i) = M, then a(i)=1a'(i) = 1 and b(i1)=b(i)=b(i+1)=0b(i-1) = b(i) = b(i+1) = 0, so b(i)b(i) certainly has the a(i)a'(i)-harmonic property; and
If a(i)=Ma(i) = M, then b(i)=0b(i) = 0, and so a(i)=1a'(i) = 1 has the b(i)b(i)-harmonic property. If a(i)Ma(i) \ne M, then we have just shown that none of the terms in the statement of a(i)a(i)'s harmonic property are changed by this process, so it remains harmonic. \square

Lemma 3. We have min(a(i),b(i))=0\min(a(i), b(i)) = 0 for all ii. Moreover, there exists an ii with a(i)=b(i)=0a(i) = b(i) = 0.

Proof. Both statements in the lemma are invariant under the procedure in Lemma 2. Apply this procedure repeatedly, to replace all instances of the maximum value in one of the sequences with 1, until both sequences consist of zeroes and ones. It suffices to check the lemma statement for the obtained pair of sequences.
Suppose that a(i)=b(i)=1a(i) = b(i) = 1 for some ii. Since the sequences remain non-constant, we may and will assume that min(a(i1),b(i1))=0\min(a(i-1), b(i-1)) = 0, say a(i1)=0a(i-1) = 0. But then the b(i)b(i)-harmonic property is violated for a(i)a(i), as a(i+1)1a(i+1) \le 1.
Suppose now that there is no ii with a(i)=b(i)=0a(i) = b(i) = 0. This means that for every index ii we have either a(i)=1a(i) = 1 and b(i)=0b(i) = 0, or a(i)=0a(i) = 0 and b(i)=1b(i) = 1. There is a pair of adjacent indices having different types, so that a(i)=b(i+1)=1a(i) = b(i + 1) = 1 and a(i+1)=b(i)=0a(i + 1) = b(i) = 0. But then b(i)b(i) violates the a(i)a(i)-harmonic property. \square

Lemma 3 readily yields that at least N+1N+1 terms across both sequences are zeroes, as required.

Want a route through all this instead of an archive? The track puts 2,000 problems in a working order, from AMC 10 level to the IMO shortlist.

Source: MathNet, licensed CC-BY-4.0. Statement and solution reproduced as published; topic and difficulty added by this site.