Maths Olympiad Prep

Library / /433 of 520

Algebra Difficulty 7.1 National olympiad, round 2 Prove it

Initially, a non-constant polynomial S(x)S(x) with real coefficients is written down on a board. Whenever the board contains a polynomial P(x)P(x), not necessarily alone, one can write down on the board any polynomial of the form P(C+x)P(C+x) or C+P(x)C+P(x), where CC is a real constant. Moreover, if the board contains two (not necessarily distinct) polynomials P(x)P(x) and Q(x)Q(x), one can write P(Q(x))P(Q(x)) and P(x)+Q(x)P(x)+Q(x) down on the board. No polynomial is ever erased from the board.

Given two sets of real numbers, A={a1,a2,,an}A=\left\{a_{1}, a_{2}, \ldots, a_{n}\right\} and B={b1,b2,,bn}B=\left\{b_{1}, b_{2}, \ldots, b_{n}\right\}, a polynomial f(x)f(x) with real coefficients is (A,B)(A, B)-nice if f(A)=Bf(A)=B, where f(A)={f(ai):i=1,2,,n}f(A)=\left\{f\left(a_{i}\right): i=1,2, \ldots, n\right\}.

Determine all polynomials S(x)S(x) that can initially be written down on the board such that, for any two finite sets AA and BB of real numbers, with A=B|A|=|B|, one can produce an (A,B)(A, B)-nice polynomial in a finite number of steps.

Iran, Navid SafaEi

Solution

The required polynomials are all polynomials of an even degree d2d \geq 2, and all polynomials of odd degree d3d \geq 3 with a negative leading coefficient.

Part I. We begin by showing that any (non-constant) polynomial S(x)S(x) not listed above is not (A,B)(A, B)-nice for some pair (A,B)(A, B) with either A=B=2|A|=|B|=2, or A=B=3|A|=|B|=3.

If S(x)S(x) is linear, then so are all the polynomials appearing on the board. Therefore, none of them will be (A,B)(A, B)-nice, say, for A={1,2,3}A=\{1,2,3\} and B={1,2,4}B=\{1,2,4\}, as desired.

Otherwise, degS=d3\operatorname{deg} S=d \geq 3 is odd, and the leading coefficient is positive. In this case, we make use of the following technical fact, whose proof is presented at the end of the solution.

Claim. There exists a positive constant TT such that S(x)S(x) satisfies the following condition:

S(b)S(a)ba whenever baT S(b)-S(a) \geq b-a \quad \text { whenever } \quad b-a \geq T

Fix a constant TT provided by the Claim. Then, an immediate check shows that all newly appearing polynomials on the board also satisfy ()(*) (with the same value of TT ). Therefore, none of them will be (A,B)(A, B)-nice, say, for A={0,T}A=\{0, T\} and B={0,T/2}B=\{0, T / 2\}, as desired.

Part II. We show that the polynomials listed in the Answer satisfy the requirements. We will show that for any a1maxxΔS(x)a_{1}\max _{x \in \Delta} S(x). Therefore, for any x,y,zx, y, z with xαyβzx \leq \alpha \leq y \leq \beta \leq z we get S(x)S(α)S(x) \leq S(\alpha) \leq S(y)S(β)S(z)S(y) \leq S(\beta) \leq S(z).

We may decrease α\alpha and increase β\beta (preserving the condition above) so that, in addition, S(x)>3S^{\prime}(x)>3 for all x[α,β]x \notin[\alpha, \beta]. Now we claim that the number T=3(βα)T=3(\beta-\alpha) fits the bill.

Indeed, take any aa and bb with baTb-a \geq T. Even if the segment [a,b][a, b] crosses [α,β][\alpha, \beta], there still is a segment [a,b][a,b]\(α,β)\left[a^{\prime}, b^{\prime}\right] \subseteq[a, b] \backslash(\alpha, \beta) of length ba(ba)/3b^{\prime}-a^{\prime} \geq(b-a) / 3. Then

S(b)S(a)S(b)S(a)=(ba)S(ξ)3(ba)ba S(b)-S(a) \geq S\left(b^{\prime}\right)-S\left(a^{\prime}\right)=\left(b^{\prime}-a^{\prime}\right) \cdot S^{\prime}(\xi) \geq 3\left(b^{\prime}-a^{\prime}\right) \geq b-a

for some ξ(a,b)\xi \in\left(a^{\prime}, b^{\prime}\right).
Proof of Lemma 1. If S(x)S(x) has an even degree, then the polynomial T(x)=S(x+a2)S(x+a1)T(x)=S\left(x+a_{2}\right)-S\left(x+a_{1}\right) has an odd degree, hence there exists x0x_{0} with T(x0)=S(x0+a2)S(x0+a1)=b2b1T\left(x_{0}\right)=S\left(x_{0}+a_{2}\right)-S\left(x_{0}+a_{1}\right)=b_{2}-b_{1}. Setting G(x)=S(x+x0)G(x)=S\left(x+x_{0}\right), we see that G(a2)G(a1)=b2b1G\left(a_{2}\right)-G\left(a_{1}\right)=b_{2}-b_{1}, so a suitable shift F(x)=G(x)+(b1G(a1))F(x)=G(x)+\left(b_{1}-G\left(a_{1}\right)\right) fits the bill.

Assume now that S(x)S(x) has odd degree and a negative leading coefficient. Notice that the polynomial S2(x):=S(S(x))S^{2}(x):=S(S(x)) has an odd degree and a positive leading coefficient. So, the polynomial S2(x+a2)S2(x+a1)S^{2}\left(x+a_{2}\right)-S^{2}\left(x+a_{1}\right) attains all sufficiently large positive values, while S(x+a2)S\left(x+a_{2}\right)- S(x+a1)S\left(x+a_{1}\right) attains all sufficiently large negative values. Therefore, the two-variable polynomial S2(x+a2)S2(x+a1)+S(y+a2)S(y+a1)S^{2}\left(x+a_{2}\right)-S^{2}\left(x+a_{1}\right)+S\left(y+a_{2}\right)-S\left(y+a_{1}\right) attains all real values; in particular, there exist x0x_{0} and y0y_{0} with S2(x0+a2)+S(y0+a2)S2(x0+a1)S(y0+a1)=b2b1S^{2}\left(x_{0}+a_{2}\right)+S\left(y_{0}+a_{2}\right)-S^{2}\left(x_{0}+a_{1}\right)-S\left(y_{0}+a_{1}\right)=b_{2}-b_{1}. Setting G(x)=S2(x+x0)+S(x+y0)G(x)=S^{2}\left(x+x_{0}\right)+S\left(x+y_{0}\right), we see that G(a2)G(a1)=b2b1G\left(a_{2}\right)-G\left(a_{1}\right)=b_{2}-b_{1}, so a suitable shift of GG fits the bill.

Proof of Lemma 2. Let Δ\Delta denote the segment [a1;an]\left[a_{1} ; a_{n}\right]. We modify the proof of Lemma 1 in order to obtain a polynomial FF convex (or concave) on Δ\Delta such that F(a1)=F(a2)F\left(a_{1}\right)=F\left(a_{2}\right); then FF is a desired polynomial. Say that a polynomial H(x)H(x) is good if HH is convex on Δ\Delta.

If degS\operatorname{deg} S is even, and its leading coefficient is positive, then S(x+c)S(x+c) is good for all sufficiently large negative cc, and S(a2+c)S(a1+c)S\left(a_{2}+c\right)-S\left(a_{1}+c\right) attains all sufficiently large negative values for such cc. Similarly, S(x+c)S(x+c) is good for all sufficiently large positive cc, and S(a2+c)S(a1+c)S\left(a_{2}+c\right)-S\left(a_{1}+c\right) attains all sufficiently large positive values for such cc. Therefore, there exist large $c_{1}T \quad \text { whenever } \quad b-a>T

Let us sketch an alternative approach for Part II. It suffices to construct, for each ii, a polynomial fi(x)f_{i}(x) such that fi(ai)=bif_{i}\left(a_{i}\right)=b_{i} and fi(aj)=0,jif_{i}\left(a_{j}\right)=0, j \neq i. The construction of such polynomials may be reduced to the construction of those for n=3n=3 similarly to what happens in the proof of Lemma 2. However, this approach (as well as any in this part) needs some care in order to work properly.

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: NuminaMath-1.5, licensed Apache-2.0. Statement and solution reproduced as published; topic and difficulty added by this site.