Search found 70 matches

by Animus
Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:32 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 503
Replies: 10
Views: 2064

Re: Problem 503

All of your values F(n) are too big for n>4, for example F(5)=2.05 A brute force program should NOT assume any strategy, but find out which moves turn out to be optimal without preselection. Try to see which cases (trees in the game) for n=5 are omitted by your brute force program. After the brute f...
by Animus
Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:30 am
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 668
Replies: 1
Views: 84

Re: Problem 668

Answered in solution thread. I hope that the answer is sufficient for you.
by Animus
Thu Sep 05, 2019 5:30 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 257
Replies: 7
Views: 2608

Re: Problem 257

I solved problem 257 using similar technique as the others who solved it. Then I found out missing triplets and rewrote my code completely. Now I can generate all triplets and there are more than twice the number of unique triplets than the answer says. Hi tf08rq0 It seems pretty improbable that yo...
by Animus
Fri May 03, 2019 9:40 am
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 316
Replies: 32
Views: 13454

Re: Problem 316

The problem description for 316 appears to have a typo in it. The upper limit of the summation is off to the right of the $\sum$ rather than above it: $\sum \limits_{n = 2}{999999}$. It should read $\sum \limits_{n = 2}^{999999}$ instead. Thanks, changed. (That typo must have sliped in during the l...
by Animus
Wed Apr 03, 2019 10:39 am
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 663
Replies: 11
Views: 2147

Re: Problem 663

We've edited the problem text (inserted "contiguous"). Thanks, michelebastione, for mentioning this issue.
by Animus
Wed Apr 03, 2019 12:39 am
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 663
Replies: 11
Views: 2147

Re: Problem 663

I am sorry, michelebastione, in this problem we we did NOT use the word subsequence according to the wikipedia's definition, but the way it's described in the definition of $M_n(i)$ (as this would also make the problem quite trivial, since you'd only have to add all positive values of the sequence. ...
by Animus
Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:29 am
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 656
Replies: 9
Views: 1223

Re: Problem 656

Vamsi, we are not per se opposed to people building a small, closed group working on solving problems collaboratively.
However, this forum is in no way a closed group and should not be, so we don't want you to use this forum to do so.
by Animus
Mon Feb 18, 2019 7:29 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 656
Replies: 9
Views: 1223

Re: Problem 656

This forum is meant for clarifying questions concerning the problem statements. Please adhere the forum rules shown above, especially these: In particular don't post any code fragments or results. Don't start begging others to give partial answers to problems Don't ask for hints how to solve a probl...
by Animus
Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:47 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 223 & 224
Replies: 22
Views: 8256

Re: Problem 223 & 224

You are probably mixing up values in the thread for problem 223 and problem 224.
by Animus
Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:15 am
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 611
Replies: 17
Views: 3129

Re: Problem 611

No, I mean three different ways of representing a number as the sum of two squares, then the door with this number would be opened, closed and opened again, thus this number would have to be counted as well.
by Animus
Tue Jan 22, 2019 12:57 am
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 611
Replies: 17
Views: 3129

Re: Problem 611

gregzzz wrote:
Mon Jan 21, 2019 11:19 pm
Please tell me. Isnt the "Numbers that are the sum of 2 distinct nonzero squares in exactly 1 way" the correct sequence for the problem ?
No, what happens when you find three different sums for one number?
by Animus
Tue Jan 15, 2019 8:11 am
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 620
Replies: 20
Views: 4753

Re: Problem 620

Yes. (More detailed answer via PM.)
by Animus
Mon Jan 14, 2019 1:02 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 620
Replies: 20
Views: 4753

Re: Problem 620

Hi Dani In particular, if I assume that all circles must be tangent, and that the points of tangency have to be a half-integer number of centimetres apart, then I get g(16,5,5,6)=0. Why is this assumption wrong? Take a close look at the illustration given, showing a valid configuration. You can see ...
by Animus
Thu Jan 03, 2019 5:12 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: problem 267
Replies: 14
Views: 5425

Re: problem 267

The iteration continues with any amout of money, no rounding of the amount left (or gained) happens during the process.
by Animus
Tue Dec 25, 2018 8:26 pm
Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
Topic: Hairsplitting Curiosity (w/ Alliteration)...
Replies: 6
Views: 1744

Re: Hairsplitting Curiosity (w/ Alliteration)...

Moved topic to correct forum.
by Animus
Sun Nov 25, 2018 5:16 pm
Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
Topic: I do not know/remember my Recovery Key
Replies: 7
Views: 2591

Re: I do not know/remember my Recovery Key

You can delete your account yourself. Just select Account at the top of the projecteuler.net site, scroll down to the Maintenance Box and choose Delete Account (being logged into the right one :wink:)
by Animus
Sun Nov 25, 2018 12:37 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 243
Replies: 8
Views: 3744

Re: Problem 243

You can find a lower resilent fraction for higher denominators, the question is how big the denominator must get in order to get the resilent fraction below the given treshold for the very first time. That's no contradiction. PS: Your nickname sounds german. If english is an issue and german is fine...
by Animus
Tue Nov 06, 2018 2:19 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 641
Replies: 5
Views: 2168

Re: Problem 641

kenbrooker wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:49 am
I don't think it's within the spirit of
PE to confirm beyond the givens...
Yes, thanks for this comment, Ken. This is especially true when a problem is just a few days old.
by Animus
Tue Oct 30, 2018 12:25 pm
Forum: News, Suggestions, and FAQ
Topic: Inconsistency on Project Eulers problems forum
Replies: 2
Views: 2078

Re: Inconsistency on Project Eulers problems forum

I think a nice addition to the forum would be an ability to see a persons original name somewhere near his post. Maybe under his current name or maybe like it is done in the leaderboards. I am not sure I get your point. It is true that the user name pops up in the fastest solver table as (part of t...
by Animus
Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:00 pm
Forum: Clarifications on Project Euler Problems
Topic: Problem 629
Replies: 2
Views: 1141

Re: Problem 629

hi, tamandua The parameter $k$ does not restrict the number of piles in the starting position nor the number of piles present after a valid move, only the number of piles a single pile may be split into. Therefore is {1,1,1,2} a valid starting position for a game with $k=2$, and happens to be a winn...