Stay ahead of learning milestones! Enroll in a class over the summer!

G
Topic
First Poster
Last Poster
k a April Highlights and 2025 AoPS Online Class Information
jlacosta   0
Apr 2, 2025
Spring is in full swing and summer is right around the corner, what are your plans? At AoPS Online our schedule has new classes starting now through July, so be sure to keep your skills sharp and be prepared for the Fall school year! Check out the schedule of upcoming classes below.

WOOT early bird pricing is in effect, don’t miss out! If you took MathWOOT Level 2 last year, no worries, it is all new problems this year! Our Worldwide Online Olympiad Training program is for high school level competitors. AoPS designed these courses to help our top students get the deep focus they need to succeed in their specific competition goals. Check out the details at this link for all our WOOT programs in math, computer science, chemistry, and physics.

Looking for summer camps in math and language arts? Be sure to check out the video-based summer camps offered at the Virtual Campus that are 2- to 4-weeks in duration. There are middle and high school competition math camps as well as Math Beasts camps that review key topics coupled with fun explorations covering areas such as graph theory (Math Beasts Camp 6), cryptography (Math Beasts Camp 7-8), and topology (Math Beasts Camp 8-9)!

Be sure to mark your calendars for the following events:
[list][*]April 3rd (Webinar), 4pm PT/7:00pm ET, Learning with AoPS: Perspectives from a Parent, Math Camp Instructor, and University Professor
[*]April 8th (Math Jam), 4:30pm PT/7:30pm ET, 2025 MATHCOUNTS State Discussion
April 9th (Webinar), 4:00pm PT/7:00pm ET, Learn about Video-based Summer Camps at the Virtual Campus
[*]April 10th (Math Jam), 4:30pm PT/7:30pm ET, 2025 MathILy and MathILy-Er Math Jam: Multibackwards Numbers
[*]April 22nd (Webinar), 4:00pm PT/7:00pm ET, Competitive Programming at AoPS (USACO).[/list]
Our full course list for upcoming classes is below:
All classes run 7:30pm-8:45pm ET/4:30pm - 5:45pm PT unless otherwise noted.

Introductory: Grades 5-10

Prealgebra 1 Self-Paced

Prealgebra 1
Sunday, Apr 13 - Aug 10
Tuesday, May 13 - Aug 26
Thursday, May 29 - Sep 11
Sunday, Jun 15 - Oct 12
Monday, Jun 30 - Oct 20
Wednesday, Jul 16 - Oct 29

Prealgebra 2 Self-Paced

Prealgebra 2
Sunday, Apr 13 - Aug 10
Wednesday, May 7 - Aug 20
Monday, Jun 2 - Sep 22
Sunday, Jun 29 - Oct 26
Friday, Jul 25 - Nov 21

Introduction to Algebra A Self-Paced

Introduction to Algebra A
Monday, Apr 7 - Jul 28
Sunday, May 11 - Sep 14 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Wednesday, May 14 - Aug 27
Friday, May 30 - Sep 26
Monday, Jun 2 - Sep 22
Sunday, Jun 15 - Oct 12
Thursday, Jun 26 - Oct 9
Tuesday, Jul 15 - Oct 28

Introduction to Counting & Probability Self-Paced

Introduction to Counting & Probability
Wednesday, Apr 16 - Jul 2
Thursday, May 15 - Jul 31
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Wednesday, Jul 9 - Sep 24
Sunday, Jul 27 - Oct 19

Introduction to Number Theory
Thursday, Apr 17 - Jul 3
Friday, May 9 - Aug 1
Wednesday, May 21 - Aug 6
Monday, Jun 9 - Aug 25
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14
Tuesday, Jul 15 - Sep 30

Introduction to Algebra B Self-Paced

Introduction to Algebra B
Wednesday, Apr 16 - Jul 30
Tuesday, May 6 - Aug 19
Wednesday, Jun 4 - Sep 17
Sunday, Jun 22 - Oct 19
Friday, Jul 18 - Nov 14

Introduction to Geometry
Wednesday, Apr 23 - Oct 1
Sunday, May 11 - Nov 9
Tuesday, May 20 - Oct 28
Monday, Jun 16 - Dec 8
Friday, Jun 20 - Jan 9
Sunday, Jun 29 - Jan 11
Monday, Jul 14 - Jan 19

Intermediate: Grades 8-12

Intermediate Algebra
Monday, Apr 21 - Oct 13
Sunday, Jun 1 - Nov 23
Tuesday, Jun 10 - Nov 18
Wednesday, Jun 25 - Dec 10
Sunday, Jul 13 - Jan 18
Thursday, Jul 24 - Jan 22

Intermediate Counting & Probability
Wednesday, May 21 - Sep 17
Sunday, Jun 22 - Nov 2

Intermediate Number Theory
Friday, Apr 11 - Jun 27
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Wednesday, Jun 18 - Sep 3

Precalculus
Wednesday, Apr 9 - Sep 3
Friday, May 16 - Oct 24
Sunday, Jun 1 - Nov 9
Monday, Jun 30 - Dec 8

Advanced: Grades 9-12

Olympiad Geometry
Tuesday, Jun 10 - Aug 26

Calculus
Tuesday, May 27 - Nov 11
Wednesday, Jun 25 - Dec 17

Group Theory
Thursday, Jun 12 - Sep 11

Contest Preparation: Grades 6-12

MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Basics
Wednesday, Apr 16 - Jul 2
Friday, May 23 - Aug 15
Monday, Jun 2 - Aug 18
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)

MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Advanced
Friday, Apr 11 - Jun 27
Sunday, May 11 - Aug 10
Tuesday, May 27 - Aug 12
Wednesday, Jun 11 - Aug 27
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)

AMC 10 Problem Series
Friday, May 9 - Aug 1
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Tuesday, Jun 17 - Sep 2
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Monday, Jun 23 - Sep 15
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)

AMC 10 Final Fives
Sunday, May 11 - Jun 8
Tuesday, May 27 - Jun 17
Monday, Jun 30 - Jul 21

AMC 12 Problem Series
Tuesday, May 27 - Aug 12
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Wednesday, Aug 6 - Oct 22

AMC 12 Final Fives
Sunday, May 18 - Jun 15

F=ma Problem Series
Wednesday, Jun 11 - Aug 27

WOOT Programs
Visit the pages linked for full schedule details for each of these programs!


MathWOOT Level 1
MathWOOT Level 2
ChemWOOT
CodeWOOT
PhysicsWOOT

Programming

Introduction to Programming with Python
Thursday, May 22 - Aug 7
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Tuesday, Jun 17 - Sep 2
Monday, Jun 30 - Sep 22

Intermediate Programming with Python
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Monday, Jun 30 - Sep 22

USACO Bronze Problem Series
Tuesday, May 13 - Jul 29
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 1

Physics

Introduction to Physics
Wednesday, May 21 - Aug 6
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14
Monday, Jun 23 - Sep 15

Physics 1: Mechanics
Thursday, May 22 - Oct 30
Monday, Jun 23 - Dec 15

Relativity
Sat & Sun, Apr 26 - Apr 27 (4:00 - 7:00 pm ET/1:00 - 4:00pm PT)
Mon, Tue, Wed & Thurs, Jun 23 - Jun 26 (meets every day of the week!)
0 replies
jlacosta
Apr 2, 2025
0 replies
k i Adding contests to the Contest Collections
dcouchman   1
N Apr 5, 2023 by v_Enhance
Want to help AoPS remain a valuable Olympiad resource? Help us add contests to AoPS's Contest Collections.

Find instructions and a list of contests to add here: https://artofproblemsolving.com/community/c40244h1064480_contests_to_add
1 reply
dcouchman
Sep 9, 2019
v_Enhance
Apr 5, 2023
k i Zero tolerance
ZetaX   49
N May 4, 2019 by NoDealsHere
Source: Use your common sense! (enough is enough)
Some users don't want to learn, some other simply ignore advises.
But please follow the following guideline:


To make it short: ALWAYS USE YOUR COMMON SENSE IF POSTING!
If you don't have common sense, don't post.


More specifically:

For new threads:


a) Good, meaningful title:
The title has to say what the problem is about in best way possible.
If that title occured already, it's definitely bad. And contest names aren't good either.
That's in fact a requirement for being able to search old problems.

Examples:
Bad titles:
- "Hard"/"Medium"/"Easy" (if you find it so cool how hard/easy it is, tell it in the post and use a title that tells us the problem)
- "Number Theory" (hey guy, guess why this forum's named that way¿ and is it the only such problem on earth¿)
- "Fibonacci" (there are millions of Fibonacci problems out there, all posted and named the same...)
- "Chinese TST 2003" (does this say anything about the problem¿)
Good titles:
- "On divisors of a³+2b³+4c³-6abc"
- "Number of solutions to x²+y²=6z²"
- "Fibonacci numbers are never squares"


b) Use search function:
Before posting a "new" problem spend at least two, better five, minutes to look if this problem was posted before. If it was, don't repost it. If you have anything important to say on topic, post it in one of the older threads.
If the thread is locked cause of this, use search function.

Update (by Amir Hossein). The best way to search for two keywords in AoPS is to input
[code]+"first keyword" +"second keyword"[/code]
so that any post containing both strings "first word" and "second form".


c) Good problem statement:
Some recent really bad post was:
[quote]$lim_{n\to 1}^{+\infty}\frac{1}{n}-lnn$[/quote]
It contains no question and no answer.
If you do this, too, you are on the best way to get your thread deleted. Write everything clearly, define where your variables come from (and define the "natural" numbers if used). Additionally read your post at least twice before submitting. After you sent it, read it again and use the Edit-Button if necessary to correct errors.


For answers to already existing threads:


d) Of any interest and with content:
Don't post things that are more trivial than completely obvious. For example, if the question is to solve $x^{3}+y^{3}=z^{3}$, do not answer with "$x=y=z=0$ is a solution" only. Either you post any kind of proof or at least something unexpected (like "$x=1337, y=481, z=42$ is the smallest solution). Someone that does not see that $x=y=z=0$ is a solution of the above without your post is completely wrong here, this is an IMO-level forum.
Similar, posting "I have solved this problem" but not posting anything else is not welcome; it even looks that you just want to show off what a genius you are.

e) Well written and checked answers:
Like c) for new threads, check your solutions at least twice for mistakes. And after sending, read it again and use the Edit-Button if necessary to correct errors.



To repeat it: ALWAYS USE YOUR COMMON SENSE IF POSTING!


Everything definitely out of range of common sense will be locked or deleted (exept for new users having less than about 42 posts, they are newbies and need/get some time to learn).

The above rules will be applied from next monday (5. march of 2007).
Feel free to discuss on this here.
49 replies
ZetaX
Feb 27, 2007
NoDealsHere
May 4, 2019
Inspired by old results
sqing   5
N 12 minutes ago by sqing
Source: Own
Let $ a,b>0. $ Prove that
$$\frac{(a+1)^2}{b}+\frac{(b+k)^2}{a} \geq4(k+1) $$Where $ k\geq 0. $
$$\frac{a^2}{b}+\frac{(b+1)^2}{a} \geq4$$
5 replies
sqing
Yesterday at 2:43 AM
sqing
12 minutes ago
a+d=2^k and b+c=2^m for some integers k and m
ehsan2004   15
N an hour ago by SwordAxe
Source: IMO 1984, Day 2, Problem 6
Let $a,b,c,d$ be odd integers such that $0<a<b<c<d$ and $ad=bc$. Prove that if $a+d=2^k$ and $b+c=2^m$ for some integers $k$ and $m$, then $a=1$.
15 replies
ehsan2004
Feb 12, 2005
SwordAxe
an hour ago
Inspired by Bet667
sqing   0
an hour ago
Source: Own
Let $ x,y\ge 0 $ such that $k(x+y)=1+xy. $ Prove that$$x+k^2y+\frac{1}{x}+\frac{k^2}{y} \geq \frac{k^2(k+1)^2+(k-1)^2}{k}$$Where $ k\in N^+.$
Let $ x,y\ge 0 $ such that $2(x+y)=1+xy. $ Prove that$$x+4y+\frac{1}{x}+\frac{4}{y} \geq \frac{37}{2}$$
0 replies
sqing
an hour ago
0 replies
Is it always possible to color the points red or white?
orl   7
N an hour ago by SwordAxe
Source: 1986, Day 2, Problem 6
Given a finite set of points in the plane, each with integer coordinates, is it always possible to color the points red or white so that for any straight line $L$ parallel to one of the coordinate axes the difference (in absolute value) between the numbers of white and red points on $L$ is not greater than $1$?
7 replies
orl
Nov 11, 2005
SwordAxe
an hour ago
Inspired by old results
sqing   2
N an hour ago by sqing
Source: Own
Let $ a,b, c\geq 0 $ and $ a+b+c +a^2+b^2+c^2= 4$. Prove that
$$ (a^3+b^3)(b^3+c^3 )(c^3+a^3)\le 2$$
2 replies
1 viewing
sqing
Yesterday at 12:37 PM
sqing
an hour ago
3 var inquality
sqing   5
N an hour ago by sqing
Source: Own
Let $ a,b,c $ be reals such that $ a+b+c=0 $ and $ abc\geq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} . $ Prove that
$$ a^2+b^2+c^2\geq 3$$Let $ a,b,c $ be reals such that $ a+2b+c=0 $ and $ abc\geq \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} . $ Prove that
$$ a^2+b^2+c^2\geq \frac{3}{ \sqrt[3]{2}}$$$$ a^2+2b^2+c^2\geq 2\sqrt[3]{4} $$
5 replies
sqing
Yesterday at 8:32 AM
sqing
an hour ago
Substitutions inequality?
giangtruong13   3
N an hour ago by giangtruong13
Let $a,b,c>0$ such that: $a^2b^2+ c^2b^2+ a^2c^2=3(abc)^2$. Prove that: $$\sum \frac{b+c}{a} \geq 2\sqrt{3(ab+bc+ca)}$$
3 replies
giangtruong13
Friday at 2:07 PM
giangtruong13
an hour ago
source own
Bet667   6
N 2 hours ago by sqing
Let $x,y\ge 0$ such that $2(x+y)=1+xy$ then find minimal value of $$x+\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{y}+y$$
6 replies
Bet667
Yesterday at 4:14 PM
sqing
2 hours ago
functional equation on natural numbers ! CMO 2015 P1
aditya21   18
N 2 hours ago by NicoN9
Source: Canadian mathematical olympiad 2015
Let $\mathbb{N} = \{1, 2, 3, \ldots\}$ be the set of positive integers. Find all functions $f$, defined on $\mathbb{N}$ and taking values in $\mathbb{N}$, such that $(n-1)^2< f(n)f(f(n)) < n^2+n$ for every positive integer $n$.
18 replies
aditya21
Apr 24, 2015
NicoN9
2 hours ago
Inspired by Bet667
sqing   0
2 hours ago
Source: Own
Let $x,y\ge 0$ such that $k(x+y)=1+xy. $ Prove that $$x+y+\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{y}\geq 4k $$Where $k\geq 1. $
0 replies
sqing
2 hours ago
0 replies
Number of Polynomial Q such that P(x) | P(Q(x))
IndoMathXdZ   16
N 2 hours ago by Ilikeminecraft
Source: IZHO 2021 P6
Let $P(x)$ be a nonconstant polynomial of degree $n$ with rational coefficients which can not be presented as a product of two nonconstant polynomials with rational coefficients. Prove that the number of polynomials $Q(x)$ of degree less than $n$ with rational coefficients such that $P(x)$ divides $P(Q(x))$
a) is finite
b) does not exceed $n$.
16 replies
IndoMathXdZ
Jan 9, 2021
Ilikeminecraft
2 hours ago
Quick Oly question
Alpaca31415   0
2 hours ago
What is China second round? Just asking because I did a few questions and I'm wondering about the difficulty. Also, are there mohs ratings for non-IMO ISL questions?
0 replies
Alpaca31415
2 hours ago
0 replies
Rectangular line segments in russia
egxa   1
N 2 hours ago by Quantum-Phantom
Source: All Russian 2025 9.1
Several line segments parallel to the sides of a rectangular sheet of paper were drawn on it. These segments divided the sheet into several rectangles, inside of which there are no drawn lines. Petya wants to draw one diagonal in each of the rectangles, dividing it into two triangles, and color each triangle either black or white. Is it always possible to do this in such a way that no two triangles of the same color share a segment of their boundary?
1 reply
egxa
Friday at 10:00 AM
Quantum-Phantom
2 hours ago
old and easy imo inequality
Valentin Vornicu   212
N 3 hours ago by Sleepy_Head
Source: IMO 2000, Problem 2, IMO Shortlist 2000, A1
Let $ a, b, c$ be positive real numbers so that $ abc = 1$. Prove that
\[ \left( a - 1 + \frac 1b \right) \left( b - 1 + \frac 1c \right) \left( c - 1 + \frac 1a \right) \leq 1.
\]
212 replies
Valentin Vornicu
Oct 24, 2005
Sleepy_Head
3 hours ago
An nxn Checkboard
MithsApprentice   26
N Apr 3, 2025 by NicoN9
Source: USAMO 1999 Problem 1
Some checkers placed on an $n \times n$ checkerboard satisfy the following conditions:

(a) every square that does not contain a checker shares a side with one that does;

(b) given any pair of squares that contain checkers, there is a sequence of squares containing checkers, starting and ending with the given squares, such that every two consecutive squares of the sequence share a side.

Prove that at least $(n^{2}-2)/3$ checkers have been placed on the board.
26 replies
MithsApprentice
Oct 3, 2005
NicoN9
Apr 3, 2025
An nxn Checkboard
G H J
G H BBookmark kLocked kLocked NReply
Source: USAMO 1999 Problem 1
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
MithsApprentice
2390 posts
#1 • 3 Y
Y by Adventure10, Mango247, ehuseyinyigit
Some checkers placed on an $n \times n$ checkerboard satisfy the following conditions:

(a) every square that does not contain a checker shares a side with one that does;

(b) given any pair of squares that contain checkers, there is a sequence of squares containing checkers, starting and ending with the given squares, such that every two consecutive squares of the sequence share a side.

Prove that at least $(n^{2}-2)/3$ checkers have been placed on the board.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
Severius
194 posts
#2 • 3 Y
Y by Adventure10, Mango247, ehuseyinyigit
We'll cover the board with checkers and ghost-checkers.

For each checker we'll have two ghost-checkers available. So we'll have $3k$ units available, where $k$ is the number of checkers. For each checker X with just two neighbors A, B: place the two ghost-checkers for X on the two squares adjacent to X different from A and B. For each checker with three neighbors, place one of its ghosts on the fourth adjacent square and keep the other. For each checker with four neighbors, keep both of its ghosts.

For each checker X with just one neighbor A, place the two ghost-checkers for X on the squares adjacent to X different from A and its opposite. (Of course there are no lonely checkers since the graph is connected). When we're done there may be squares covered more than once, and there may be ghosts outside the board; it doesn't matter. The only squares that may be left uncovered are those squares A with just one checkered neighbor X, where X has just one checkered neighbor itself (call it Y), and A, X, Y are collinear.

Now note that, for the connected graph formed by the checkers, the number of "endpoints" of the graph (that is, checkers with just one neighbor) is at most 2+the number of checkers with 3 neighbors+twice the number of checkers with 4 neighbors (the event "a checker with 4 neighbors" is equivalent to the event "a checker with 3 neighbors" ocurring two different times), which is easy to prove by induction (take an endpoint, go along the graph till you find a point where the path has two or more branches, and remove the string connecting the taken endpoint to the rest of the graph; if we find no points where it branches out, it must be a simple path with just 2 endpoints). This means that using the checkers we'd kept before, we can cover all the yet uncovered squares except at most 2, so $3k \geq n^2-2$, which is what we wanted to prove.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
calc rulz
1126 posts
#3 • 3 Y
Y by vsathiam, lifeisgood03, Adventure10
Let us place the checkers on the board as follows: place one checker on the board to start, and then continually place a checker adjacent to one that has already been placed. Since any arrangement of checkers that satisfies the problem must be connected (i.e. (b)), we can form any arrangement of checkers in this manner.

Call a square "on" if it has a checker on it or it is next to a square that has a checker. By (a), we require an arrangement for which every single square is on. When we place the first checker, at most five squares are turned on. For every subsequent checker we place, at most three squares are turned on (the place we just filled and the filled space next to it being already on).

If we fill the board with $ k$ checkers, we have turned on at most $ 5 + 3(k-1) = 3k+2$ checkers. Since there are $ n^2$ squares on the board, we need $ 3k+2 \ge n^2$ or $ k \ge \frac{n^2-2}{3}$.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
ghjk
858 posts
#4 • 1 Y
Y by Adventure10
How about the result if this just has only the first restriction? Is it 12 in the case 5*5 blackboard? :roll:
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
limac
638 posts
#5 • 2 Y
Y by Adventure10, Mango247
What about when n=2? Then the problem requires that we need at least 2/3, or 1 checker. But no matter where we put it the square diagonally from that square doesn't share a side with that square with the checker.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
JBL
16123 posts
#6 • 3 Y
Y by Adventure10, Mango247, and 1 other user
That's true and doesn't contradict the statement of the problem. (It does show that the statement is not sharp for $n = 2$, since in that case at least 2 checkers are needed.)

@ghjk, two years later: no, 12 is much too large for the $5 \times 5$. For example, my first attempt did it in 8. In general, the best case should be approximately $\frac{n^2}{5}$ (but slightly larger due to edge effects).
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
math154
4302 posts
#7 • 5 Y
Y by vsathiam, Fermat_Theorem, Kamran011, 554183, Adventure10
Suppose there are $f(n)$ checkers on the board (and $n^2-f(n)$ empty squares), so from (b), the checkers form a connected graph $G$.

Now let $X$ denote the number of pairs of neighboring squares both containing checkers and $Y$ denote the number of pairs of neighboring squares with exactly one containing a checker. Then $X$ is simply the number of edges in $G$, so $X\ge f(n)-1$. Furthermore, since each checker borders at most four other squares, we have $2X+Y\le4f(n)$, so $Y\le4f(n)-2X$.

But (a) tells us that
\[n^2-f(n) \le Y\le4f(n)-2X,\]so
\[5f(n)\ge n^2+2X\ge n^2+2f(n)-2\implies f(n)\ge\frac{n^2-2}{3},\]as desired.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
Delray
348 posts
#8 • 3 Y
Y by vsathiam, Adventure10, Mango247
Solution with vsathiam.
solution
This post has been edited 5 times. Last edited by Delray, Aug 29, 2017, 2:37 AM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
v_Enhance
6874 posts
#9 • 5 Y
Y by Pluto04, HamstPan38825, Dansman2838, cosdealfa, NicoN9
Solution from Twitch Solves ISL:

Take a spanning tree on the set $V$ of checkers where the $|V|-1$ edges of the tree are given by orthogonal adjacency. By condition (a) we have \[ \sum_{v \in V} (4-\deg v) \ge n^2 - |V| \]and since $\sum_{v \in V} \deg v = 2(|V|-1)$ we get \[ 4|V| - \left( 2|V|-2 \right) \ge n^2 - |V| \]which implies $|V| \ge \frac{n^2-2}{3}$.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
asdf334
7586 posts
#10 • 1 Y
Y by hh99754539
statement (b) says that the squares with checkers on them form a polyomino

finally, statement (a) says that if we "extend" the polyomino outward (this probably doesn't make sense oops) the area must be $n^2$

its easy to see that extend the polyomino, maximum area is $3k+2$ given $k$ checkers (because we form a $1$ by $k$ rectangle)

therefore number of checkers satisfies $3k+2\geq n^2$ and we are done
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
asdf334
7586 posts
#11 • 1 Y
Y by hh99754539
to show max is $3k+2$ area, note that the first tile adds $5$ squares, and each successive one must add only $3$ at most
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
john0512
4180 posts
#12 • 2 Y
Y by Mango247, Mango247
Let $m$ be the number of checkers. We say that a cell is good if it either contains a checker or is adjacent to a cell that contains a checker. Since the order we place them in does not matter, we placed them in an order such that each checker after the first is placed next to an existing checker (this is possible due to the connected component condition).

Note that the first checker can make at most 5 cells good. Each additional checker can make at most 3 cells good (since the cell its placed on is already good and it is "blocked" in one of the directions by an existing checker). Therefore, we must have $5+3(m-1)\geq n^2$, so $$m\geq \frac{n^2-2}{3}$$
Remark: this was somewhat motivated by the very peculiar condition $\frac{n^2-2}{3}$. in particular, this is never an integer due to 2mod3, so this motivates a method where each checker placed counts as multiple "things" (in this case good cells)
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
HamstPan38825
8857 posts
#13 • 1 Y
Y by Mango247
Let $k$ be the number of squares with checkers.

First, notice that the number of pairs of adjacent squares with one filled and one empty is at least $n^2-k$ (the number of empty squares). On the other hand, the number of pairs of adjacent squares, both filled, is at least $k-1$. However, in total, there are at most $4k$ pairs of adjacent squares, at least one of which is filled. Therefore, we have the inequality $$n^2-k+2(k-1) \leq 4k \iff k \geq \frac{n^2-2}3,$$as required.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
Mogmog8
1080 posts
#14 • 1 Y
Y by centslordm
We count the pairs of adjacent squares such that one is filled and one is empty. If there are $k$ filled squares, the maximum perimeter of the filled squares is $2k+2$ as each new block after the original one adds at most $2$ to the perimeter of the filled squares. The minimum perimeter is $n^2-k$ as each non-filled square must share a side with a filled square. Hence, $2k+2\ge n^2-k$, as desired. $\square$
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
peppapig_
280 posts
#15 • 2 Y
Y by Significant, mulberrykid
Consider a square to be "covered" if it is covered by a checker or shares a side with a square covered by a checker. First place down one checker. This checker can "cover" at most $5$ squares. For each checker placed down after that, by problem conditions, it must share a side with another checker, meaning that it can "cover" at most $3$ new squares. This means that we need at least
\[1+\frac{n^2-5}{3},\]or $\frac{n^2-2}{3}$ checkers.
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by peppapig_, Nov 26, 2023, 5:00 PM
Reason: Rewrite
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
416554
223 posts
#16
Y by
We count the total number of cells in two ways:

First, it is obviously $n^2$.

On the other hand, it is the number of cells with checkers along with the number of cells that are adjacent to checkers. Let the number of cells with checkers be $k$. Then from the second condition, all checkers must be able to form a path, and so each checker must be adjacent to two others except for the "end" checkers if they exist, giving a maximum of $2k+2$ in this case. Thus, we have
\[ 3k+2 \leq n^2 \implies k \geq \frac{n^2-2}{3} \]completing the proof. $\blacksquare$
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
joshualiu315
2513 posts
#17
Y by
Let there be $k$ squares with checkers in them. It is clear that they border at most $2(k-2)+3 \cdot 2=2k+2$ squares because of the first condition. Thus,

\[3k+2 \ge n^2 \iff k \ge \frac{n^2-2}{3}. \ \square\]
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
bjump
999 posts
#18
Y by
This is a funny way to solve.
Connect squares with checkers in them to become a spanning tree $V$
Consider the sum $\sum_{v \in V} (4-\text{deg}(v))$
Note that in this sum each square without a checker on it gets counted so
$$\sum_{v \in V} (4-\text{deg}(v)) \geq n^2- |V|$$$$4|V|-2(|V|-1) \geq n^2-|V|$$$$|V| \geq \tfrac{n^2-2}{3}. \square$$
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by bjump, Nov 12, 2023, 1:45 AM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
cj13609517288
1889 posts
#19
Y by
Let $w$ be the number of white cells and let $b$ be the number of black cells. Then each white cell has at least one black neighbor.

Consider the graph on the black cells where there is an edge between two black cells if they share an edge. Since this graph is connected, it must have at least $b-1$ edges. Therefore, the black cells can satisfy at most $2b+2$ white cells, so $w\le 2b+2$. Therefore, $n^2=w+b\le 3b+2$, which implies the wanted result.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
shendrew7
794 posts
#20 • 1 Y
Y by GeoKing
Let $A$ and $B$ be the set of squares with and without a checker, respectively. A upper bound for $|B|$ is \[\sum_{a \in A} (4-\deg a) = 4|A| - \sum_{a \in A} (\deg a)\].
The graph of $A$ is connected, so it contains at least $|A|-1$ edges, and thus
\[4|A| - \sum_{a \in A} (\deg a) \ge 4|A| - 2(|A|-1) \ge |B| = n^2 - |A| \implies |A| \ge \frac{n^2-2}{3}. \quad \blacksquare\]
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
Jndd
1417 posts
#21
Y by
Let $C_i$ be the number of checkers next to square $i$, and let $a$ be the total number of checkers. The checkers must be connected, so the first time we add a checker nothing happens with the checker, but after adding a checker next to it, the count of $\sum C_i$ goes up by $2$, and goes up by $2$ for each additional checker we put next to another checker. Note that in this count, we have not yet included $C_i$ for squares without checkers. When we do, the count goes up by at least $n^2-a$, because every non checker square has at least one checker next to it. So in total, we have that \[\sum_{i=1}^{n^2}C_i\geq 2a-2+n^2-a = n^2-2+a.\]However, notice that each checker is counted at most four times, because it has at most $4$ surrounding squares. This gives us \[4a\geq\sum_{i=1}^{n^2}C_i\geq n^2-2+a,\]giving $a\geq \frac{n^2-2}{3}$, as desired.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
blueprimes
329 posts
#22
Y by
Define a neighbor of a square containing a checker as an adjacent square that does not contain a checker. Clearly no valid configuration exists where a square with a checker has exactly $4$ neighbors. Now in any valid configuration suppose there are $k$ squares with a checker, $a$ of which have $3$ neighbors.

Denote $S$ as the sum of the number of neighbors of every square with a checker. On one hand we have $S \ge n^2 - k$, but since $k - a$ checkers have at most $2$ neighbors we also have the bound $3a + 2(k - a) = 2k + a \ge S$. So $3k + a \ge n^2 \implies k \ge \frac{n^2 - a}{3}$. This implies the conclusion when $a \ge 2$.

Now if $a = 1$, note that some three squares have checkers that form an L-shape. Then two of the squares with a checker share a neighbor, and we have $3 + 2(k - 1) - 1 \ge S \ge n^2 - k \implies k \ge \frac{n^2}{3} > \frac{n^2 - 2}{3}$.

Our proof is complete.
This post has been edited 2 times. Last edited by blueprimes, Aug 7, 2024, 9:35 PM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
numbertheory97
42 posts
#23
Y by
Let $k$ be the number of checkers placed. Call a square black if it contains a checker and white otherwise. For each square $S$, let $f(S)$ be the number of black neighbors of $S$. Our plan is to sum $f$ over all squares so that we can get a lower bound on $k$.

Claim: The sum of $f$ over all white squares is at least $n^2 - k$.

Proof. Each white square has at least one black neighbor, so the result follows.

Claim: The sum of $f$ over all black squares is at least $2k - 2$.

Proof. Let $G = (V, E)$ be a graph with its vertices as the $k$ black squares, and connect two vertices by an edge if and only if they're neighbors on the checkerboard. By the handshaking lemma we have \[\sum_{s\text{ black}} f(s) = \sum_{v \in V} \text{deg}(v) = 2|E| \geq 2k - 2,\]where the last inequality follows since $G$ is connected. $\square$

The above two claims imply that $\sum_s f(s) \geq (n^2 - k) + (2k - 2) = n^2 + k - 2$. But each black square in $\sum_s f(s)$ is counted $4$ times, so $\sum_s f(s) = 4k$. Thus \[4k \geq n^2 + k - 2 \implies k \geq \frac{n^2 - 2}{3}\]as desired. $\square$

Remark. The bound can actually be improved to $\frac{n^2 - 1}{3}$, since $n^2 - 2$ is never divisible by $3$.
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by numbertheory97, Oct 4, 2024, 2:06 AM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
lpieleanu
2907 posts
#24 • 1 Y
Y by KevinYang2.71
Solution
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
eg4334
631 posts
#25
Y by
Let there be $x$ squares with checkers in them. It is clear that all $x$ squares must be connected, and that for the other $n^2-x$ squares we need one of their sides to touch a square with a checker. Therefore, the perimeter of our $x$ squares must be at least $n^2-x$, but if we have $x$ squares our perimeter is at most $2x+2$ (this is from the second condition and that some squares touch sides of the grid). Therefore $$2x+2 \geq n^2-x \implies x \geq \frac{n^2-2}{3}$$done
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
Maximilian113
549 posts
#26
Y by
Let $k$ squares have checkers, clearly $k \geq 1.$ If $k=1,$ we have at least $4$ empty squares adjacent to a filled square. But adding more squares, no matter what we always lose $1$ and gain at least $3$ empty squares, meaning that we have at least $2(k-1)+4$ empty squares adjacent to a filled square. Thus $$2(k-1)+4 \geq n^2-k \implies k \geq \frac{n^2-2}{3}.$$QED
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
NicoN9
114 posts
#27
Y by
Short solution:

Let $m$ be the number of checkers, and $a$ be the number of $1\times 2$ or $2\times 1$ rectangle such that it contains exactly one checker. Count $a$ in two ways.

first, by (a), we have $a\ge n^2-m$.

second, since the checkers are all connected, counting with each checkers will get $a\le 2m+2$.

so $n^2-m\le a\le 2m+2$, which implies that $(n^2-2)/3\le m$.
Z K Y
N Quick Reply
G
H
=
a