Difference between revisions of "1993 USAMO Problems/Problem 3"
m (→Solution) |
|||
Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
<br/> | <br/> | ||
− | Let's look at a function <math>g(x)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}0&0\le x\le \frac{1}{2};\\1&\frac{1}{2}<x\le1;\\\end{array}\right </math> | + | Let's look at a function <math>g(x)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}0&0\le x\le \frac{1}{2};\\1&\frac{1}{2}<x\le1;\\\end{array}\right\} </math> |
It clearly have property (i) and (ii). For <math>0\le x\le\frac{1}{2}</math> and WLOG let <math>x\le y</math>, <math>f(x)+f(y)=0+f(y)\le f(y)</math> | It clearly have property (i) and (ii). For <math>0\le x\le\frac{1}{2}</math> and WLOG let <math>x\le y</math>, <math>f(x)+f(y)=0+f(y)\le f(y)</math> |
Revision as of 06:55, 19 July 2016
Problem 3
Consider functions which satisfy
(i) | for all in , | |
(ii) | , | |
(iii) | whenever , , and are all in . |
Find, with proof, the smallest constant such that
for every function satisfying (i)-(iii) and every in .
Solution
My claim:
Lemma 1) for
For , (ii)
Assume that it is true for , then
By principle of induction, lemma 1 is proven.
Lemma 2) For any , and , .
(lemma 1 and (iii) )
(because (i) )
, . Thus, works.
Let's look at a function
It clearly have property (i) and (ii). For and WLOG let ,
For , . Thus, property (iii) holds too. Thus is one of the legit function.
but approach to when is extremely close to from the right side.
Resources
1993 USAMO (Problems • Resources) | ||
Preceded by Problem 2 |
Followed by Problem 4 | |
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 | ||
All USAMO Problems and Solutions |
The problems on this page are copyrighted by the Mathematical Association of America's American Mathematics Competitions.