Difference between revisions of "2023 AIME I Problems/Problem 7"
Toinfinity (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Unofficial Solution: We realize that any such number (mod 2) and (mod 4) must have the same parity, and its values (mod 3) and (mod 6) must have a absolute value difference of 3. Thus the only possibilities for the sequence of mods are 1,2,3,4,5 1,2,3,0,5 and 0,1,2,3,4. Using CRT and summing we get 049. | Unofficial Solution: We realize that any such number (mod 2) and (mod 4) must have the same parity, and its values (mod 3) and (mod 6) must have a absolute value difference of 3. Thus the only possibilities for the sequence of mods are 1,2,3,4,5 1,2,3,0,5 and 0,1,2,3,4. Using CRT and summing we get 049. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Solution== | ||
+ | |||
+ | \textbf{Case 0:} <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 0</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We have <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 2 \right) = 0</math>. This violates the condition that <math>n</math> is extra-distinct. | ||
+ | Therefore, this case has no solution. | ||
+ | |||
+ | \textbf{Case 1:} <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 1</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We have <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 2 \right) = 1</math>. This violates the condition that <math>n</math> is extra-distinct. | ||
+ | Therefore, this case has no solution. | ||
+ | |||
+ | \textbf{Case 2:} <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 2</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We have <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 3 \right) = 2</math>. This violates the condition that <math>n</math> is extra-distinct. | ||
+ | Therefore, this case has no solution. | ||
+ | |||
+ | \textbf{Case 3:} <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 3</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The condition <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 3</math> implies <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 2 \right) = 1</math>, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 3 \right) = 0</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Because <math>n</math> is extra-distinct, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, l \right)</math> for <math>l \in \left\{ 2, 3, 4 \right\}</math> is a permutation of <math>\left\{ 0, 1 ,2 \right\}</math>. | ||
+ | Thus, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 4 \right) = 2</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | However, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 4 \right) = 2</math> conflicts <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 2 \right) = 1</math>. | ||
+ | Therefore, this case has no solution. | ||
+ | |||
+ | \textbf{Case 4:} <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 4</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The condition <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 4</math> implies <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 2 \right) = 0</math> and <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 3 \right) = 1</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Because <math>n</math> is extra-distinct, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, l \right)</math> for <math>l \in \left\{ 2, 3, 4 , 5 \right\}</math> is a permutation of <math>\left\{ 0, 1 ,2 , 3 \right\}</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Because <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 2 \right) = 0</math>, we must have <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 4 \right) = 2</math>. Hence, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 5 \right) = 3</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Hence, <math>n \equiv -2 \pmod{{\rm lcm} \left( 4, 5 , 6 \right)}</math>. | ||
+ | Hence, <math>n \equiv - 2 \pmod{60}</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We have <math>1000 = 60 \cdot 16 + 40</math>. | ||
+ | Therefore, the number extra-distinct <math>n</math> in this case is 16. | ||
+ | |||
+ | \textbf{Case 5:} <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 5</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | The condition <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 5</math> implies <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 2 \right) = 1</math> and <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 3 \right) = 2</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Because <math>n</math> is extra-distinct, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 4 \right)</math> and <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 5 \right)</math> are two distinct numbers in <math>\left\{ 0, 3, 4 \right\}</math>. | ||
+ | Because <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 4 \right) \leq 3</math> and <math>n</math> is odd, we have <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 4 \right) = 3</math>. | ||
+ | Hence, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 5 \right) = 0</math> or 4. | ||
+ | |||
+ | \textbf{Case 5.1:} <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 5</math>, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 4 \right) = 3</math>, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 5 \right) = 0</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We have <math>n \equiv 35 \pmod{60}</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We have <math>1000 = 60 \cdot 16 + 40</math>. | ||
+ | Therefore, the number extra-distinct <math>n</math> in this subcase is 17. | ||
+ | |||
+ | \textbf{Case 5.2:} <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 6 \right) = 5</math>, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 4 \right) = 3</math>, <math>{\rm Rem} \ \left( n, 5 \right) = 4</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <math>n \equiv - 1 \pmod{60}</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We have <math>1000 = 60 \cdot 16 + 40</math>. | ||
+ | Therefore, the number extra-distinct <math>n</math> in this subcase is 16. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Putting all cases together, the total number of extra-distinct <math>n</math> is <math>16 + 17 + 16 = \boxed{\textbf{(049) }}</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ~Steven Chen (Professor Chen Education Palace, www.professorchenedu.com) |
Revision as of 13:39, 8 February 2023
Unofficial problem statement: Find the number of positive integers from 1 to 1000 that have different mods in mod 2,3,4,5, and 6.
Unofficial Solution: We realize that any such number (mod 2) and (mod 4) must have the same parity, and its values (mod 3) and (mod 6) must have a absolute value difference of 3. Thus the only possibilities for the sequence of mods are 1,2,3,4,5 1,2,3,0,5 and 0,1,2,3,4. Using CRT and summing we get 049.
Solution
\textbf{Case 0:} .
We have . This violates the condition that is extra-distinct. Therefore, this case has no solution.
\textbf{Case 1:} .
We have . This violates the condition that is extra-distinct. Therefore, this case has no solution.
\textbf{Case 2:} .
We have . This violates the condition that is extra-distinct. Therefore, this case has no solution.
\textbf{Case 3:} .
The condition implies , .
Because is extra-distinct, for is a permutation of . Thus, .
However, conflicts . Therefore, this case has no solution.
\textbf{Case 4:} .
The condition implies and .
Because is extra-distinct, for is a permutation of .
Because , we must have . Hence, .
Hence, . Hence, .
We have . Therefore, the number extra-distinct in this case is 16.
\textbf{Case 5:} .
The condition implies and .
Because is extra-distinct, and are two distinct numbers in . Because and is odd, we have . Hence, or 4.
\textbf{Case 5.1:} , , .
We have .
We have . Therefore, the number extra-distinct in this subcase is 17.
\textbf{Case 5.2:} , , .
.
We have . Therefore, the number extra-distinct in this subcase is 16.
Putting all cases together, the total number of extra-distinct is .
~Steven Chen (Professor Chen Education Palace, www.professorchenedu.com)