2007 USAMO Problems/Problem 1

Revision as of 19:06, 23 August 2023 by Jschroeder (talk | contribs) (Problem)

Problem

(Sam Vandervelde) Let $n$ be a positive integer. Define a sequence by setting $a_1 = n$ and, for each $k>1$, letting $a_k$ be the unique integer in the range $0 \le a_k \le k-1$ for which $a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_k$ is divisible by $k$. For instance, when $n=9$ the obtained sequence is $9, 1, 2, 0, 3, 3, 3, \ldots$. Prove that for any $n$ the sequence $a_1, a_2, a_3, \ldots$ eventually becomes constant. ho hum

Solutions

Solution 1

Let $S_k = a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_k$ and $b_k = \frac{S_k}{k}$. Thus, because $S_{k+1} = S_k + a_{k+1}$, \[b_{k+1} = \frac{b_k \cdot k + a_{k+1}}{k+1} = \left(\frac{k}{k+1}\right) \cdot b_k + \frac{a_{k+1}}{k+1}\] $\frac{k}{k+1} < 1$, and by definition, $\frac{a_{k+1}}{k+1} < 1$. Thus, $b_{k+1} < b_k + 1$. Also, both $b_k$ and $b_{k+1}$ are integers, so $b_{k+1} \le b_k$. As the $b_k$'s form a non-increasing sequence of positive integers, they must eventually become constant.

Therefore, $b_k = b_{k+1}$ for some sufficiently large value of $k$. Then $a_{k+1} = S_{k+1} - S_k = b_k(k + 1) - b_k(k) = b_k$, so eventually the sequence $a_k$ becomes constant.

Solution 2

Let $a_1 = n$. Since $a_k\leq k - 1$, we have that \[a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_n\leq n + 1 + 2 + \cdots + n - 1 = \frac{n(n + 1)}{2}.\] Since $a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_n = nk$ for some integer $k$, we can keep adding $k$ to satisfy the conditions, provided that $k\leq n$. This is true since $k\leq\frac{n + 1}{2}\leq n$, so the sequence must eventually become constant.

Solution 3

Define $S_k = a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_k$, and $b_k = \frac{S_k}{k}$. By the problem hypothesis, $b_k$ is an integer valued sequence.

Lemma: There exists a $k$ such that $b_k < k$.

Proof: Choose any $k$ such that $k^2 + 3k - 2 > 2n$. Then \begin{align*} \frac{k^2 + 3k - 2}{2} &> n \\ k^2 &> \frac{k^2 - 3k + 2}{2} + n \\ k^2 &> (k-2) + (k-1) + \cdots + 1 + n \\ k^2 &> a_{k-1} + a_{k-2} + \cdots + a_2 + a_1 \\ k^2 &> S_k \\ k &> \frac{S_k}{k} \\ k &> b_k, \end{align*} as desired.

End Lemma

Let $k$ be the smallest $k$ such that $b_k < k$. Then $b_k = m < k$, and $S_k = km$. To make $b_{k+1}$ an integer, $S_{k+1} = S_k + a_{k+1}$ must be divisible by $k+1$. Thus, because $km + m$ is divisible by $k+1$, $a_{k+1} \equiv m \pmod{k+1}$, and, because $0 \le a_{k+1} < k$, $a_{k+1} = m$. Then $b_{k+1} = \frac{(k+1)m}{k+1} = m$ as well. Repeating the same process using $k+1$ instead of $k$ gives $a_{k+2} = m$, and an easy induction can prove that for all $N > k+1$, $a_N = m$. Thus, $a_k$ becomes a constant function for arbitrarily large values of $k$.

Solution 4

For $k\geq 1$, let \[s_k = a_1 + a_2 + \cdots + a_k.\] We claim that for some $m$ we have $s_m = m(m - 1)$. To this end, consider the sequence which computes the differences between $s_k$ and $k(k - 1)$, i.e., whose $k$-th term is $s_k - k(k - 1)$. Note that the first term of this sequence is positive (it is equal to $n$) and that its terms are strictly decreasing since \[(s_k - k(k - 1)) - (s_{k+1} - (k + 1)k) = 2k - a_{k+1}\geq 2k - k = k\geq 1.\] Further, a negative term cannot immediately follow a positive term. Suppose otherwise, namely that $s_k > k(k - 1)$ and $s_{k+1} < (k + 1)k$. Since $s_k$ and $s_{k+1}$ are divisible by $k$ and $k + 1$, respectively, we can tighten the above inequalities to $s_k\geq k^2$ and $s_{k+1}\leq (k + 1)(k - 1) = k^2 - 1$. But this would imply that $s_k > s_{k+1}$, a contradiction. We conclude that the sequence of differences must eventually include a term equal to zero.

Let $m$ be a positive integer such that $s_m = m(m - 1)$. We claim that \[m - 1 = a_{m+1} = a_{m+2} = a_{m+3} = a_{m+4} = \cdots.\] This follows from the fact that the sequence $a_1, a_2, a_3, \ldots$ is uniquely determined and choosing $a_{m+i} = m - 1$, for $i\geq 1$, satisfies the range condition \[0\leq a_{m+i} = m - 1\leq m + i - 1,\] and yields \[s_{m+i} = s_m + i(m - 1) = m(m - 1) + i(m - 1) = (m + i)(m - 1).\]

Solution 5(like solution 2)

First, we may make an observation and say that for $n \equiv p (mod k)$, $\sum_{m=2}^{k} a_m \equiv k-p (mod k)$ must occur for the whole sum to be divisible by $k$. Thus, the following is apparent: \[\sum_{m=2}^{k} a_m =(q+1)k - p , k < n\] Then, we may make another observation that when $n=k$, the sum also has to be divisible by n. We may then explore when n=k: \[\sum_{m=2}^{n} a_m \equiv 0 (mod n), \sum_{m=2}^{n} a_m = rn\] and \[a_n = \sum_{m=2}^{n} a_m - \sum_{m=2}^{n-1} a_m\] Then, \[a_n = rn - \sum_{m=2}^{n-1} a_m \le n-1\] Also, \[a_{n+s} = r, r \le n\] for $s \ge 1$. This is because: \[\sum_{m=2}^{n} a_m + r = rn + r = r(n+1)\] This must be true since $r(n+1)$ will be divisible by $n+1$ and $k=n+1$, we may then generalize this to all $r(n+s), s \in \mathbb{Z}, s \ge 1$ \[rn + sr= r(n+s), \frac{r(n+s)}{r} = n + s = \frac{\sum_{m=2}^{n+s} a_m}{r}\] Thus, we may say that the sequence $a_1,a_2,...a_k$ must converge to some integer value $r \le n$ when $k \ge n + 1$.


Alternate solutions are always welcome. If you have a different, elegant solution to this problem, please add it to this page.

See also

  • <url>viewtopic.php?t=145842 Discussion on AoPS/MathLinks</url>
2007 USAMO (ProblemsResources)
Preceded by
First Question
Followed by
Problem 2
1 2 3 4 5 6
All USAMO Problems and Solutions

The problems on this page are copyrighted by the Mathematical Association of America's American Mathematics Competitions. AMC logo.png