Let \(x_1,x_2,\cdots,x_{19},x_{20}\) be permutations of numbers from 1 to 20. Then what will be the maximum value of the summation \[\large x_1x_2+x_2x_3+\cdots+x_{19}x_{20}+x_{20}x_1 \] At which values of \(x_1,x_2,\cdots,x_{19},x_{20}\) will that maximum occur? And when will minimum occur?
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
I looked at this a little but I haven't done anything substantive. It seems like it should be possible to show that the minimum is obtained by alternating large and small numbers in a smart way.
E.g. for n=4 you get a minimum when you do something like 3142.
For n=6 you do 351624.
For n=8 you do 53718264.
For n=10 you do 57391(10)2846. And so on.
Inductively, to get from one level to the next, it looks like you add two to the numbers larger than n/2, and then on the outside you stick n/2 and n/2+1 in a smart way.
I don't have any kind of proof though, and I haven't thought about the maximum yet.
Log in to reply
For the maximum for n=N, going from N down to 1 while alternating from one side of the sequence to the other might be optimal. For n=4 this would be 4213, yielding a product-sum of 25, (compared to your minimum of 21), and for n=6 it would be 642135, yielding a product-sum of 82, (compared to your minimum of 58).
Log in to reply
Here's one idea I tried: for it to be a minimum (resp. maximum), the result has to be smaller (resp. bigger) than what you get after doing a transposition. For say x2,x3, this ends up being the statement that (x1−x4)(x2−x3)<0 (resp. >0). And so on for other pairs of adjacent indices. Your examples satisfy this criterion.
There is another condition you get if you transpose x2,x4 (say), and then you can look at a 3-cycle too. Taken together, those give you pretty strong conditions on the permutation, but I don't know if they determine it uniquely.
explain this
again
Log in to reply
wc
Please help me with this anyone. @Brian Charlesworth , @Chew-Seong Cheong , @Anirudh Sreekumar , @Sharky Kesa anyone?