Integer Sequence with a Restriction

A positive integer sequence a 1 , a 2 , a n , a n + 1 , a_1,a_2,\ldots a_n,a_{n+1},\ldots has a property that for all integers i , j i,j with i > j i > j , the sequence satisfies i a j > j a i ia_j > ja_i

If a 1000 = 2014 a_{1000}=2014 , then what is the the minimum possible value a 500 a_{500} can take?


The answer is 1014.

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

1 solution

Daniel Liu
Jul 11, 2014

At first glance, plugging in j = 500 j=500 and i = 1000 i=1000 gives a 500 > 1007 a_{500} > 1007 , so the answer should be 1008 1008 . But there is a tighter bound; this is because the sequence is of integers , not real numbers.

First, we compare a 1000 a_{1000} to a 999 a_{999} . We see that using the condition, a 999 > 999 1000 2014 2011.9 a_{999} > \dfrac{999}{1000}\cdot 2014\approx 2011.9 so a 999 2012 a_{999} \ge 2012 Comparing a 998 a_{998} with a 999 a_{999} , we obtain (skipping calculations) a 998 2010 a_{998} \ge 2010

Comparing a 998 a_{998} with a 997 a_{997} , we obtain a 997 2008 a_{997}\ge 2008

It appears that this pattern continues, so we conjecture that for all k k , the sequence satisfies a k 14 + 2 k a_k \ge 14+2k

Now let's try to prove it using induction. We first check the base case: does a 1000 14 + 2 ( 1000 ) a_{1000}\ge 14+2(1000) ? Yes it does.

Now we assume a k 14 + 2 k a_k \ge 14+2k and try to prove that a k 1 12 + 2 k a_{k-1} \ge 12+2k .

Plugging in i = k i=k and j = k 1 j=k-1 , we see that k a k 1 > ( k 1 ) a k ka_{k-1} > (k-1)a_k

Rearranging: a k 1 > k 1 k a k a_{k-1} > \dfrac{k-1}{k}\cdot a_k

Using the fact that a k 14 + 2 k a_k \ge 14+2k :

a k 1 > ( k 1 ) ( 14 + 2 k ) k a_{k-1} > \dfrac{(k-1)(14+2k)}{k}

Now to prove that a k 1 12 + 2 k a_{k-1}\ge 12+2k , we must prove that 12 + 2 k > ( k 1 ) ( 14 + 2 k ) k > 11 + 2 k 12+2k > \dfrac{(k-1)(14+2k)}{k} > 11+2k

Multiply k k on all sides of the inequalities:

k ( 12 + 2 k ) > ( k 1 ) ( 14 + 2 k ) > k ( 11 + 2 k ) k(12+2k) > (k-1)(14+2k) > k(11+2k)

Expanding: 2 k 2 + 12 k > 2 k 2 + 12 k 14 > 2 k 2 + 11 k 2k^2+12k > 2k^2+12k-14 > 2k^2+11k

Clearly, 2 k 2 + 12 k > 2 k 2 + 12 k 14 2k^2+12k > 2k^2+12k-14 for al k k . However, when does 2 k 2 + 12 k 14 > 2 k 2 + 11 k 2k^2+12k-14 > 2k^2+11k ?

Simplifying, we see that we must have k > 14 k > 14 . However, this is not a problem since we just want to go down to k = 500 k=500 .

Since we have proved that a k 14 + 2 k a_k \ge 14+2k for all k > 14 k > 14 , we can just plug in k = 500 k=500 to obtain a 500 1014 a_{500}\ge \boxed{1014} and we are done.

Wow, this problem is rated 320. I realized that level 5 is 200 points and above, not 300 points and above.

Daniel Liu - 6 years, 11 months ago

I'm really surprised that everything cancelled out so neatly in the induction part. This makes me think there is an easier way...

I was also really surprised that I found the answer to be 1014 1014 , not 1008 1008 .

Daniel Liu - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

The way I thought about it, is to rephrase your condition as

a i i \frac{a_i}{i} is a decreasing sequence.

Now, suppose we have such a sequence, with a 1000 = 2014 a_{1000} = 2014 . Consider the points ( i , a i ) (i, a_i ) . Connect them to the origin. We get a "fan" shape, which looks like this:

Imgur Imgur

Claim: If a n n > k \frac{ a_n} { n} > k for some integer k k , then a n a n 1 < k a_n - a_{n-1} < k .

Proof: This follows immediately from the geometric picture of the fan. Going from the point ( n , a n ) (n, a_n) to the point ( n 1 , a n 1 ) ( n-1, a_{n-1}) , we cannot decrease at a rate (strictly) steeper than k k , hence moving by unit 1 in the x x direction cannot decrease the y y direction by (strictly) more than k k . _ \square

Corollary: Since a 1000 1000 > 2 \frac{ a_{1000} } { 1000 } > 2 , hence a k a 1000 2 × ( 1000 k ) = 14 + 2 k a_k \geq a_{1000} - 2 \times (1000-k) = 14 + 2k

Corollary. This also tells that the largest n n for which we could possibly have a n a n 1 3 a_{n} - a_{n-1} \geq 3 , must also satisfy a n n > 3 \frac{ a_n} { n} > 3 . In particular, k < 14 k <14 .

Corollary. The minimum value of a 1 a_1 is less than 14 + 2 × 1 = 16 14 + 2\times 1 = 16 . Note that Daniel's proof only applied to k > 14 k>14 .

Followup: Can you find the minimum value of a 1 a_1 ?

Calvin Lin Staff - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

I was a bit confused by what you were asking in the followup, because you stated that a 1 > 16 a_1 > 16 so the minimum should be 17 17 . Oops.

I'm not quite getting the fan shape you are talking about. Can you draw an example?

Also, at the second to last corollary, is it supposed to be a k a k 1 < 3 a_k-a_{k-1} < 3 not a k a k 1 > 3 a_k-a_{k-1} > 3 ?

I'm pretty sure I'm not getting this. Your claim states that if a n n > k \dfrac{a_n}{n} > k then a n a n 1 < k a_n-a_{n-1} < k . However, plugging k = 2 k=2 in, we have that 14 + 2 n n > 2 14 > 0 \dfrac{14+2n}{n} > 2\implies 14 > 0 which is already true, so a n a n 1 < 2 a_n-a_{n-1} < 2 is always true. But that means that the difference between consecutive terms is never more than 1 1 which doesn't make sense! I don't know what I'm missing here.

Daniel Liu - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

@Daniel Liu Ah sorry, I had a bunch of typos. (The last two corollaries were wrongly phrased.) Let me go back and clean things up.

Calvin Lin Staff - 6 years, 11 months ago

Lol how you can admit that a999>=2012 and not for 500 there's no logic at all

Mirah Hamza - 6 years, 11 months ago

Log in to reply

I have no idea what you are trying to convey to me...

Daniel Liu - 6 years, 10 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...