0.2 millisecons to read a single bit? They say 0.2 microseconds. I get WA when doing what I explained, in 1.7 seconds...
On Friday, June 2, 2017 at 12:09:47 PM UTC-4, Luke Pebody wrote: > I would think it can't work on the large case because it takes 0.2 > milliseconds to read a single bit once and therefore 20 seconds to read all > 100M bits once and 10 minutes to read them 30 times. > > > On 2 Jun 2017 4:56 p.m., "Reynaldo Gil-Pons" <[email protected]> wrote: > In the analisis they explain a solution for the Small case, and point out it > cannot work for the Large one. When I calculate the probabilities of getting > WA using 30 checks for each position, and assuming 1000000 testcases (cant be > more than this right?) I get less than 1 / 1000. But I still get WA. I > calculate an upper bound on the probability of failure as 1 - (1 - 1 / (2 ** > 30)) ** number_test_cases. Is there anything wrong? > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google Code Jam" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-code/11b46b16-82c3-4824-b319-626b05cf9e76%40googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Code Jam" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-code/b8d61e73-ddb2-4fdf-bb32-7c61929055a7%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
