Browse · MathNet
PrintTHE 68th NMO SELECTION TESTS FOR THE JUNIOR BALKAN MATHEMATICAL OLYMPIAD
Romania counting and probability
Problem
Consider an board where are positive integers, divided into unit squares. Initially all the squares are white. What is the minimum number of squares that need to be painted red such that each square contains at least two red squares?
Solution
We label the rows from 1 to and the columns from 1 to . If and are not congruent to 2 modulo 3, i.e. and with , we can tile the rectangle formed by the first lines and columns with disjoint squares. Each of these squares needs to contain at least 2 red squares, therefore one needs to paint red at least squares. On the other hand, this number is sufficient: paint red those unit squares whose row number is a multiple of 3 (i.e. 3, 6, ..., ) and whose column number belongs to the set . It is easy to check that each square contains exactly two red squares.
The same answer (with the exact same arguments) remains valid if and (the answer remains the same in the case and ).
Let us now tackle the case , . We prove that in this case the answer is .
Let us call a zone a square from which we have removed a square situated in one of its corners. We start by noticing that in any zone we need to have at least three red squares. Indeed, examining the two squares that contain the two remaining opposite corners of the square, they contain each at least two red squares and they only share one unit square (the one in the center), hence they contain together at least 3 red squares. With this remark, we move on to the promised induction:
For : we can paint red the squares situated in column number 3, on the lines 1, 3 and 4. Any square contains exactly two of these red squares.
Assuming the assertion true for a board, let us prove it for the board. From the inductive hypothesis, in the square situated in top-left corner we must have at least red squares. We cover the remaining part of the square with squares, plus one zone placed in the bottom-right corner. In this remaining part we have at least red squares, hence we have in total at least red squares.
For (the case when is similar), it is sufficient to notice that the rectangle can be obtained from the square by gluing a rectangle next to it. In the square there are at least red squares, while in the rectangle one can fit disjoint squares, therefore it contains at least red squares. In total, the rectangle has at least red squares. We have already seen that this number can actually be achieved, therefore the statement is proven.
The same answer (with the exact same arguments) remains valid if and (the answer remains the same in the case and ).
Let us now tackle the case , . We prove that in this case the answer is .
Let us call a zone a square from which we have removed a square situated in one of its corners. We start by noticing that in any zone we need to have at least three red squares. Indeed, examining the two squares that contain the two remaining opposite corners of the square, they contain each at least two red squares and they only share one unit square (the one in the center), hence they contain together at least 3 red squares. With this remark, we move on to the promised induction:
For : we can paint red the squares situated in column number 3, on the lines 1, 3 and 4. Any square contains exactly two of these red squares.
Assuming the assertion true for a board, let us prove it for the board. From the inductive hypothesis, in the square situated in top-left corner we must have at least red squares. We cover the remaining part of the square with squares, plus one zone placed in the bottom-right corner. In this remaining part we have at least red squares, hence we have in total at least red squares.
For (the case when is similar), it is sufficient to notice that the rectangle can be obtained from the square by gluing a rectangle next to it. In the square there are at least red squares, while in the rectangle one can fit disjoint squares, therefore it contains at least red squares. In total, the rectangle has at least red squares. We have already seen that this number can actually be achieved, therefore the statement is proven.
Final answer
If m ≡ 2 mod 3 and n ≡ 2 mod 3, the minimum is 2·floor(m/3)·floor(n/3) + min(floor(m/3), floor(n/3)); otherwise, the minimum is 2·floor(m/3)·floor(n/3).
Techniques
Coloring schemes, extremal argumentsInduction / smoothing