Browse · MathNet
Print68. National Mathematical Olympiad
Bulgaria counting and probability
Problem
A convex -gon is given, for which no three diagonals intersect in a point. An intersection point of two diagonals, internal for the given polygon will be called “knot”. Two knots are called “neighbors” if they share a common diagonal. A closed path between neighboring knots, such that no three consecutive knots share a diagonal, will be called “cycle”. Find the maximal number of knots that can be colored, such that there exists no colored cycle (that is a cycle, containing only colored knots)?
Solution
Answer: . Let us consider the more general problem, where is replaced with . We will prove that in a convex -gon, neither three of which diagonals have a common point, we can color at most of the knots without generating a colored cycle.
First, we prove an estimate from above, i.e., that the number of colored knots needs to be less than . Assume the contrary and let us consider a planar graph, with vertices corresponding to the polygon diagonals and edges corresponding to the colored knots. Since the number of diagonals in a convex -gon equals , the edges in the constructed graph outnumber the vertices, thus the graph contains a cycle. But it is easy to see that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the cycles in the constructed graph and the colored cycles in the polygon. Hence, there exists a colored cycle, which is a contradiction.
Now, it remains to show a strategy for coloring knots, without generating a colored cycle. We do it by induction. The base is trivial. Now, let us have a strategy for coloring of the knots of an arbitrary convex -gon without generating a colored cycle. Consider a convex -gon and take a “good” coloring for the knots of . Adding the vertex , we transform the side for into a diagonal for and we generate additional diagonals , . Therefore, the diagonal contains exactly knots (all corresponding to the additional diagonals) and we color all of them. Finally, we color one more knot on a diagonal through , e.g., the intersection point of and . (Due to the convexity of the polygon, it is clear that all considered intersection points are internal, thus are indeed knots!) Overall, we end up with colored points. Among the freshly colored knots, “neighboring” appears only with respect to the diagonals or . Furthermore, every other diagonal through contains at most one colored knot, i.e., it doesn’t generate any “neighboring” relations. It is straightforward to observe that in order to exist a colored cycle, given that the coloring of the knots of is acyclic, at least two of the freshly colored knots should be part of this cycle, which is impossible due to construction. Induction is completed and so is the proof.
First, we prove an estimate from above, i.e., that the number of colored knots needs to be less than . Assume the contrary and let us consider a planar graph, with vertices corresponding to the polygon diagonals and edges corresponding to the colored knots. Since the number of diagonals in a convex -gon equals , the edges in the constructed graph outnumber the vertices, thus the graph contains a cycle. But it is easy to see that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the cycles in the constructed graph and the colored cycles in the polygon. Hence, there exists a colored cycle, which is a contradiction.
Now, it remains to show a strategy for coloring knots, without generating a colored cycle. We do it by induction. The base is trivial. Now, let us have a strategy for coloring of the knots of an arbitrary convex -gon without generating a colored cycle. Consider a convex -gon and take a “good” coloring for the knots of . Adding the vertex , we transform the side for into a diagonal for and we generate additional diagonals , . Therefore, the diagonal contains exactly knots (all corresponding to the additional diagonals) and we color all of them. Finally, we color one more knot on a diagonal through , e.g., the intersection point of and . (Due to the convexity of the polygon, it is clear that all considered intersection points are internal, thus are indeed knots!) Overall, we end up with colored points. Among the freshly colored knots, “neighboring” appears only with respect to the diagonals or . Furthermore, every other diagonal through contains at most one colored knot, i.e., it doesn’t generate any “neighboring” relations. It is straightforward to observe that in order to exist a colored cycle, given that the coloring of the knots of is acyclic, at least two of the freshly colored knots should be part of this cycle, which is impossible due to construction. Induction is completed and so is the proof.
Final answer
2035151
Techniques
Coloring schemes, extremal argumentsInduction / smoothingInvariants / monovariants