Open study

is now brainly

With Brainly you can:

  • Get homework help from millions of students and moderators
  • Learn how to solve problems with step-by-step explanations
  • Share your knowledge and earn points by helping other students
  • Learn anywhere, anytime with the Brainly app!

A community for students.

[UNSOLVED, ANSWER GIVEN] KingGeorge's Challenge of the Month Suppose you have \(n\) children sitting in a circle waiting for Santa to give each of them one present. When Santa finally arrives, he announces he'll pass out the presents in such a way that he'll go in a clockwise circle, and give a present to every other child who has not yet received a present starting with the second child. Find a closed formula to find which child got the \(n-1\)-th present. If, say, there were 6 children in a circle, the order in which they would get presents is 2, 4, 6, 3, 1, 5. So the 1st child got the \(6-1\)-th present.

See more answers at
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Get this expert

answer on brainly


Get your free account and access expert answers to this and thousands of other questions

I should say that this is a rather difficult problem. I've also changed the wording so you can't google a solution. And even if you did manage to google the original problem, the one formula I found online for this, was incorrect.
Also, if you want me to compute some test values for you, let me know what \(n\) to use.
im getting something like: let n be\[n=3\cdot 2^k+r,0\le r\le 3\cdot 2^k\]Then the answer is:\[2r+1\]Havent written out a proof yet though >.<

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question

Other answers:

This is a variation of Extended Josephus problem, where \( x=n-1 \) The recursive and the non-recursive formulas are discussed here:
@FoolForMath That was the formula I mentioned I was able to find. However, it gives the incorrect value.
I think you are probably making mistake while implementing it. This looks correct to me.
Their table is correct, but their formula is not. Try their formula for n=41, and x=40.
If I've typed it into wolfram correctly, that formula gives you -10, while the solution should be 35.
@joemath314159 is close. I believe his formula gives you the number of the child that gets the last present.
Well, as I said if you implement is right you will get 35.
Do you understand C?
The recursive solution given there is right. I can't find my implementation so I had to fix a broken program available in internet and got 35 for n = 41 and x=40. And please don't say a published paper is wrong just like that :)
Maybe I'm missing something critical then. But where did I type it incorrectly into Wolfram? My personal opinion is that they just made a small typo in the formula because I was able to make a very small modification that gave me the correct answer.
When we are dealing with decimals (log) it's really hard to hold the precision even for the wolf. This is the C (recursive) solution, I was talking about:
Even using their formula by hand, I get an incorrect value for n=6.
Sorry, I haven't checked in the non-recursive version. But it's rather difficult to believe that the formula is incorrect :)
Like I said, I believe it's a typo since it's easily changed so that I do always get the correct solution.
The non-recursive version has little importance in computer science (programming) as it fails for sufficiently large \(n \).
For those just joining us, I know of two different closed form expressions that give me the correct solution. The first, is a modified form of the closed form expression in the link ffm provided above. The second, is a formula more similar to what Joe had near the top. This is the formula I originally found on my own. Both formulas give the correct solution, although they look mildly different. I will accept either.
Hint: Solve the problem for \(n=2^k\). Now go back to the general case. Reduce that case to a \(2^k\) case, and solve. In particular, what do you have to add in and then subtract?
Could you please compute for values from \(1\) to \(10\)?
I believe \(1\) is undefined, actually. Sorry.
\[n=5 \rightarrow 5\]\[n=6\rightarrow1\]\[n=7\rightarrow3\]\[n=8\rightarrow5\]\[n=9\rightarrow7\]\[n=10\rightarrow9\]I'll let you do 2-4 since they're fairly simple
@KingGeorge Solution??
First up, we have the modified form of the equation linked to above. This is \[\Large 2n+1-(2n-2x+1)\left(2^{\left\lfloor \log_2 \left\lfloor \frac{n}{2n-2x+1}\right\rfloor\right\rfloor+1}-\text{sgn}\left(\left\lfloor \frac{\left\lceil\frac{n}{2}\right\rceil}{x}\right\rfloor\right)\right)\]With \(x=n-1\)
Sorry, at the end it's just \[\Large -\text{sgn}\left(\left\lfloor \frac{\left\lceil\frac{n}{2}\right\rceil}{x}\right\rfloor\right)\]
The solution that I discovered on my own (both give the same values for all positive integers)\[\Large 2\left(n-2^{\left\lfloor\log_2(n)\right\rfloor}\right)+2^{\left\lfloor\log_2(n)\right\rfloor+1}+1\pmod{2^{\left\lfloor\log_2(n)\right\rfloor-1}\cdot3}\]
Once again, the end is just \[\Large \pmod{2^{\left\lfloor\log_2(n)\right\rfloor-1}\cdot3}\]

Not the answer you are looking for?

Search for more explanations.

Ask your own question