All ICPC entries
Competitive Programming

ICPC 2015 - D. Cutting Cheese

State the problem in your own words. Focus on the mathematical or algorithmic core rather than repeating the full statement.

Source sync Apr 19, 2026
Track ICPC
Year 2015
Files TeX, C++, statement assets
Folder competitive_programming/icpc/2015/D-cutting-cheese
ICPC2015TeXC++statement textstatement pdf

Source-first archive entry

This page is built from the copied files in competitive_programming/icpc/2015/D-cutting-cheese. Edit competitive_programming/icpc/2015/D-cutting-cheese/solution.tex to update the written solution and competitive_programming/icpc/2015/D-cutting-cheese/solution.cpp to update the implementation.

The website does not replace those files with hand-maintained HTML. It reads the copied source tree during the build and exposes the exact files below.

Problem Statement

Copied statement text kept beside the solution archive for direct reference.

Problem D
                                       Cutting Cheese
                                     Time limit: 3 seconds
Of course you have all heard of the International Cheese
Processing Company. Their machine for cutting a piece of
cheese into slices of exactly the same thickness is a classic.
Recently they produced a machine able to cut a spherical
cheese (such as Edam) into slices – no, not all of the same
thickness, but all of the same weight! But new challenges
lie ahead: cutting Swiss cheese.
Swiss cheese such as Emmentaler has holes in it, and the
holes may have different sizes. A slice with holes contains
less cheese and has a lower weight than a slice without holes.
                                                                              Picture by Jon Sullivan via Wikimedia Commons
So here is the challenge: cut a cheese with holes in it into
slices of equal weight.
By smart sonar techniques (the same techniques used to scan unborn babies and oil fields), it is possible
to locate the holes in the cheese up to micrometer precision. For the present problem you may assume
that the holes are perfect spheres.
Each uncut block has size 100 × 100 × 100 where each dimension is measured in millimeters. Your task
is to cut it into s slices of equal weight. The slices will be 100 mm wide and 100 mm high, and your job
is to determine the thickness of each slice.

Input

The first line of the input contains two integers n and s, where 0 ≤ n ≤ 10 000 is the number of holes in
the cheese, and 1 ≤ s ≤ 100 is the number of slices to cut. The next n lines each contain four positive
integers r, x, y, and z that describe a hole, where r is the radius and x, y, and z are the coordinates of
the center, all in micrometers.
The cheese block occupies the points (x, y, z) where 0 ≤ x, y, z ≤ 100 000, except for the points that
are part of some hole. The cuts are made perpendicular to the z axis.
You may assume that holes do not overlap but may touch, and that the holes are fully contained in the
cheese but may touch its boundary.

Output

Display the s slice thicknesses in millimeters, starting from the end of the cheese with z = 0. Your
output should have an absolute or relative error of at most 10−6 .

Sample Input 1                               Sample Output 1
0 4                                          25.000000000
                                             25.000000000
                                             25.000000000
                                             25.000000000

Sample Input 2                               Sample Output 2
2 5                                          14.611103142
10000 10000 20000 20000                      16.269801734
40000 40000 50000 60000                      24.092457788
                                             27.002992272
                                             18.023645064

Editorial

Rendered from the copied solution.tex file. The original TeX source remains available below.

Key Observations

  • Write the structural observations that make the problem tractable.

  • State any useful invariant, monotonicity property, graph interpretation, or combinatorial reformulation.

  • If the constraints matter, explain exactly which part of the solution they enable.

Algorithm

  1. Describe the data structures and the state maintained by the algorithm.

  2. Explain the processing order and why it is sufficient.

  3. Mention corner cases explicitly if they affect the implementation.

Correctness Proof

We prove that the algorithm returns the correct answer.

Lemma 1.

State the first key claim.

Proof.

Provide a concise proof.

Lemma 2.

State the next claim if needed.

Proof.

Provide a concise proof.

Theorem.

The algorithm outputs the correct answer for every valid input.

Proof.

Combine the lemmas and finish the argument.

Complexity Analysis

State the running time and memory usage in terms of the input size.

Implementation Notes

  • Mention any non-obvious implementation detail that is easy to get wrong.

  • Mention numeric limits, indexing conventions, or tie-breaking rules if relevant.

Code

Exact copied C++ implementation from solution.cpp.

C++ competitive_programming/icpc/2015/D-cutting-cheese/solution.cpp

Exact copied implementation source.

Raw file
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;

namespace {

void solve() {
    // Fill in the full solution logic for the problem here.
}

}  // namespace

int main() {
    ios::sync_with_stdio(false);
    cin.tie(nullptr);

    solve();
    return 0;
}

Source Files

Exact copied source-of-truth files. Edit solution.tex for the write-up and solution.cpp for the implementation.

TeX write-up competitive_programming/icpc/2015/D-cutting-cheese/solution.tex

Exact copied write-up source.

Raw file
\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,amsthm}
\usepackage{enumitem}

\title{ICPC World Finals 2015\\D. Cutting Cheese}
\author{}
\date{}

\begin{document}
\maketitle

\section*{Problem Summary}

State the problem in your own words. Focus on the mathematical or algorithmic core rather than repeating the full statement.

\section*{Key Observations}

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
    \item Write the structural observations that make the problem tractable.
    \item State any useful invariant, monotonicity property, graph interpretation, or combinatorial reformulation.
    \item If the constraints matter, explain exactly which part of the solution they enable.
\end{itemize}

\section*{Algorithm}

\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=*]
    \item Describe the data structures and the state maintained by the algorithm.
    \item Explain the processing order and why it is sufficient.
    \item Mention corner cases explicitly if they affect the implementation.
\end{enumerate}

\section*{Correctness Proof}

We prove that the algorithm returns the correct answer.

\paragraph{Lemma 1.}
State the first key claim.

\paragraph{Proof.}
Provide a concise proof.

\paragraph{Lemma 2.}
State the next claim if needed.

\paragraph{Proof.}
Provide a concise proof.

\paragraph{Theorem.}
The algorithm outputs the correct answer for every valid input.

\paragraph{Proof.}
Combine the lemmas and finish the argument.

\section*{Complexity Analysis}

State the running time and memory usage in terms of the input size.

\section*{Implementation Notes}

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
    \item Mention any non-obvious implementation detail that is easy to get wrong.
    \item Mention numeric limits, indexing conventions, or tie-breaking rules if relevant.
\end{itemize}

\end{document}