A group of students from different countries meet at a mathematics competition. Each student speaks the same number of languages, and, for every pair of students and , student speaks some language that student does not speak, and student speaks some language that student does not speak. What is the least possible total number of languages spoken by all the students?
- A)
- B)
- C)
- D)
- E)
Answer
A
Key insight
Students correspond to distinct k-subsets of n languages; the most such subsets is C(n, n/2), and C(8,4) = 70 < 100 <= 126 = C(9,4).
Solution
Suppose languages are spoken in total and every student speaks exactly of them. Each student corresponds to a -element subset of the languages.
The condition says that for any two students, neither language set contains the other. Because all the sets have the same size , one set contains another only when they are identical. So the condition is simply: all subsets are different.
Conversely, any distinct -subsets work. So we need for some , and we want the smallest . For fixed the largest binomial coefficient is the middle one:
With languages no choice of gives different subsets, while with languages we can assign each student a different -language subset.
The answer is .
Why this works
Translating "speaks a language the other does not" into set language turns a wordy condition into "no set contains another," and equal sizes collapse that to "all sets distinct." The problem is then just counting subsets, with the useful fact that peaks at . Look for hidden bijections between people and subsets whenever a problem describes who has what.
The trap
Reading 'A speaks something B does not' as requiring disjoint sets, which leads to 100 languages; equal-size sets satisfy the condition as soon as they are different.
Common mistakes
- Reading 'A speaks something B does not' as requiring disjoint sets, which leads to 100 languages; equal-size sets satisfy the condition as soon as they are different.
- Checking for only one value of (say ) and not realizing that is the best case for , so that really is impossible.
Techniques
Map the objects to something easier to count · Bound the quantity above/below or estimate to pin it down