k | L(k,2) | # | all optimal solutions |
0 | 0 | 1 | |
1 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
2 | 6 | 1 | 2 3 |
3 | 10 | 3 | 1 5 8 / 2 4 5 / 3 4 5 |
4 | 16 | 3 | 1 2 8 13 / 4 6 7 9 / 3 6 7 8 |
5 | 24 | 1 | 4 8 10 11 13 |
6 | 32 | 2 | 4 8 12 14 15 17 / 5 7 12 13 15 16 |
7 | 40 | 8 | 2 4 5 19 20 31 32 / 2 11 13 14 18 19 21 / 2 13 14 16 17 22 23 / 4 8 12 16 18 19 21 / 5 10 15 17 18 19 21 / 5 11 13 17 19 20 40 / 6 12 15 16 17 19 20 / 7 9 15 17 19 20 40 |
8 | 52 | 3 | 2 4 6 7 25 26 41 42 / 5 8 19 20 22 23 29 55 / 6 12 18 21 22 23 25 26 |
9 | 64 | 2 | 2 4 6 8 9 31 32 51 52 / 6 12 18 24 27 28 29 31 32 |
10 | 76 | 2 | 2 4 6 8 10 11 37 38 61 62 / 6 12 18 24 30 33 34 35 37 38 |
A) The set {2,4,...,2t,2t+1} shows that t+1 coins can reach 4t+2 (for t>=0), that is, 4k-2. This is optimal for k=1,2,3.
B) The set {4,8,12,...,4t,4t+2,4t+3,4t+5} shows that t+3 coins can reach 8t+8 (for t>0), that is, 8k-16. This is optimal for k=4,5,6,7.
C) The set {2,4,6,...,2t,2t+1,6t+7,6t+8,10t+11,10t+12} shows that t+5 coins can reach 12t+16 (for t>0), that is, 12k-44. This is optimal for k=7,8,9,10.
D) The set {6,12,18,...,6t,6t+3,6t+4,6t+5,6t+7,6t+8} shows that t+5 coins can reach 12t+16 (for t>0), just like the previous.
With k coins one cannot get more than k(k+1) (there are k(k-1) sums and differences, and 2k single values taken once or twice). Equality holds for k=0,1,2 and for no other values of k.
An easy lower bound is found by taking the set {1,2,...,t,3t+1,5t+2,7t+3,...,(2a+1)t+a}. It shows that t+a coins can reach (2a+2)t+a, that is, that k coins can reach 2a(k-a)+2k-a. This is largest for a=[k/2] and then yields k(k+3)/2.
Tim Peeters finds a slightly better solution by taking the consecutive part at the end instead of the beginning: the set {x,2x,...,tx,tx+1,...,tx+x-1} of size t+x-1 reaches 2(tx+x-1). This is maximal for x = 1 + k/2 (rounded up or down) and then yields L(k,2) >= [k(k+4)/2].
m | L(3,m) | # | all optimal solutions |
1 | 3 | 1 | 1 2 3 |
2 | 10 | 3 | 1 5 8 / 2 4 5 / 3 4 5 |
3 | 24 | 2 | 1 8 11 / 5 7 8 |
4 | 46 | 1 | 9 10 16 |
5 | 80 | 1 | 8 17 23 |
6 | 129 | 1 | 9 31 32 |
7 | 196 | 1 | 11 38 39 |
8 | 277 | 1 | 13 45 46 |
9 | 372 | 1 | 15 52 53 |
10 | 500 | 1 | 15 82 83 |
11 | 660 | 1 | 17 93 94 |
12 | 842 | 1 | 19 104 105 |
13 | 1046 | 1 | 21 115 116 |
14 | 1272 | 1 | 23 126 127 |
15 | 1560 | 1 | 23 172 173 |
16 | 1883 | 1 | 25 187 188 |
17 | 2236 | 1 | 27 202 203 |
18 | 2619 | 1 | 29 217 218 |
19 | 3040 | 1 | 29 275 276 |
20 | 3544 | 1 | 31 294 295 |
21 | 4086 | 1 | 33 313 314 |
22 | 4666 | 1 | 35 332 333 |
23 | 5284 | 1 | 37 351 352 |
24 | 5969 | 1 | 37 425 426 |
25 | 6740 | 1 | 39 448 449 |
26 | 7557 | 1 | 41 471 472 |
27 | 8420 | 1 | 43 494 495 |
28 | 9329 | 1 | 45 517 518 |
29 | 10342 | 1 | 45 607 608 |
30 | 11436 | 1 | 47 634 635 |
Each of these was found to be best possible by exhaustive search.
For a discussion, see above.
m | L(4,m) | # | all optimal solutions |
1 | 4 | 1 | 1 2 3 4 |
2 | 16 | 3 | 1 2 8 13 / 3 6 7 8 / 4 6 7 9 |
3 | 47 | 1 | 11 12 15 20 |
4 | 104 | 1 | 1 5 34 47 |
5 | 207 | 1 | 1 7 68 93 |
6 | 375 | 1 | 1 7 93 118 |
7 | 624 | 1 | 1 9 155 196 |
8 | 984 | 1 | 1 9 196 237 |
9 | 1475 | 1 | 1 11 294 355 |
10 | 2135 | 1 | 1 11 355 416 |
(These values are from Jurgen van Dijk. Am not sure whether he claims optimality. I found the same values for m <= 7. For m=8,9,10 they are optimal among the sets containing 1.)
The following values were found by Jurgen van Dijk.
k | m | L(k,m) | # | all optimal solutions |
5 | 3 | 73 | 1 | 5 18 30 33 34 |
5 | 4 | 189 | 1 | 3 5 17 93 148 |
6 | 3 | 110 | 1 | 14 22 25 26 55 57 |
(I also found L(5,3) = 73 and L(6,3) = 110. The 73 is optimal. The 110 is probably optimal: any nonlisted solutions have w_6 >= 119. Have not verified the 189.)
It is fairly easy to come up with good solutions, while
it takes a long time to prove optimality.
For example, finding the four solutions
k | m | L | # | solutions |
11 | 2 | 90 | 4 | 4 8 12 16 18 19 21 62 63 68 69 |
8 16 24 30 32 35 39 41 42 44 45 | ||||
8 16 24 32 36 38 41 42 43 45 47 | ||||
8 16 24 32 36 38 41 42 45 47 51 | ||||
A few lower bounds for m=3 (and one for m=5) found by Wil van der Aalst
and Ton Weijters using a genetic search:
k | m | L | solution(s) |
7 | 3 | 153 | 19 38 40 46 47 50 51 |
8 | 3 | 210 | 19 38 57 59 65 66 69 70 |
9 | 3 | 276 | 3 6 7 8 25 79 134 187 239 / 4 8 12 53 71 108 117 131 140 |
10 | 3 | 336 | 2 4 7 17 18 30 94 159 233 296 |
20 | 5 | 25676 | 1282 2387 3552 3810 3955 4073 4223 4355 4472 45534683 4787 4907 5022 5159 5217 5306 5431 5557 5592 |
k | m | L | solution |
7 | 3 | 160 | 4 12 38 58 68 77 79 |
Added 2004-03-14: Tommi Vainikainen writes that he improved the 210 to 217:
k | m | L | solution |
8 | 3 | 217 | 5 8 12 14 62 101 150 189 |