Given that a sequence of real numbers satisfies x0=0 and ∣xk∣=∣xk−1+3∣ for all integers k≥1, find the minimum possible value of ∣x1+x2+⋯+x2006∣.
解析
Solutions
Solution 1
Suppose bi=3xi. We have
i=1∑2006bi2=i=0∑2005(bi+1)2=i=0∑2005(bi2+2bi+1)
So
i=0∑2005bi=2b20062−2006
Now
i=1∑2006bi=2b20062+2b2006−2006
Therefore
i=1∑2006bi=2(b2006+1)2−2007≥22025−2007=9
This lower bound can be achieved if we use b1=−1, b2=0, b3=−1, b4=0, and so on until b1962=0, after which we let bk=bk−1+1 so that b2006=44. So
i=1∑2006xi≥027
Solution 2
First, we state that iff xi−1≥0, ∣xi∣=∣xi−1∣+3 and iff xi−1<0, ∣xi∣=∣xi−1∣−3. Now suppose xi=xj for some 0≤i<j≤2006. Now, this means that ∣xi∣=∣xj∣, and so the number of positive numbers in the set {xi,xi+1,…,xj−1} equals the number of negative numbers. Now pair the numbers in this list up in the following way: Whenever a positive and a negative number are adjacent in this progression, pair them up and remove them from this list. We claim that every pair will sum to -3.
If the positive number comes first, then the negative number will have a magnitude three greater, so this is true. If the negative number comes first, then the positive number will have magnitude three smaller, and this will also be true. Now let us examine what happens when we remove those two from the sequence. WLOG, let the numbers be xk and xk+1. Since one is positive and the other is negative, ∣xk+2∣=∣xk+1∣±3=∣xk∣±3∓3=∣xk∣=∣xk−1+3∣. So the new sequence works under the same criteria as the old one. In this way, we can pair all of the numbers up in this subsequence so the sums of the pairs are -3. Thus, the average of these numbers will be -3/2 for all subsequences that start and end with the same number (not including one of those).
Now, take all of the repeating subsequences out of the original sequence. The only thing that will be left will be a sequence {0,3,6,9,⋯,3k} for some even k. Since we started with 2006 terms, we removed 2006−k (an even number) with an average of -3/2. Thus, the sum of both this remaining sequence and the removed stuff is (2006−k)(−3/2)+∑i=1k3k=(3/2)(k−2006+k(k+1))=3/2(k2+2k−2006). This must be minimized, so we find the roots: k2+2k=2006⟹(k+1)2=2007 and 442=1936<2007<2025=452. Plugging in k=44 yields (3/2)(2025−2007)=27 (and k=42 yields −237, a worse result). Thus, 027 is the closest to zero this sum can get.
Solution 3
We know ∣xk∣=∣xk−1+3∣. We get rid of the absolute value by squaring both sides: xk2=xk−12+6xk−1+9⇒xk2−xk−12=6xk−1+9. So we set this up:
x12−x02x22−x12x20072−x20062=6x0+9=6x1+9⋮=6x2006+9
There are 2007 equations. Sum them. We get: x20072=6(x1+x2+⋯+x2006)+9⋅2007
So ∣x1+x2+⋯+x2006∣=61x20072−9⋅2007
We know 3∣x2007 and we want to minimize x20072−9⋅2007, so x2007 must be 3⋅45 for it to be minimal (452=2025 which is closest to 2007). We can achieve this with xk=3k till x45=135 and then alternating x46=−138, x47=135 and so on ... Then x2k=−138 and x2k+1=135 for all k>22. Since 2007 is odd, we have x2007=135.
This means that ∣x1+x2+⋯+x2006∣=61∣9(2025−2007)∣=027
Solution 4
Playing around with a couple numbers, we see that we can generate the sequence 0,3,−6,3,−6,⋯, and we can also generate the sequence 3,6,9,12,⋯ after each −6 value. Thus, we will apply this to try and find some bounds. We can test if the first 1000 pairs of numbers each sum up to −3, and the rest form an arithmetic sequence, if the first 990 pairs sum up to −3, and so on. When we get to 980, we find that 980(−3)+3+6+⋯+3⋅46=303. If we shift the number of pairs up by 1, we get 981(−3)+3+6+⋯+3⋅44=027.
~ Spacesam
Solution 5
We will work our way from ∣x0∣ to ∣x0+x1∣ to ∣x0+x1+x2+⋯+x2006∣. Let the sum ∣x0+x1+x2+⋯+xi∣=Si.
Seeing as the value for the sum we want is always nonnegative, the best pseudo-strategy would be to stay as close to 0 as possible as we increase i to eventually get to i=2006. It turns out that a greedy algorithm works here. Let us start with some smaller values of i.
Note that we can describe xk+1 in terms of xk in the following way: take xk, add 3, and either multiply by −1 or not.
We know that S0=0. When we get to S1, we add in x1, which is either 3 or −3. It does not make a difference which one we choose, so we can choose 3 for convenience. Now, S1=3. x2 is either ±6; adding 6 would take us farther away from 0, but adding −6 is an okay move. Thus, let x2=−6, so S2=−3.
x3 is ±3. Adding 3 is clearly the right choice here, which takes us to 0. Thus, x3=3 and S3=0.
Let us look at how this greedy algorithm performs in general.
(the table doesn't work; if you desire, please to go https://artofproblemsolving.com/texer/zzyacvnp to view)
The sums alternate between separate arithmetic sequences. One of them is of particular interest to us: specifically, the one that goes 3a,3a−3,3a−6,⋯, because it will eventually become 0. One can then derive using simple algebra how long it will take to reach zero, depending on a; it turns out that it takes 2a+1 for each cycle to complete. We can then see that Sk2−1=0 for positive integers k; thus, S1935=0. We can then go through our algorithm, and it turns out that S2006=027.