Difference between revisions of "2002 IMO Problems/Problem 4"

 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
==Solution==
 
==Solution==
{{solution}}
+
We proceed with two parts:
Since <math>d_xd_{r-x+1} = d_{x+1}d_{r-x} = n</math> for all x < r, <math>d_xd_{x+1} = \frac{n^2}{d_{r-x}d_{r-x+1}}</math>. Then $d_1d_2 + d_2d_3 \cdots
+
 
 +
===Part 1: Proof of Inequality===
 +
We have:
 +
\[
 +
\sum_{i=1}^{r-1} d_i d_{i+1} = d_1d_2 + d_2d_3 + \cdots + d_{r-1}d_r
 +
\]
 +
For each term \( d_i d_{i+1} \), note that \( d_{i+1} \leq \frac{n}{d_i} \) (since divisors come in pairs). Thus:
 +
\[
 +
d_i d_{i+1} \leq d_i \cdot \frac{n}{d_i} = n
 +
\]
 +
Summing over all \( r-1 \) terms:
 +
\[
 +
\sum_{i=1}^{r-1} d_i d_{i+1} \leq (r-1) \cdot n < n^2
 +
\]
 +
The last inequality holds because \( r \) (the number of divisors) is at most \( 2\sqrt{n} \), making \( (r-1)n \leq 2n^{3/2} < n^2 \) for \( n > 4 \). Smaller cases can be verified directly.
 +
 
 +
===Part 2: Equality Condition===
 +
Equality occurs **only** when \( n \) is prime:
 +
- For prime \( n \), the divisors are \( 1 \) and \( n \), so:
 +
  <cmath> d_1d_2 = 1 \cdot n = n < n^2 </cmath>
 +
- For composite \( n \), there exists at least one additional divisor \( d_2 \) (where \( 1 < d_2 < n \)), making the sum strictly larger than \( n \) but still less than \( n^2 \).
 +
 
 +
{{INO box|year=2002|num-b=3|num-a=5}}
 
==See Also==
 
==See Also==
  
 
{{IMO box|year=2002|num-b=3|num-a=5}}
 
{{IMO box|year=2002|num-b=3|num-a=5}}

Latest revision as of 10:22, 24 April 2025

Problem: Let $n>1$ be an integer and let $1=d_{1}<d_{2}<d_{3} \cdots <d_{r}=n$ be all of its positive divisors in increasing order. Show that \[d=d_1d_2+d_2d_3+ \cdots +d_{r-1}d_r <n^2\]

Solution

We proceed with two parts:

Part 1: Proof of Inequality

We have: \[ \sum_{i=1}^{r-1} d_i d_{i+1} = d_1d_2 + d_2d_3 + \cdots + d_{r-1}d_r \] For each term \( d_i d_{i+1} \), note that \( d_{i+1} \leq \frac{n}{d_i} \) (since divisors come in pairs). Thus: \[ d_i d_{i+1} \leq d_i \cdot \frac{n}{d_i} = n \] Summing over all \( r-1 \) terms: \[ \sum_{i=1}^{r-1} d_i d_{i+1} \leq (r-1) \cdot n < n^2 \] The last inequality holds because \( r \) (the number of divisors) is at most \( 2\sqrt{n} \), making \( (r-1)n \leq 2n^{3/2} < n^2 \) for \( n > 4 \). Smaller cases can be verified directly.

Part 2: Equality Condition

Equality occurs **only** when \( n \) is prime: - For prime \( n \), the divisors are \( 1 \) and \( n \), so:

 \[d_1d_2 = 1 \cdot n = n < n^2\]

- For composite \( n \), there exists at least one additional divisor \( d_2 \) (where \( 1 < d_2 < n \)), making the sum strictly larger than \( n \) but still less than \( n^2 \).

Template:INO box

See Also

2002 IMO (Problems) • Resources
Preceded by
Problem 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 Followed by
Problem 5
All IMO Problems and Solutions