{
  "index": "1997-A-5",
  "type": "NT",
  "tag": [
    "NT",
    "COMB"
  ],
  "difficulty": "",
  "question": "Let $N_n$ denote the number of ordered $n$-tuples of positive\nintegers $(a_1,a_2,\\ldots,a_n)$ such that $1/a_1 + 1/a_2 +\\ldots +\n1/a_n=1$.  Determine whether $N_{10}$ is even or odd.",
  "solution": "We may discard any solutions for which $a_1 \\neq a_2$, since those come in\npairs; so assume $a_1 = a_2$.  Similarly, we may assume that $a_3 = a_4$,\n$a_5 = a_6$, $a_7 = a_8$, $a_9=a_{10}$.  Thus we get the equation\n\\[\n2/a_1 + 2/a_3 + 2/a_5 + 2/a_7 + 2/a_9 = 1.\n\\]\nAgain, we may assume $a_1 = a_3$ and $a_5 = a_7$, so we get $4/a_1 + 4/a_5\n+ 2/a_9 = 1$; and $a_1 = a_5$, so $8/a_1 + 2/a_9 = 1$.  This implies that\n$(a_1-8)(a_9-2) = 16$, which by counting has 5 solutions.  Thus $N_{10}$\nis odd.",
  "vars": [
    "a_1",
    "a_2",
    "a_3",
    "a_4",
    "a_5",
    "a_6",
    "a_7",
    "a_8",
    "a_9",
    "a_10",
    "a_n"
  ],
  "params": [
    "n",
    "N_n",
    "N_10"
  ],
  "sci_consts": [],
  "variants": {
    "descriptive_long": {
      "map": {
        "a_1": "firstelement",
        "a_2": "secondelement",
        "a_3": "thirdelement",
        "a_4": "fourthelement",
        "a_5": "fifthelement",
        "a_6": "sixthelement",
        "a_7": "seventhelement",
        "a_8": "eightelement",
        "a_9": "ninthelement",
        "a_10": "tenthelement",
        "a_n": "generalelement",
        "n": "tuplelength",
        "N_n": "countn",
        "N_10": "countten"
      },
      "question": "Let $countn$ denote the number of ordered $tuplelength$-tuples of positive\nintegers $(firstelement,secondelement,\\ldots,generalelement)$ such that $1/firstelement + 1/secondelement +\\ldots +\n1/generalelement=1$.  Determine whether $countten$ is even or odd.",
      "solution": "We may discard any solutions for which $firstelement \\neq secondelement$, since those come in\npairs; so assume $firstelement = secondelement$.  Similarly, we may assume that $thirdelement = fourthelement$,\n$fifthelement = sixthelement$, $seventhelement = eightelement$, $ninthelement=tenthelement$.  Thus we get the equation\n\\[\n2/firstelement + 2/thirdelement + 2/fifthelement + 2/seventhelement + 2/ninthelement = 1.\n\\]\nAgain, we may assume $firstelement = thirdelement$ and $fifthelement = seventhelement$, so we get $4/firstelement + 4/fifthelement\n+ 2/ninthelement = 1$; and $firstelement = fifthelement$, so $8/firstelement + 2/ninthelement = 1$.  This implies that\n$(firstelement-8)(ninthelement-2) = 16$, which by counting has 5 solutions.  Thus $countten$\nis odd."
    },
    "descriptive_long_confusing": {
      "map": {
        "a_1": "sunflower",
        "a_2": "tangerine",
        "a_3": "hummingbd",
        "a_4": "crocodile",
        "a_5": "chandelier",
        "a_6": "limestone",
        "a_7": "parchment",
        "a_8": "raspberry",
        "a_9": "sandstorm",
        "a_10": "wildfire",
        "a_n": "shipwreck",
        "n": "nightfall",
        "N_n": "raincloud",
        "N_10": "moonlight"
      },
      "question": "Let $raincloud$ denote the number of ordered $nightfall$-tuples of positive\nintegers $(sunflower,tangerine,\\ldots,shipwreck)$ such that $1/sunflower + 1/tangerine +\\ldots +\n1/shipwreck=1$.  Determine whether $moonlight$ is even or odd.",
      "solution": "We may discard any solutions for which $sunflower \\neq tangerine$, since those come in\npairs; so assume $sunflower = tangerine$.  Similarly, we may assume that $hummingbd = crocodile$,\n$chandelier = limestone$, $parchment = raspberry$, $sandstorm=wildfire$.  Thus we get the equation\n\\[\n2/sunflower + 2/hummingbd + 2/chandelier + 2/parchment + 2/sandstorm = 1.\n\\]\nAgain, we may assume $sunflower = hummingbd$ and $chandelier = parchment$, so we get $4/sunflower + 4/chandelier\n+ 2/sandstorm = 1$; and $sunflower = chandelier$, so $8/sunflower + 2/sandstorm = 1$.  This implies that\n$(sunflower-8)(sandstorm-2) = 16$, which by counting has 5 solutions.  Thus $moonlight$\nis odd."
    },
    "descriptive_long_misleading": {
      "map": {
        "a_1": "nonpositiveone",
        "a_2": "nonpositivetwo",
        "a_3": "nonpositivethree",
        "a_4": "nonpositivefour",
        "a_5": "nonpositivefive",
        "a_6": "nonpositivesix",
        "a_7": "nonpositiveseven",
        "a_8": "nonpositiveeight",
        "a_9": "nonpositivenine",
        "a_10": "nonpositiveten",
        "a_n": "nonpositiventh",
        "n": "boundless",
        "N_n": "uncountable",
        "N_10": "uncountableten"
      },
      "question": "Let $\\uncountable$ denote the number of ordered $\\boundless$-tuples of positive integers $(\\nonpositiveone,\\nonpositivetwo,\\ldots,\\nonpositiventh)$ such that $1/\\nonpositiveone + 1/\\nonpositivetwo +\\ldots + 1/\\nonpositiventh=1$.  Determine whether $\\uncountableten$ is even or odd.",
      "solution": "We may discard any solutions for which $nonpositiveone \\neq nonpositivetwo$, since those come in\npairs; so assume $nonpositiveone = nonpositivetwo$.  Similarly, we may assume that $nonpositivethree = nonpositivefour$,\n$nonpositivefive = nonpositivesix$, $nonpositiveseven = nonpositiveeight$, $nonpositivenine=nonpositiveten$.  Thus we get the equation\n\\[\n2/nonpositiveone + 2/nonpositivethree + 2/nonpositivefive + 2/nonpositiveseven + 2/nonpositivenine = 1.\n\\]\nAgain, we may assume $nonpositiveone = nonpositivethree$ and $nonpositivefive = nonpositiveseven$, so we get $4/nonpositiveone + 4/nonpositivefive\n+ 2/nonpositivenine = 1$; and $nonpositiveone = nonpositivefive$, so $8/nonpositiveone + 2/nonpositivenine = 1$.  This implies that\n$(nonpositiveone-8)(nonpositivenine-2) = 16$, which by counting has 5 solutions.  Thus $uncountableten$\nis odd."
    },
    "garbled_string": {
      "map": {
        "a_1": "qlpzxtwer",
        "a_2": "vkmsdcnou",
        "a_3": "hdrmbtisa",
        "a_4": "fjklqresx",
        "a_5": "xgywdncha",
        "a_6": "tpouzlemn",
        "a_7": "sbnahkrqe",
        "a_8": "wnpxgdzvo",
        "a_9": "kctmhylab",
        "a_10": "goznerpqi",
        "a_n": "vdmoulkse",
        "n": "bladetfyh",
        "N_n": "qrsplijaw",
        "N_10": "zmdfkrelu"
      },
      "question": "Let $qrsplijaw$ denote the number of ordered bladetfyh-tuples of positive integers $(qlpzxtwer,vkmsdcnou,\\ldots,vdmoulkse)$ such that $1/qlpzxtwer + 1/vkmsdcnou +\\ldots + 1/vdmoulkse=1$. Determine whether $zmdfkrelu$ is even or odd.",
      "solution": "We may discard any solutions for which $qlpzxtwer \\neq vkmsdcnou$, since those come in pairs; so assume $qlpzxtwer = vkmsdcnou$.  Similarly, we may assume that $hdrmbtisa = fjklqresx$, $xgywdncha = tpouzlemn$, $sbnahkrqe = wnpxgdzvo$, $kctmhylab=goznerpqi$.  Thus we get the equation\n\\[\n2/qlpzxtwer + 2/hdrmbtisa + 2/xgywdncha + 2/sbnahkrqe + 2/kctmhylab = 1.\n\\]\nAgain, we may assume $qlpzxtwer = hdrmbtisa$ and $xgywdncha = sbnahkrqe$, so we get $4/qlpzxtwer + 4/xgywdncha + 2/kctmhylab = 1$; and $qlpzxtwer = xgywdncha$, so $8/qlpzxtwer + 2/kctmhylab = 1$.  This implies that $(qlpzxtwer-8)(kctmhylab-2) = 16$, which by counting has 5 solutions.  Thus $zmdfkrelu$ is odd."
    },
    "kernel_variant": {
      "question": "Let  \n\\[\nn=2m \\qquad (m\\ge 1),\n\\]\nand for an ordered $n$–tuple $A=(a_{1},a_{2},\\dots ,a_{n})$ of positive\nintegers write  \n\\[\n\\sigma(A)=\\frac1{a_{1}}+\\frac1{a_{2}}+\\dots+\\frac1{a_{n}}.\n\\]\n\nDefine  \n\\[\n\\Sigma _{n}=\\bigl\\{A\\in(\\mathbf Z_{>0})^{\\,n}\\;:\\;\\sigma(A)=1\\bigr\\},\n\\qquad\nN_{n}=|\\Sigma _{n}|.\n\\]\n\n1.\\;(Finiteness)  \nFor $A\\in\\Sigma _{n}$ let  \n\\[\n(b_{1},b_{2},\\dots ,b_{n})\n\\qquad(b_{1}\\le b_{2}\\le\\dots\\le b_{n})\n\\]\nbe the non–decreasing rearrangement of its coordinates and put  \n\\[\nP_{i}:=\\prod_{j=1}^{i}b_{j}\\qquad(1\\le i\\le n).\n\\]\nProve  \n\\[\n\\boxed{\\;\nb_{1}\\le n,\\qquad   \nb_{i}\\le (\\,n-i+1\\,)\\,P_{i-1}\\bigl(P_{i-1}-1\\bigr)\\quad(2\\le i\\le n)\n\\;}\n\\tag{$\\heartsuit$}\n\\]\nand deduce that every set $\\Sigma _{n}$ is finite.\n\n2.\\;(Parity modulo $2$)  \nWrite the binary expansion of $n$ as  \n\\[\nn=\\sum_{j=1}^{k}2^{e_{j}},\\qquad \n0\\le e_{1}<e_{2}<\\dots<e_{k},\\qquad \nk=s_{2}(n)\\;(\\text{Hamming weight}),\n\\]\nand work \\emph{modulo $2$} throughout.\n\n(A) (Pure power of two)  \nShow that if $n=2^{e}$ then $N_{n}\\equiv1\\pmod 2$.\n\n(B) (Sum of two powers of two)  \nAssume $n=2^{a}+2^{b}\\;(a<b)$.  Prove that  \n\\[\nN_{n}\\equiv\n\\begin{cases}\n1 & \\text{if }a+b\\text{ is even},\\\\[2pt]\n0 & \\text{if }a+b\\text{ is odd}.\n\\end{cases}\n\\tag{$\\ast$}\n\\]\n\nIn particular  \n\\[\nN_{2}\\equiv N_{4}\\equiv N_{8}\\equiv N_{10}\\equiv N_{20}\\equiv 1,\n\\qquad \nN_{6}\\equiv N_{12}\\equiv 0\\pmod 2 .\n\\]\n\nGive complete proofs, and write every congruence explicitly modulo $2$.",
      "solution": "Throughout the symbol ``$\\equiv$’’ denotes equality modulo $2$.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n0.\\;Proof of finiteness and of $(\\heartsuit)$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nLet $A=(a_{1},\\dots ,a_{n})\\in\\Sigma _{n}$ and write its coordinates\nin non–decreasing order\n\\[\nb_{1}\\le b_{2}\\le\\dots\\le b_{n},\\qquad\nP_{i}:=\\prod_{j=1}^{i}b_{j}\\ (1\\le i\\le n).\n\\]\n\n(i)  The bound for $b_{1}$.  \nBecause $\\sigma(A)=1$ we have\n\\[\n1=\\sum_{j=1}^{n}\\frac1{b_{j}}\\le\nn\\cdot\\frac1{b_{1}},\n\\quad\\Longrightarrow\\quad\nb_{1}\\le n.\n\\]\n\n(ii)  The recursive bound for $b_{i}\\ (2\\le i\\le n)$.  \nPut  \n\\[\nS_{i-1}:=\\sum_{j=1}^{i-1}\\frac1{b_{j}},\\qquad\nR_{i}:=1-S_{i-1}>0 .\n\\]\nSince there remain exactly $n-i+1$ terms, each at least $b_{i}$,\n\\[\nR_{i}=\\sum_{j=i}^{n}\\frac1{b_{j}}\n     \\le\\frac{n-i+1}{b_{i}}\n\\quad\\Longrightarrow\\quad\nb_{i}\\le\\frac{n-i+1}{R_{i}}.\n\\tag{0.1}\n\\]\n\nIn order to bound $R_{i}$ from \\emph{below}, observe that all\ndenominators $b_{1},\\dots ,b_{i-1}$ divide  \n\\[\nP_{i-1}=b_{1}\\times\\dots\\times b_{i-1},\n\\]\nhence $S_{i-1}=Q/P_{i-1}$ for some integer $Q$.\nBecause $S_{i-1}<1$ we have $P_{i-1}-Q\\ge 1$ and therefore\n\\[\nR_{i}=1-S_{i-1}\n     =\\frac{P_{i-1}-Q}{P_{i-1}}\n     \\ge\\frac1{P_{i-1}}.\n\\]\nSubstituting this into (0.1) yields a \\emph{strong} estimate\n\\[\nb_{i}\\le(n-i+1)\\,P_{i-1}.\n\\]\nNow $P_{i-1}\\ge 2\\;(i\\ge 2)$, so\n\\[\n(n-i+1)\\,P_{i-1}\\le(n-i+1)\\,P_{i-1}\\bigl(P_{i-1}-1\\bigr),\n\\]\nwhence the weaker but sufficient inequality stated in $(\\heartsuit)$:\n\\[\nb_{i}\\le (n-i+1)\\,P_{i-1}\\bigl(P_{i-1}-1\\bigr).\n\\]\n\nBecause each $b_{i}$ is bounded \\emph{a priori}, only finitely\nmany $n$–tuples satisfy $\\sigma(A)=1$; thus every $\\Sigma _{n}$\nis finite.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n1.\\;A family of local–swap involutions $\\mathcal J_{r}$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nFix an even integer $r$ with $2\\le r\\le n$ (later we choose\n$r=2^{j}$).\nPartition $\\{1,2,\\dots ,n\\}$ into consecutive blocks\n\\[\n[1,r],\\,[r+1,2r],\\,[2r+1,3r],\\dots\n\\]\nleaving a (possibly empty) final block of length $<r$.\n\n\\emph{Well definedness of the first non–constant block.}\nScanning the blocks from left to right stops either\n(a) at the first block of length $r$ on which the $a_{j}$ are not\nall equal, or  \n(b) after the final (short) block, in which case\n``non–constant’’ never occurs.\nHence the procedure below is always well defined.\n\n\\medskip\nDefinition of $\\mathcal J_{r}$.  \nGiven $A=(a_{1},\\dots ,a_{n})$:\n\n(1)  Locate the first $r$–block $B=[s+1,\\dots ,s+r]$ on which the\n     entries are not all equal.\n     If no such block exists set $\\Theta_{r}(A)=\\infty$.\n\n(2)  Inside $B$ choose the left–most index\n     $t$ with $a_{t}\\ne a_{t+1}$.\n\n(3)  Put $\\mathcal J_{r}(A)=(a_{1},\\dots ,a_{t+1},a_{t},\\dots ,a_{n})$,\n     i.e.\\ swap $a_{t}$ and $a_{t+1}$.\n     If $\\Theta_{r}(A)=\\infty$ keep $\\mathcal J_{r}(A)=A$.\n\n\\medskip\nProperties.\n\n•  $\\mathcal J_{r}$ is an involution.  \n•  The value of $\\sigma$ is unchanged, so $\\mathcal J_{r}$\n   restricts to $\\Sigma _{n}$.  \n•  $\\mathcal J_{r}(A)=A$ iff $A$ is constant on every complete\n   $r$–block.\n\nWrite  \n\\[\n\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{r})=\n\\bigl\\{A\\in(\\mathbf Z_{>0})^{\\,n}\\;:\\;\nA\\text{ is constant on every complete }r\\text{–block}\\bigr\\}.\n\\]\nBecause the complement of $\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{r})$ breaks into\n$2$–cycles,\n\\[\n|\\Sigma _{n}|\\equiv\n|\\Sigma _{n}\\cap\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{r})|\\pmod 2.\n\\tag{1.1}\n\\]\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n2.\\;When $n$ is a power of two\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nAssume $n=2^{e}$ $(e\\ge 1)$ and take $r=n$.\nThere is only one complete $n$–block, so any\n$A\\in\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{n})$ is of the form $A=(x,x,\\dots ,x)$.\nThe equation $\\sigma(A)=n/x=1$ forces $x=n$, giving exactly one\nelement.  Hence\n\\[\nN_{n}=|\\Sigma _{n}|\\equiv\n|\\Sigma _{n}\\cap\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{n})|=1\\pmod 2,\n\\]\nwhich proves part\\;(A).\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n3.\\;When $n=2^{a}+2^{b}$ with $a<b$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nWrite $n=2^{a}+2^{b}$.\n\n\\emph{Step\\,1.}  Set  \n\\[\nT_{0}:=\\Sigma _{n},\\qquad\nT_{1}:=T_{0}\\cap\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{2^{b}}).\n\\]\nBy (1.1) with $r=2^{b}$,\n\\[\nN_{n}=|T_{0}|\\equiv|T_{1}|\\pmod 2.\n\\tag{3.1}\n\\]\n\nBecause $2^{b}>2^{a}$ there is exactly one full $2^{b}$–block,\nnamely $\\{1,\\dots ,2^{b}\\}$.  Thus each\n$A\\in T_{1}$ has the shape  \n\\[\nA=(\\underbrace{x,\\dots ,x}_{2^{b}},a_{2^{b}+1},\\dots ,a_{n}).\n\\tag{3.2}\n\\]\n\n\\emph{Step\\,2.}  Show that $\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}$ preserves $T_{1}$.\nIndeed, any swap performed by $\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}$ happens inside a\nfull $2^{a}$–block.\nThe prefix $\\{1,\\dots ,2^{b}\\}$ is a union of such blocks,\nhence equal entries there prevent $\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}$ from acting\nuntil it reaches the tail $\\{2^{b}+1,\\dots ,n\\}$.\nConsequently\n\\[\n\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}\\bigl(T_{1}\\bigr)=T_{1}.\n\\tag{3.3}\n\\]\nDefine  \n\\[\nT_{2}:=T_{1}\\cap\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}).\n\\]\nApplying (1.1) \\emph{inside} $T_{1}$ gives  \n\\[\n|T_{1}|\\equiv|T_{2}|\\pmod 2.\n\\tag{3.4}\n\\]\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n3.1.\\;Shape of the fixed points in $T_{2}$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nBelonging to $\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{2^{a}})$ forces the tail\n$\\{2^{b}+1,\\dots ,n\\}$, of length $2^{a}$, to be constant as well.\nHence every $A\\in T_{2}$ has the form  \n\\[\nA=\\bigl(\\underbrace{x,\\dots ,x}_{2^{b}},\n        \\underbrace{y,\\dots ,y}_{2^{a}}\\bigr),\n\\qquad x,y\\in\\mathbf Z_{>0}.\n\\tag{3.5}\n\\]\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n3.2.\\;Counting $T_{2}$ modulo $2$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nFor $A$ as in (3.5) the condition $\\sigma(A)=1$ becomes\n\\[\n\\frac{2^{b}}{x}+\\frac{2^{a}}{y}=1\n\\Longleftrightarrow\n(x-2^{b})(y-2^{a})=2^{a+b}.\n\\tag{3.6}\n\\]\nBecause the right–hand side is a power of two, both factors on the\nleft are themselves powers of two:\n\\[\nx-2^{b}=2^{k},\\qquad\ny-2^{a}=2^{a+b-k},\n\\qquad 0\\le k\\le a+b.\n\\]\nThus $|T_{2}|=a+b+1$.\n\nPairing $k$ with $k^{\\prime}=a+b-k$, the $2$–element orbits cancel\nmodulo $2$; a fixed point occurs exactly when $k=k^{\\prime}$, i.e.\\\nwhen $a+b$ is even.\nTherefore  \n\\[\n|T_{2}|\\equiv\n\\begin{cases}\n1 & \\text{if }a+b\\text{ is even},\\\\[4pt]\n0 & \\text{if }a+b\\text{ is odd}.\n\\end{cases}\n\\tag{3.7}\n\\]\n\nCombining (3.7), (3.4) and (3.1) yields precisely the parity\nstatement $(\\ast)$, completing the proof of\\;(B).\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n4.\\;Numerical verification\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\nn=2&:\\;N_{2}\\equiv1 & (\\text{pure power});\\\\\nn=4&:\\;N_{4}\\equiv1 & (\\text{pure power});\\\\\nn=6&:\\;6=2+4,\\;a+b=3\\text{ odd }&\\Longrightarrow N_{6}\\equiv0;\\\\\nn=8&:\\;N_{8}\\equiv1 & (\\text{pure power});\\\\\nn=10&:\\;10=2+8,\\;a+b=4\\text{ even }&\\Longrightarrow N_{10}\\equiv1;\\\\\nn=12&:\\;12=4+8,\\;a+b=5\\text{ odd }&\\Longrightarrow N_{12}\\equiv0;\\\\\nn=20&:\\;20=4+16,\\;a+b=6\\text{ even }&\\Longrightarrow N_{20}\\equiv1.\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\n\\hfill$\\square$",
      "metadata": {
        "replaced_from": "harder_variant",
        "replacement_date": "2025-07-14T19:09:31.752883",
        "was_fixed": false,
        "difficulty_analysis": "1. Scope:  The original asks only for the parity of one specific case\n($n=10$ or $n=20$); the enhanced variant demands a complete\nclassification \\emph{for every even~$n$}.  One must therefore discover a\ngeneral structure rather than perform a single computation.\n\n2. Depth of argument:  \n   • A single round of “discard-by-pairing’’ suffices in the original,\n   whereas here the pairing argument must be applied recursively\n   $\\log_2 n$ times and carefully tracked.  \n   • The eventual reduction to\n   $(x-2^{m-1})(y-2)=2^{m}$ requires understanding how the coefficients\n   evolve through the iterations; this is considerably subtler than the\n   constant $16$ that appears for $n=10$.\n\n3. Number-theoretic component:  \n   The solver must recognise that the final counting problem is governed\n   by the divisor function of a high power of 2 and relate its \\emph{parity}\n   to the exponent, something absent from the original exercise.\n\n4. Conceptual generalisation:  \n   The solution reveals the precise arithmetic reason—namely the parity of\n   the exponent in $2^{m}$—behind all particular cases.  Extracting and\n   proving this hidden pattern requires more insight than merely handling\n   a specific numerical constant.\n\nConsequently the problem is markedly harder, employs a multi-layered\ninductive argument, and blends combinatorial, Diophantine, and\ndivisor-parity ideas that go well beyond the original kernel variant."
      }
    },
    "original_kernel_variant": {
      "question": "Let  \n\\[\nn=2m \\qquad (m\\ge 1),\n\\]\nand for an ordered $n$–tuple $A=(a_{1},a_{2},\\dots ,a_{n})$ of positive\nintegers write  \n\\[\n\\sigma(A)=\\frac1{a_{1}}+\\frac1{a_{2}}+\\dots+\\frac1{a_{n}}.\n\\]\n\nDefine  \n\\[\n\\Sigma _{n}=\\bigl\\{A\\in(\\mathbf Z_{>0})^{\\,n}\\;:\\;\\sigma(A)=1\\bigr\\},\n\\qquad\nN_{n}=|\\Sigma _{n}|.\n\\]\n\n1.\\;(Finiteness)  \nFor $A\\in\\Sigma _{n}$ let  \n\\[\n(b_{1},b_{2},\\dots ,b_{n})\n\\qquad(b_{1}\\le b_{2}\\le\\dots\\le b_{n})\n\\]\nbe the non–decreasing rearrangement of its coordinates and put  \n\\[\nP_{i}:=\\prod_{j=1}^{i}b_{j}\\qquad(1\\le i\\le n).\n\\]\nProve  \n\\[\n\\boxed{\\;\nb_{1}\\le n,\\qquad   \nb_{i}\\le (\\,n-i+1\\,)\\,P_{i-1}\\bigl(P_{i-1}-1\\bigr)\\quad(2\\le i\\le n)\n\\;}\n\\tag{$\\heartsuit$}\n\\]\nand deduce that every set $\\Sigma _{n}$ is finite.\n\n2.\\;(Parity modulo $2$)  \nWrite the binary expansion of $n$ as  \n\\[\nn=\\sum_{j=1}^{k}2^{e_{j}},\\qquad \n0\\le e_{1}<e_{2}<\\dots<e_{k},\\qquad \nk=s_{2}(n)\\;(\\text{Hamming weight}),\n\\]\nand work \\emph{modulo $2$} throughout.\n\n(A) (Pure power of two)  \nShow that if $n=2^{e}$ then $N_{n}\\equiv1\\pmod 2$.\n\n(B) (Sum of two powers of two)  \nAssume $n=2^{a}+2^{b}\\;(a<b)$.  Prove that  \n\\[\nN_{n}\\equiv\n\\begin{cases}\n1 & \\text{if }a+b\\text{ is even},\\\\[2pt]\n0 & \\text{if }a+b\\text{ is odd}.\n\\end{cases}\n\\tag{$\\ast$}\n\\]\n\nIn particular  \n\\[\nN_{2}\\equiv N_{4}\\equiv N_{8}\\equiv N_{10}\\equiv N_{20}\\equiv 1,\n\\qquad \nN_{6}\\equiv N_{12}\\equiv 0\\pmod 2 .\n\\]\n\nGive complete proofs, and write every congruence explicitly modulo $2$.",
      "solution": "Throughout the symbol ``$\\equiv$’’ denotes equality modulo $2$.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n0.\\;Proof of finiteness and of $(\\heartsuit)$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nLet $A=(a_{1},\\dots ,a_{n})\\in\\Sigma _{n}$ and write its coordinates\nin non–decreasing order\n\\[\nb_{1}\\le b_{2}\\le\\dots\\le b_{n},\\qquad\nP_{i}:=\\prod_{j=1}^{i}b_{j}\\ (1\\le i\\le n).\n\\]\n\n(i)  The bound for $b_{1}$.  \nBecause $\\sigma(A)=1$ we have\n\\[\n1=\\sum_{j=1}^{n}\\frac1{b_{j}}\\le\nn\\cdot\\frac1{b_{1}},\n\\quad\\Longrightarrow\\quad\nb_{1}\\le n.\n\\]\n\n(ii)  The recursive bound for $b_{i}\\ (2\\le i\\le n)$.  \nPut  \n\\[\nS_{i-1}:=\\sum_{j=1}^{i-1}\\frac1{b_{j}},\\qquad\nR_{i}:=1-S_{i-1}>0 .\n\\]\nSince there remain exactly $n-i+1$ terms, each at least $b_{i}$,\n\\[\nR_{i}=\\sum_{j=i}^{n}\\frac1{b_{j}}\n     \\le\\frac{n-i+1}{b_{i}}\n\\quad\\Longrightarrow\\quad\nb_{i}\\le\\frac{n-i+1}{R_{i}}.\n\\tag{0.1}\n\\]\n\nIn order to bound $R_{i}$ from \\emph{below}, observe that all\ndenominators $b_{1},\\dots ,b_{i-1}$ divide  \n\\[\nP_{i-1}=b_{1}\\times\\dots\\times b_{i-1},\n\\]\nhence $S_{i-1}=Q/P_{i-1}$ for some integer $Q$.\nBecause $S_{i-1}<1$ we have $P_{i-1}-Q\\ge 1$ and therefore\n\\[\nR_{i}=1-S_{i-1}\n     =\\frac{P_{i-1}-Q}{P_{i-1}}\n     \\ge\\frac1{P_{i-1}}.\n\\]\nSubstituting this into (0.1) yields a \\emph{strong} estimate\n\\[\nb_{i}\\le(n-i+1)\\,P_{i-1}.\n\\]\nNow $P_{i-1}\\ge 2\\;(i\\ge 2)$, so\n\\[\n(n-i+1)\\,P_{i-1}\\le(n-i+1)\\,P_{i-1}\\bigl(P_{i-1}-1\\bigr),\n\\]\nwhence the weaker but sufficient inequality stated in $(\\heartsuit)$:\n\\[\nb_{i}\\le (n-i+1)\\,P_{i-1}\\bigl(P_{i-1}-1\\bigr).\n\\]\n\nBecause each $b_{i}$ is bounded \\emph{a priori}, only finitely\nmany $n$–tuples satisfy $\\sigma(A)=1$; thus every $\\Sigma _{n}$\nis finite.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n1.\\;A family of local–swap involutions $\\mathcal J_{r}$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nFix an even integer $r$ with $2\\le r\\le n$ (later we choose\n$r=2^{j}$).\nPartition $\\{1,2,\\dots ,n\\}$ into consecutive blocks\n\\[\n[1,r],\\,[r+1,2r],\\,[2r+1,3r],\\dots\n\\]\nleaving a (possibly empty) final block of length $<r$.\n\n\\emph{Well definedness of the first non–constant block.}\nScanning the blocks from left to right stops either\n(a) at the first block of length $r$ on which the $a_{j}$ are not\nall equal, or  \n(b) after the final (short) block, in which case\n``non–constant’’ never occurs.\nHence the procedure below is always well defined.\n\n\\medskip\nDefinition of $\\mathcal J_{r}$.  \nGiven $A=(a_{1},\\dots ,a_{n})$:\n\n(1)  Locate the first $r$–block $B=[s+1,\\dots ,s+r]$ on which the\n     entries are not all equal.\n     If no such block exists set $\\Theta_{r}(A)=\\infty$.\n\n(2)  Inside $B$ choose the left–most index\n     $t$ with $a_{t}\\ne a_{t+1}$.\n\n(3)  Put $\\mathcal J_{r}(A)=(a_{1},\\dots ,a_{t+1},a_{t},\\dots ,a_{n})$,\n     i.e.\\ swap $a_{t}$ and $a_{t+1}$.\n     If $\\Theta_{r}(A)=\\infty$ keep $\\mathcal J_{r}(A)=A$.\n\n\\medskip\nProperties.\n\n•  $\\mathcal J_{r}$ is an involution.  \n•  The value of $\\sigma$ is unchanged, so $\\mathcal J_{r}$\n   restricts to $\\Sigma _{n}$.  \n•  $\\mathcal J_{r}(A)=A$ iff $A$ is constant on every complete\n   $r$–block.\n\nWrite  \n\\[\n\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{r})=\n\\bigl\\{A\\in(\\mathbf Z_{>0})^{\\,n}\\;:\\;\nA\\text{ is constant on every complete }r\\text{–block}\\bigr\\}.\n\\]\nBecause the complement of $\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{r})$ breaks into\n$2$–cycles,\n\\[\n|\\Sigma _{n}|\\equiv\n|\\Sigma _{n}\\cap\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{r})|\\pmod 2.\n\\tag{1.1}\n\\]\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n2.\\;When $n$ is a power of two\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nAssume $n=2^{e}$ $(e\\ge 1)$ and take $r=n$.\nThere is only one complete $n$–block, so any\n$A\\in\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{n})$ is of the form $A=(x,x,\\dots ,x)$.\nThe equation $\\sigma(A)=n/x=1$ forces $x=n$, giving exactly one\nelement.  Hence\n\\[\nN_{n}=|\\Sigma _{n}|\\equiv\n|\\Sigma _{n}\\cap\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{n})|=1\\pmod 2,\n\\]\nwhich proves part\\;(A).\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n3.\\;When $n=2^{a}+2^{b}$ with $a<b$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nWrite $n=2^{a}+2^{b}$.\n\n\\emph{Step\\,1.}  Set  \n\\[\nT_{0}:=\\Sigma _{n},\\qquad\nT_{1}:=T_{0}\\cap\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{2^{b}}).\n\\]\nBy (1.1) with $r=2^{b}$,\n\\[\nN_{n}=|T_{0}|\\equiv|T_{1}|\\pmod 2.\n\\tag{3.1}\n\\]\n\nBecause $2^{b}>2^{a}$ there is exactly one full $2^{b}$–block,\nnamely $\\{1,\\dots ,2^{b}\\}$.  Thus each\n$A\\in T_{1}$ has the shape  \n\\[\nA=(\\underbrace{x,\\dots ,x}_{2^{b}},a_{2^{b}+1},\\dots ,a_{n}).\n\\tag{3.2}\n\\]\n\n\\emph{Step\\,2.}  Show that $\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}$ preserves $T_{1}$.\nIndeed, any swap performed by $\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}$ happens inside a\nfull $2^{a}$–block.\nThe prefix $\\{1,\\dots ,2^{b}\\}$ is a union of such blocks,\nhence equal entries there prevent $\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}$ from acting\nuntil it reaches the tail $\\{2^{b}+1,\\dots ,n\\}$.\nConsequently\n\\[\n\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}\\bigl(T_{1}\\bigr)=T_{1}.\n\\tag{3.3}\n\\]\nDefine  \n\\[\nT_{2}:=T_{1}\\cap\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{2^{a}}).\n\\]\nApplying (1.1) \\emph{inside} $T_{1}$ gives  \n\\[\n|T_{1}|\\equiv|T_{2}|\\pmod 2.\n\\tag{3.4}\n\\]\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n3.1.\\;Shape of the fixed points in $T_{2}$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nBelonging to $\\Fix(\\mathcal J_{2^{a}})$ forces the tail\n$\\{2^{b}+1,\\dots ,n\\}$, of length $2^{a}$, to be constant as well.\nHence every $A\\in T_{2}$ has the form  \n\\[\nA=\\bigl(\\underbrace{x,\\dots ,x}_{2^{b}},\n        \\underbrace{y,\\dots ,y}_{2^{a}}\\bigr),\n\\qquad x,y\\in\\mathbf Z_{>0}.\n\\tag{3.5}\n\\]\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n3.2.\\;Counting $T_{2}$ modulo $2$\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\nFor $A$ as in (3.5) the condition $\\sigma(A)=1$ becomes\n\\[\n\\frac{2^{b}}{x}+\\frac{2^{a}}{y}=1\n\\Longleftrightarrow\n(x-2^{b})(y-2^{a})=2^{a+b}.\n\\tag{3.6}\n\\]\nBecause the right–hand side is a power of two, both factors on the\nleft are themselves powers of two:\n\\[\nx-2^{b}=2^{k},\\qquad\ny-2^{a}=2^{a+b-k},\n\\qquad 0\\le k\\le a+b.\n\\]\nThus $|T_{2}|=a+b+1$.\n\nPairing $k$ with $k^{\\prime}=a+b-k$, the $2$–element orbits cancel\nmodulo $2$; a fixed point occurs exactly when $k=k^{\\prime}$, i.e.\\\nwhen $a+b$ is even.\nTherefore  \n\\[\n|T_{2}|\\equiv\n\\begin{cases}\n1 & \\text{if }a+b\\text{ is even},\\\\[4pt]\n0 & \\text{if }a+b\\text{ is odd}.\n\\end{cases}\n\\tag{3.7}\n\\]\n\nCombining (3.7), (3.4) and (3.1) yields precisely the parity\nstatement $(\\ast)$, completing the proof of\\;(B).\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n4.\\;Numerical verification\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\nn=2&:\\;N_{2}\\equiv1 & (\\text{pure power});\\\\\nn=4&:\\;N_{4}\\equiv1 & (\\text{pure power});\\\\\nn=6&:\\;6=2+4,\\;a+b=3\\text{ odd }&\\Longrightarrow N_{6}\\equiv0;\\\\\nn=8&:\\;N_{8}\\equiv1 & (\\text{pure power});\\\\\nn=10&:\\;10=2+8,\\;a+b=4\\text{ even }&\\Longrightarrow N_{10}\\equiv1;\\\\\nn=12&:\\;12=4+8,\\;a+b=5\\text{ odd }&\\Longrightarrow N_{12}\\equiv0;\\\\\nn=20&:\\;20=4+16,\\;a+b=6\\text{ even }&\\Longrightarrow N_{20}\\equiv1.\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\n\\hfill$\\square$",
      "metadata": {
        "replaced_from": "harder_variant",
        "replacement_date": "2025-07-14T01:37:45.580116",
        "was_fixed": false,
        "difficulty_analysis": "1. Scope:  The original asks only for the parity of one specific case\n($n=10$ or $n=20$); the enhanced variant demands a complete\nclassification \\emph{for every even~$n$}.  One must therefore discover a\ngeneral structure rather than perform a single computation.\n\n2. Depth of argument:  \n   • A single round of “discard-by-pairing’’ suffices in the original,\n   whereas here the pairing argument must be applied recursively\n   $\\log_2 n$ times and carefully tracked.  \n   • The eventual reduction to\n   $(x-2^{m-1})(y-2)=2^{m}$ requires understanding how the coefficients\n   evolve through the iterations; this is considerably subtler than the\n   constant $16$ that appears for $n=10$.\n\n3. Number-theoretic component:  \n   The solver must recognise that the final counting problem is governed\n   by the divisor function of a high power of 2 and relate its \\emph{parity}\n   to the exponent, something absent from the original exercise.\n\n4. Conceptual generalisation:  \n   The solution reveals the precise arithmetic reason—namely the parity of\n   the exponent in $2^{m}$—behind all particular cases.  Extracting and\n   proving this hidden pattern requires more insight than merely handling\n   a specific numerical constant.\n\nConsequently the problem is markedly harder, employs a multi-layered\ninductive argument, and blends combinatorial, Diophantine, and\ndivisor-parity ideas that go well beyond the original kernel variant."
      }
    }
  },
  "checked": true,
  "problem_type": "proof",
  "iteratively_fixed": true
}