Let us see what this theorem tells us. From AG inequality, we know that if every number is equal, a=√n and every ai=1√n. Then by a choice of the best Boolean approximation ∑ni=1ϵiai, one can get a number very close to the 0 with an error 1√n --- that is the error of one term.
This makes us think of the concentration inequality in the probability --- like Markov inequality, Hoeffding inequality etc. That is the case when I did Alibaba competition, but I have to say this is a very dangerous trap in this question. In fact, even after the competition, I continue trying this idea many times, but it seems no easy way to figure it out. In fact, let us recall what concentration inequality teaches us: yes, if we put ϵi centered variable, the measure should be concentrated and P[|n∑i=1ϵiai|≥1a]≤2exp(−2/a2).
Good, you will see an explosion and this does not give useful information. Indeed, the concentration inequality always told us the measure should be in the σ region, but it tells nothing how good the measure is concentrated in the σ region. In this question, a random choice is clearly not good because the σ for ∑ni=1ϵiai is 1.
One has to keep in mind that the probabilistic method is good and cool, but not the only way and sometimes not the best way.
A simple solution is just by induction and one step exploration, or someone calls it the greedy method. This problem is equivalent to prove (minϵi∈{±}|n∑i=1ϵiai|)(n∑i=1ai)≤n∑i=1(ai)2. We do at first the optimization for n variable and then choose the sign for the last one. We can also manipulate the choice of the last variable. For example, one can let an+1 always be the smallest one, thus its influence is always smaller than 1a. Once we get the correct direction, the theorem is not difficult.
没有评论:
发表评论