208 United States of America

Since |x − y| ≤ z by the triangle inequality, we conclude |AB − CD| ≥

|AC − BD|, and similarly |AD − BC| ≥ |AC − BD|. These two
inequalities imply the desired result.

Second Solution: Let 2α, 2β, 2γ, 2δ be the measures of the arcs
subtended by AB, BC, CD, DA, respectively, and take the radius of
the circumcircle of ABCD to be 1. Assume without loss of generality
that β ≤ δ. Then α + β + γ + δ = π, and (by the Extended Law of
Sines)
  
 α − γ   α + γ 
|AB − CD| = 2 |sin α − sin γ| = 4 sin cos
2  2 
and

|AC − BD| = 2 |sin(α + β) − sin(β + γ)|

   
 α − γ   α+γ 
= 4 sin
 cos + β  .
2   2
Since 0 ≤ 12 (α + γ) ≤ 21 (α + γ) + β ≤ π2 (by the assumption
β ≤ δ) and the cosine function is nonnegative and decreasing on
[0, π2 ], we conclude that |AB − CD| ≥ |AC − BD|, and similarly
|AD − BC| ≥ |AC − BD|.

Problem 3 Let p > 2 be a prime and let a, b, c, d be integers not

divisible by p, such that
       
ra rb rc rd
+ + + =2
p p p p
for any integer r not divisible by p. Prove that at least two of the
numbers a + b, a + c, a + d, b + c, b + d, c + d are divisible by p. Here,
for real numbers x, {x} = x − ⌊x⌋ denotes the fractional part of x.

Solution: For convenience, we write [x] for the unique integer in

{0, . . . , p − 1} congruent to x modulo p. In this notation, the given
condition can be written

[ra] + [rb] + [rc] + [rd] = 2p for all r not divisible by p. (1)

The conditions of the problem are preserved by replacing a, b, c, d

with ma, mb, mc, md for any integer m relatively prime to p. If we
choose m so that ma ≡ 1 (mod p) and then replace a, b, c, d with
[ma], [mb], [mc], [md], respectively, we end up in the case a = 1 and
1999 National Contests: Problems and Solutions 209

b, c, d ∈ {1, . . . , p − 1}. Applying (1) with r = 1, we see moreover that

a + b + c + d = 2p.
Now observe that

[x] [rx] < p − [x]
[(r + 1)x] − [rx] =
−p + [x] [rx] ≥ p − [x].
Comparing (1) applied to two consecutive values of r and using the
observation, we see that for each r = 1, . . . , p−2, two of the quantities

p − a − [ra], p − b − [rb], p − c − [rc], p − d − [rd]

are positive and two are negative. We say that a pair (r, x) is positive
if [rx] < p − [x] and negative otherwise; then for each r < p − 1, (r, 1)
is positive, so exactly one of (r, b), (r, c), (r, d) is also positive.
Lemma. If r1 , r2 , x ∈ {1, . . . , p − 1} have the property that (r1 , x)
and (r2 , x) are negative but (r, x) is positive for all r1 < r < r2 , then
jpk jpk
r2 − r 1 = or r2 − r1 = + 1.
x x
Proof: Note that (r′ , x) is negative if and only if {r′ x + 1, r′ x +
′
2, . . . , (r + 1)x} contains a multiple of p. In particular, exactly one
multiple of p lies in {r1 x, r1 x + 1, . . . , r2 x}. Since [r1 x] and [r2 x] are
distinct elements of {p − [x], . . . , p − 1}, we have

p − x + 1 < r2 x − r1 x < p + x − 1,

from which the lemma follows.

[rx] 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0
is (r, x) + or –? − + + + −
r 3 4 5 6 7
(The above diagram illustrates the meanings of positive and negative in
the case x = 3 and p = 11. Note that the difference between 7 and 3 here
is ⌊ xp ⌋ + 1. The next r such that (r, x) is negative is r = 10; 10 − 7 = ⌊ xp ⌋.)

Recall that exactly one of (1, b), (1, c), (1, d) is positive; we may as
well assume (1, b) is positive, which is to say b < p2 and c, d > p2 . Put
s1 = ⌊ pb ⌋, so that s1 is the smallest positive integer such that (s1 , b)
is negative. Then exactly one of (s1 , c) and (s1 , d) is positive, say the
former. Since s1 is also the smallest positive integer such that (s1 , c)
is positive, or equivalently such that (s1 , p − c) is negative, we have
210 United States of America

p
s1 = ⌊ p−c ⌋. The lemma states that consecutive values of r for which
(r, b) is negative differ by either s1 or s1 + 1. It also states (when
applied with x = p − c) that consecutive values of r for which (r, c) is
positive differ by either s1 or s1 + 1. From these observations we will
show that (r, d) is always negative.
?
r 1 s1 s1 + 1 s′ s′ + 1 s s+1=t
(r, b) + − + − + − −?
(r, c) − ... + − ... + − ... − +?
(r, d) − − − − − + −?

Indeed, if this were not the case, there would exist a smallest
positive integer s > s1 such that (s, d) is positive; then (s, b) and
(s, c) are both negative. If s′ is the last integer before s such that
(s′ , b) is negative (possibly equal to s1 ), then (s′ , d) is negative as
well (by the minimal definition of s). Also,

s − s′ = s1 or s − s′ = s1 + 1.

Likewise, if t were the next integer after s′ such that (t, c) were
positive, then
t − s′ = s1 or t − s′ = s1 + 1.

From these we deduce that |t − s| ≤ 1. However, we can’t have t 6= s

because then both (s, b) and (t, b) would be negative—and any two
values of r for which (r, b) is negative differ by at least s1 ≥ 2, a
contradiction. (The above diagram shows the hypothetical case when
t = s+1.) But nor can we have t = s because we already assumed that
(s, c) is negative. Therefore we can’t have |t − s| ≤ 1, contradicting
our findings and thus proving that (r, d) is indeed always negative.
Now if d 6= p − 1, then the unique s ∈ {1, . . . , p − 1} such that
[ds] = 1 is not equal to p − 1; and (s, d) is positive, a contradiction.
Thus d = p − 1 and a + d and b + c are divisible by p, as desired.

Problem 4 Let a1 , a2 , . . . , an (n > 3) be real numbers such that

a1 + a2 + · · · + an ≥ n and a21 + a22 + · · · + a2n ≥ n2 .

Prove that max(a1 , a2 , . . . , an ) ≥ 2.

b2i . Then
P P
Solution: Let bi = 2 − ai , and let S = bi and T =