Smoothing

Ricky
September 2019

§1 Introduction
In most inequality problems we are asked to find the minimum (or maximum) of a
function f (a1 , a2 , · · · , an ), where a1 , a2 , · · · , an is a set of real numbers. Let b1 , b2 , · · · , bn
be the values of a1 , a2 , · · · , an respectively when f obtains its minimum, then what we
want to prove is equivalent to f (a1 , a2 , · · · , an ) ≥ f (b1 , b2 , · · · , bn ). We are therefore
motivated to find an operation P such that
• The inequality f (a1 , a2 , · · · , an ) ≥ f (P (a1 , a2 , · · · , an )) easily holds,
• P (a1 , a2 , · · · , an ) preserves any condition regarding a1 , a2 , · · · , an ,
• There exists an integer k ≥ 2 for which P (k) (a1 , a2 , · · · , an ) = (b1 , b2 , · · · , bn ).
(This doesn’t have to be true; Sometimes P (k) (a1 , a2 , · · · , an ) = (b1 , b2 , · · · , bn−2 , t1 , t2 )
also works because then we only have to prove a 2-variable inequality.)
Finding the operation P and applying it to a1 , a2 , · · · , an so that it ultimately becomes
b1 , b2 , · · · , bn is known as “smoothing”. It’s the most useful technique when dealing with
n-variable inequalities that are somewhat symmetric.

§2 Elementary Applications
Why is this? Let us discover the advantage of this method through the following simple
example:

Example 2.1
Let x, y, z ∈ [1, 2], prove that
( )
1 1 1 18 1 1 1
+ + + ≥6 + + .
x y z x+y+z x+y y+z z+x

Proof. Obviously the equality is attained when x = y = z (although ( it is not the )

only
y+z y+z
equality case). This prompts us to take the operation P (x, y, z) = x, , .
2 2
y+z
Denote f (x, y, z) = LHS − RHS and t = , then after some computation we have
2
( )
y+z 4 2 1 1
f (x, y, z) − f (x, t, t) = − +6 − −
yz y+z t+x z+x x+y
(t + x)(x + y)(x + z) − 6yzt
= (y − z)2 .
2yz(t + x)(z + x)(x + y)

1
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

In order to make the above expression always larger than zero, let x = max{x, y, z},
then (t + x)(x + y)(x + z) > 6yzt, and consequently f (x, y, z) ≥ f (x, t, t). Now we have
transformed the original 3-variable inequality into a two-variable one:
( )
1 2 18 2 1
+ + ≥6 + .
x t x + 2t x + t 2t
The proof of this, as can be sensed, is very simple.

This above example illustrated some very amazing things that can be done by smoothing.
First, by taking an operation P that only alters the value of two variables each time, the
inequality f (x, y, z) ≥ f (P (x, y, z)) is usually easy to prove because many of the terms
cancel out, and the remaining terms usually have factors like (y−z)2 thanks to symmetry.
Then, we can transform a multi-variable inequality into a two- or one-variable inequality.
Second, in the above example f (x, y, z) ≥ f (P (x, y, z)) does not necessarily hold for
any permutation of x, y, z. However, there are various ways to fix this. One, for instance,
is to create extra conditions such as x = max{x, y, z}.
Third, finding
( the operation ) P doesn’t require much thought. In many inequalities
y+z y+z √ √
the classical x, , , (x, yz, yz), (x, y + z, 0) are most useful.
2 2
Hence many people find “smoothing” to be a very useful way to prove inequalities
because it doesn’t require much thought. Proofs with AM-GM and Cauchy need ob-
servation skills, but with enough time, experience and courage, anyone can prove an
inequality through smoothing. Now let’s see some other mechanic examples.

Example 2.2 (Classical)

Let x, y, z be non-negative reals such that xy + yz + zx = 1. Prove that
1 1 1 5
+ + ≥ .
x+y y+z z+x 2

Proof. Apparently the equality occurs when two of x, y, z is 1 and the other is 0. Let
1 1 1
f (x, y, z) = + + , then in order to change one variable to 0, we consider
x(+ y y + z z)+ x
1 1 − xy
P (x, y, z) = x + y, , 0 . Using z = we have
x+y x+y
( ) [ ]
1 2 + x2 + y 2 1
f (x, y, z) − f x + y, , 0 = (x + y) −1−
x+y (1 + x2 )(1 + y 2 ) 1 + (x − y)2
2 − 2xy − (x + y)2 xy
= xy(x + y) ·
(1 + x2 )(1 + y 2 )(1 + (x + y)2 )
2z − (x + y)xy
= xy(x + y)2 · .
(1 + x2 )(1 + y 2 )(1 + (x + y)2 )
Again, to make the expression
( ) let z = max{x, y, z}, then 2z ≥ x+y ≥ (x+y)xy,
positive,
1
hence f (x, y, z) ≥ f x + y, , 0 . It remains to prove that
x+y
( )
1 1 1 5
f x + y, ,0 = x + y + + ≥ ,
x+y x+y 1 2
x+y+
x+y
which is trivial.

2
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

Example 2.3 (2011 CGMO)

Let a, b, c, d be positive real numbers such that abcd = 1. Prove that
1 1 1 1 9 25
+ + + + ≥ .
a b c d a+b+c+d 4

Proof. This example is a bit more technical. We see that the equality is obtained when
√ √
a = b = c = d = 1, so consider P (a, b, c, d) = ( ac, b, ac, d) with f (a, b, c, d) = LHS.
Then we have
√ √ 1 1 9 2 9
f (a, b, c, d) − f ( ac, b, ac, d) = + + −√ − √
a c a+b+c+d ac 2 ac + b + d
√ √ 2 √
( a − c) ((a + b + c + d)(2 ac + b + d) − 9ac)
= √
ac(a + b + c + d)(2 ac + b + d)

Thus it suffices to prove

√
(a + b + c + d)(2 ac + b + d) − 9ac ≥ 0.
√
Since b + d ≥ 2 bd = √2 ,
ac
we now only need to prove
( )
2 √
a+c+ √ · 4 ac − 9ac ≥ 0.
ac
WLOG let a ≥ b ≥ c ≥ d, then the last inequality follows from the fact that ac ≤ 1 and
√
a + c ≥ 2 ac.
Since a ≥ b ≥ c, this means
( )
√ √ √ 1
f (a, b, c, d) ≥ f ac, ac, ac, √ 3 ,
( ac)
and it remains to prove ( )
1 1 1 3 25
f , , ,t ≥ .
t t t 4
This is a one-variable inequality of degree 6 (degree 5 after factorization) which can be
killed by simple AM-GM.
( )
ad
Alternatively, one can also consider the operation P (a, b, c, d) = , b, c, c where
c
a ≥ b ≥ c ≥ d.
Exercise 2.4 (China TST). For non-negative reals x1 , x2 , · · · , xn such that x1 + x2 +
· · · + xn = 1, find the maximum of
∑
n
(x4j − x5j ).
j=1

Exercise 2.5 (2011 CMO). Let n ≥ 4 be an integer. For non-negative real numbers
a1 , a2 , · · · , an , b1 , b2 , · · · , bn such that a1 + a2 + · · · + an = b1 + b2 + · · · + bn , find the
maximum of
∑n
ai (ai + bi )
i=1
.
∑
n
bi (ai + bi )
i=1

3
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

Exercise 2.6 (Murihead’s Inequality). If a sequence a1 ≥ a2 ≥ · · · ≥ an ≥ 0 majorizes

a sequence b1 ≥ b2 ≥ · · · ≥ bn ≥ 0, i.e., a1 + a2 + · · · + an = b1 + b2 + · · · + bn and for
every integer 1 ≤ i ≤ n, a1 + a2 + · · · + ai ≥ b1 + b2 + · · · + bi , then given a set of positive
reals x1 , x2 , · · · , xn , we have
∑ ∑
x1 a1 x2 a2 · · · xn an ≥ x1 b1 x2 b2 · · · xn bn .
sym sym

§3 More Sophisticated Techniques

§3.1 Smoothing for Sums and Products
One important thing to notice in Examples 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 is that the condition a ≥ b ≥
c ≥ d destroys the symmetry of a, b, c, d, and thus the operation P can only be applied
once under this condition. In some problems that don’t require extra constraints to
be created, however, P can be applied for multiple times. Let us explore this in the
following more symmetric:

Example 3.1
For positive reals a, b, c, prove that

63 (a + b + c)(a2 + b2 + c2 ) 27 a + b + c
+ ≥ · √3
.
2 abc 2 abc

Proof. Denote f (a, b, c) = LHS − RHS, we will leave to the reader as an exercise to show
that √ √
f (a, b, c) ≥ f (a, bc, bc)
holds for all a, b, c. What we’ve done in the above examples is to directly expand and
bash after this. But now let us introduce a more advanced approach based on the
following powerful:

Theorem 3.2 (Smoothing for Sums)

Let I ⊆ (−∞, ∞) be an interval and n ≥ 2 be a positive integer. Then, for any
symmetric continuous function on I, if
( )
x1 + x2 x1 + x2
f (x1 , x2 , x3 , · · · , xn ) ≥ f , , x3 , · · · , xn ,
2 2

holds for all x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ∈ I, then

f (x1 , x2 , x3 , · · · , xn ) ≥ f (A, A, A, · · · , A)

where A is the arithmetic mean of x1 , x2 , · · · , xn .

Proof. It suffices to prove (Why?) that if

( )
x2 + · · · + xn x2 + · · · + xn x2 + · · · + xn
f (x1 , x2 , x3 , · · · , xn ) ≥ f x1 , , ,··· , ,
n−1 n−1 n−1
then
f (x1 , x2 , x3 , · · · , xn ) ≥ f (A, A, A, · · · , A).

4
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

(k) (1) (1)

Construct sequences {xi }(i = 1, 2, · · · , n) as follows: Let x1 , x2 be two arbitrary
(1)
(1) (1) (1) S − x1 (k+1) (k)
reals in I, and x2 = x3 = · · · = xn = . For any k ≥ 1, let x1 = x2 , and
n−1
(k)
(k+1) (k+1) (k+1) S − x1
x2 = x3 = · · · = xk = . It’s quite easy to see that
n−1
(k) (k) (k) (k+1) (k+1) (k+1)
f (x1 , x2 , x3 , · · · , x(k)
n ) ≥ f (x1 , x2 , x3 , · · · , xn(k+1) ).
(k)
(k+1) S − x1 (k+1) xk − A (k)
Since x1 = , we have x1 −A = − 1 . Hence limk→∞ xi = A, and
n−1 n−1
so the minimum of f is attained when x1 = x2 = · · · = xn = A.

As a direct consequence we have:

Corollary 3.3 (Smoothing for products)

Let I ⊆ (0, ∞) be an interval and n ≥ 2 be a positive integer. Then, for any
symmetric continuous function on I, if
√ √
f (x1 , x2 , x3 , · · · , xn ) ≥ f ( x1 x2 , x1 x2 , x3 , · · · , xn ) ,

holds for all x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ∈ I, then

f (x1 , x2 , x3 , · · · , xn ) ≥ f (G, G, G, · · · , G)

where G is the arithmetic mean of x1 , x2 , · · · , xn .

Back to the original problem, according to Corollary 3.3 we have

√ √ √
f (a, b, c) ≥ f ( abc, abc, abc).
3 3 3

And thus we are done.

Exercise 3.4. Prove that for any non-negative reals a1 , a2 , a3 , we have

√ √ √ √
a1 + a2 + a3 + 3
a1 a2 a3 ≥ 2( a1 a2 + a2 a3 + a3 a1 ).

§3.2 Choice of P
) (
a+b a+b √ √
Not every problem can be easily dealt with using the , or the ( ab, ab)
2 2
trick. Sometimes plugging in actual values could massively reduce the amount of com-
putation needed. This method is also extremely advantageous as it could approach the
equality case easily and save us the need to prove theorem 3.2.

Example 3.5
Let a, b, c, d be non-negative reals such that a + b + c + d = 4. Prove that
1
bcd + cda + dab + abc − abcd ≤ (ab + ac + ad + bc + bd + cd).
2

5
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

Proof. The equality case is obtained when a = b = c = d = 1, of course. Here considering

the operation that sends (a, b) to their arithmetic mean is instinctive, but let us instead
take the operation P (a, b, c, d) = (1, a + b − 1, c, d). If abcd = 0 the inequality obviously
∑1 1 ∑ 1
holds. Otherwise denote f (a, b, c, d) = − · (we want to prove f ≤ 1), then
a 2 ab
we have
( )[ ( )]
1 1 1 1 1 1
f (a, b, c, d) − f (1, a + b − 1, c, d) = (a + b) − 1− + +
ab a + b − 1 2 a+b c d
( )( )
1 1 1 32
≤ (a + b) − 1− ·
ab a + b − 1 2 4
≤0

assuming a ≤ 1 ≤ b (Here we use the fact that ab ≤ a + b − 1). Hence

f (a, b, c, d) ≤ f (1, a + b − 1, c, d) ≤ f (1, 1, a + b + c − 2, d) ≤ f (1, 1, 1, a + b + c + d − 3) = 1.

Note that algebraic manipulation and the choice of P are both crucially important.
Exercise 3.6. Let x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 be non-negative reals such that x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 = 1.
Find the range of
∑4 ∑
S= x3i − 6 xi xj xk .
i=1 1≤i<j<k≤4

§3.3 Casework
The idea of this section can be best understood through the following example:

Example 3.7
Let real numbers x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 , y1 , y2 satisfy

y2 ≥ y1 ≥ x4 ≥ x3 ≥ x2 ≥ x1 ≥ 2, x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 ≥ y1 + y2 .

Prove that x1 x2 x3 x4 ≥ y1 y2 .

Proof. Some preparations/observations:

• We only need to consider the case x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 = y1 + y2 .

• When y2 ≤ 4 this is trivial.

• This problems concerns solely the product of four numbers that have a fixed sum.
Given any two numbers with a fixed sum, their product could be easily determined.
So taking operations like P (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) = (a, x1 + x2 − a, x3 , x4 ) would be very
useful. Here a = y1 and a = 2 could both work.
Now let us start with the problem. The first idea we came up with is P (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) =
(y1 , x1 + x2 − y1 , x3 , x4 ); this is feasible only if x1 + x2 − y1 ≥ 2. If so, x1 x2 x3 x4 ≥
y1 x2 x3 (x1 + x4 − y1 ) > y1 (x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 − y1 ) = y1 y2 , and we are done.
If x1 + x2 − y1 < 2, let’s consider P (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) = (2, x2 , x3 , x4 + x1 − 2). We have

x1 x2 x3 x4 ≥ 2x2 x3 (x4 + x1 − 2) ≥ 4(x2 + x3 − 2)(x1 + x4 − 2) ≥ 4y1 (y2 − 4).

6
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

16
If 4y1 (y2 − 4) ≥ y1 y2 , i.e. y2 ≤
, then we are done again.
3
16
Now the only remaining case is 4 < y2 < , which seems easy. We use the rough
3
estimate that
(y1 + y2 )4
x1 x2 x3 x4 ≥ 8(x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 − 6) ≥ 8(y1 + y2 − 6) ≥ ≥ y1 y2 .
4

What’s remarkable about this problem is that we didn’t really use smoothing any-
where; We used merely the identity that xy < K(x + y − K) if x < K < y. As we will
see in some future examples, this identity is extremely important.

Exercise 3.8. Let a, b, c ∈ [0, 1], find the maximum of

( )
1 1 1
(a + b + c) + + .
ab + 1 bc + 1 ca + 1

§3.4 Be careful
In this section I will show you a smoothing approach that turns out to be... a fake-
solve.

Example 3.9
For a given positive integer n, find the greatest constant kn such that

(a1 + a2 + · · · + a3n )3 ≥ kn (a1 an+1 a2n+1 + a2 an+2 a2n+2 + · · · + an a2n a3n )

holds for all 0 ≤ a1 ≤ a2 ≤ · · · ≤ a3n .

Proof. Obviously kn = 27n2 is the optimal constant, with equality obtained when
a1 = a2 = · · · = a)3n . One option would be to use the operation P (ai , ai+1 ) =
(
ai + ai+1 ai + ai+1
, . But with the annoying condition that a1 ≤ a2 ≤ · · · ≤ a3n , we
2 2
can only operate on adjacent variables ai , ai+1 , which is very inconvenient. So we “clev-
erly” consider the operation P (ai , ai+1 ) = (ai−1 , ai+1 +ai −ai−1 ) or (ai+1 +ai −ai+2 , ai+2 ).
To see this visually, consider ai−1 , ai , ai+1 , ai+2 on the number axis. The numbers ai and
ai+1 are moving towards ai−1 and ai+2 , respectively, at the same speed. One of them
would first reach their destination; When this happens the two numbers stop moving.
Then the order condition still holds, and two numbers in the sequence {ai } have become
equal.
The rest should be long but easy. Right?

This is incorrect for various reasons: Firstly, the expression is not symmetric for any
two variables, so sometimes this operation doesn’t work. Secondly, at some point it may
be impossible to further operate. For instance if you get a1 = a2 = a3 < a4 = a5 = a6 <
· · · < a3n−2 = a3n−1 = a3n , there’s nothing you can do. The operation I provided in this
section is very dangerous indeed; It’s often the beginning of a false proof.

Exercise 3.10. Try to fix the above solution.

Exercise 3.11. Find an alternative solution to Example 3.6 using the following fact:
For 0 ≤ x ≤ K ≤ y ≤ L ≤ z, xyz ≤ KL(x + y + z − K − L).

7
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

§3.5 Inductive Smoothing

Something more tricky:

Example 3.12 (2012 CMO)

∑ reals x1 , x2 , · · · , xn such
Let f (x) = (x + a)(x + b) where a, b > 0. For non-negative
that x1 + x2 + · · · + xn = 1, find the maximum of F = 1≤i<j≤n min{f (xi ), f (xj )}.

Proof. You must have gotten pretty bored by now; This is just another example where
the equality case is x1 = x2 = · · · = xn . WLOG let x1 ≤ x2 ≤ · · · ≤ xn , then we can
write
∑n
F = (n − i)f (xi ).
i=1
( )
xi + xj
Hence it suffices to prove (2n − i − j)f ≥ (n − i)f (xi ) + (n − j)f (xj ). But
2
this isn’t necessarily true!
Since the most straightforward approach failed, let’s try induction. We will prove
inductively that regardless of x1 + x2 + · · · + xk , the maximum of Fk (x1 , x2 , · · · , xk ) is
obtained when x1 = x2 = · · · = xk =. When k = 2 this is obviously true. Suppose this
is true for k, WLOG let x1 ≤ x2 ≤ · · · ≤ xk+1 , then f (x1 ) ≤ f (x2 ) ≤ · · · ≤ f (xk+1 ).
Thus
Fk+1 (x1 , x2 , · · · , xk+1 ) = kf (x1 ) + Fk (x2 , x3 , · · · , xk+1 ).
According to our inductive hypothesis, this expression is maximal when x2 = x3 = · · · =
S − x1
xk+1 = . Hence
k
k(k − 1) S − x1
Fk+1 (x1 , x2 , · · · , xk+1 ) ≤ kf (x1 ) + f( ),
2 k
S
which is a quadratic expression regarding x1 . Since 0 ≤ x1 ≤ , and the leading
k+1
coefficient is positive, the maximum of this quadratic is obtained when x1 = 0 or x1 =
S S
. Some simple computation yields that x1 = , and thus our statement is true
k+1 k+1
for k + 1. ( )
n(n − 1) 1 n−1
Now we have proven max F = f = (na + 1)(nb + 1).
2 n 2n
Exercise 3.13. Use Jensen’s Inequality to solve Example 3.11.
Exercise 3.14 (2017 CMO). Given an integer n ≥ 2 and real numbers a, b such that
0 < a < b. Let x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ∈ [a, b] be real numbers. Find the maximum value of
x21 x22 x2n−1 x2n
x2 + x3 + ··· + xn + x1
.
x1 + x2 + · · · + xn−1 + xn

§4 Selected Problems
In the following collection of exercises, the first few problems are warm-ups; but you
should pay some attention to your proof-writing. Then there are a few applications of
Generalized Jensen’s, a technique I found unnecessary to elaborate on. The last few
problems are the ones that appeared in actual tests.

8
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

Exercise 4.1 (classic). Let x1 , x2 , · · · , xn be non-negative integers such that x1 + x2 +

· · · + xn = 2019. Find the maximum of x1 x2 · · · xn .
Exercise 4.2. Let x1 , x2 , · · · , xn be distinct integers such that x1 + x2 + · · · + xn = 2019.
Find the minimum of x21 + x22 + · · · + x2n .
(Be careful with this problem! There are many things to consider.)
Exercise 4.3 (1997 CMO). Let x1 , x2 , . . . , x1997 be real numbers satisfying the following
conditions:
1 √
• − √ ≤ xi ≤ 3 for i = 1, 2, . . . , 1997;
3
√
• x1 + x2 + · · · + x1997 = −318 3.
Determine the maximum value of x12 12 12
1 + x2 + . . . + x1997 .

Exercise 4.4 (1989 CMO). Given 1989 points in the space, any three of which are not
collinear. We divide these points into 30 groups such that the numbers of points in these
groups are different from each other. Consider triangles whose three vertices are in three
different groups among the 30. Determine the numbers of points in each group such that
the number of such triangles attains its maximum.
Exercise 4.5. Let x, y, z, w be positive reals such that x + y + z + w = 4. Prove that
1 1 1 1 13 21
+ + + +√ ≥ .
x y z w 2 2 2
x +y +z +w 2 2

Exercise 4.6. Let a, b, c, d, e be non-negative reals such that a + b + c + d + e = 1. Prove

that
1
abc + bcd + cda + dab + abe ≤ .
25
Exercise 4.7. Let a, b, c be positive reals such that abc = 1. Prove that

3 + a2 + b2 + c2 ≥ 2(ab + bc + ca).

Exercise 4.8 (Generalized Jensen’s). Let x1 , x2 , · · · , xn ∈ [a, b] be reals such that x1 +

x2 + · · · + xn = M . Let f be a function convex on [a, c] and concave on [c, b]. Prove
that f (x1 ) + f (x2 ) + · · · + f (xn ) obtains its minimum when each variable is either a or
k, and its maximum when each variable is either l or b for some constants k, l.
Exercise 4.9 (Application of Generalized Jensen’s). If a1 , a2 , · · · , an are nonzero real
−n
numbers such that a1 , a2 , · · · , an ≥ and a1 + a2 + · · · + an = n, prove that
n−2
1 1 1 1 1 1
2 + 2 + ··· + 2 ≥ + + ··· + .
a1 a2 an a1 a2 an
Exercise 4.10 (Application of Generalized Jensen’s). If a1 , a2 , · · · , an are positive real
numbers such that a1 a2 · · · an = 1, prove that
1 1 1 1
√ + √ + ··· + √ ≥ .
1 + 1 + 4n(n − 1)a1 1 + 1 + 4n(n − 1)a2 1 + 1 + 4n(n − 1)an 2

Exercise 4.11 (2017 China First Round). Let x1 , x2 , x3 be non-negative reals such that
x1 + x2 + x3 = 1. Find the minimum and maximum of
( x2 x3 )
(x1 + 3x2 + 5x3 ) x1 + + .
3 5

9
Ricky (September 2019) Smoothing

Exercise 4.12 (2019 China Second Round). Let a1 , a2 , · · · , an be integers such that
1 = a1 ≤ a2 ≤ · · · ≤ a2019 = 99. Find the minimum f0 of the expression

f = (a21 + a22 + · · · + a22019 ) − (a1 a3 + a2 a4 + · · · + a2017 a2019 ),

and determine the number of sequences (a1 , a2 , · · · , an ) such that f = f0 .

Exercise 4.13 (2019 CWMO). Let a1 , a2 , · · · , an (n ≥ 2) be positive numbers such that

a1 ≤ a2 ≤ · · · ≤ an . Prove that
∑ ( ) ∑
n
1 1 a2
(ai + aj ) 2
2
+ 2 ≥ 4(n − 1) i
.
i j i2
1≤i<j≤n i=1

Exercise 4.14. Let a1 , a2 , · · · , an be positive reals where n ≥ 3. Let An , Gn , Hn , Qn

denote their arithmetic, geometric, harmonic and quadratic mean, respectively. Show
that 3n−4
(n − 1) 2n
Qn · Hn ≤ √ An · G n .
n2 − 3n + 3
(Try to make two variables equal in each operation while preserving the value of
An , Gn . Then use Theorem 3.2.)

Exercise 4.15. Let m, l be positive integers and a1 , a2 , · · · , am , b1 , b2 , · · · , bl be real

numbers such that

a1 ≥ a2 ≥ · · · ≥ am ≥ b1 ≥ b2 ≥ · · · ≥ bl ≥ 0,

a1 + a2 + · · · + am ≤ n, b1 + b2 + · · · + bl ≤ n.
Find the maximum of a21 + a22 + · · · + a2m + b21 + b22 + · · · + b2l .

Exercise 4.16 (2014 CSMO). Let x1 , x2 , · · · , xn be non-negative reals such that xi xj ≤

4−|i−j| holds for any 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n (This means i = j is allowed). Prove that
5
x1 + x2 + · · · + xn < .
3

(Turn the condition into xi xj = 4−|i−j| for some i, j. Prove that in the above equation,
|i − j| can obtain 1, and then find a bound for every xi so that there’s only one variable
left. Alternatively, use induction.)

10