On the job rotation problem



• • • <lk ≤ n. Note that

i ≤ li , for all i ≤ k.

Therefore

max(i, j) max(li, lj), for i, j ≤ k.

If equality does not hold for some i and j, then by (1) we have,

aij ≥ ali,lj.

If equality does hold for some i and j, then let lt = max(li, lj ). Note that
i < j li < lj . So we have t = max(i, j) and therefore lt = t.  Hence

lt-1 = t - 1,  . . . , l1 = 1. In this case

aij = ali,lj.

Either way, aij ≥ ali ,lj holds. Therefore

m(A(l1, . . . lk)) ≤ m(A(1, . . . k))

= m(A[k])

= δk(A),

as A(l1 , . . . lk) was arbitrary. Hence the result.

Example 14. Consider the matrix

9 91

8

4

3 ʌ

A =

8

6

5

4

5

4

4

3

3

2

3

1

/

The indicated lines help to check that A is pyramidal. Hence by Theorem 13
we find:

δ1(A) = m(A[1]) = 9

δ2 (A) = m(A[2]) = 16

δ3 (A) = m(A[3]) = 20

δ4(A) = m(A[4]) = m(A) = 22.

12



More intriguing information

1. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Epigenetic Robotics
2. A model-free approach to delta hedging
3. The name is absent
4. Towards a framework for critical citizenship education
5. Qualifying Recital: Lisa Carol Hardaway, flute
6. The name is absent
7. Qualification-Mismatch and Long-Term Unemployment in a Growth-Matching Model
8. The name is absent
9. The name is absent
10. The changing face of Chicago: demographic trends in the 1990s