Description

Two coaches of the informatics group at XX Middle School are debating whether the school’s informatics group should adopt Luogu as the primary training tool. They decide to use a quantitative approach to decide whether to switch.

The school’s original training method is as follows: on the teacher’s machine in the computer room, use cena to load the testdata. Loading the data takes time $T_a$, and this must be done for each problem. After a student finishes writing code, they can go to the teacher’s machine to submit and evaluate the program. However, because of the round trip, each evaluation incurs a waste of time $T_b$. Therefore, students are also allowed to load the testdata on their own machines, and they can choose which problems to load as needed. This takes the same time $T_a$ as loading on the teacher’s machine, but the time spent per evaluation is reduced to $T_c$. In addition, the school may use Excel to record each student’s training progress. If a student’s score on a problem is higher than the score recorded in the sheet, it will take time $T_d$ to update that record; otherwise no time is spent. If the student has not previously submitted that problem, the recorded score is considered to be $0$.

With Luogu, you only need to upload the problems and testdata to Luogu, taking time $T_a$. Each evaluation then takes only time $T_c$. Recording scores? That’s Luogu’s job—once a submission is completed, the platform organizes the table for you, taking no time.

It seems this could save quite a bit of time... However, the coach who supports the traditional method argues that Luogu is not $100 \%$ stable and may be unavailable in some cases. Therefore, first divide Luogu’s total time by its availability (a number less than $100 \%$, denoted $A\%$) and remove the fractional part. Furthermore, because traditional perceptions are hard to change and there is always distrust in handing problem data to Luogu (kkksc03: “Blame me?”), add a penalty time $H$ to Luogu’s total for a fair comparison.

Given the school’s training scenario, please help the two coaches analyze which choice to make.

Input Format

• The first line contains two integers $N, M$, the number of problems and the number of students.
• The second line contains $N$ integers $P_1, P_2, \ldots, P_N$, the problem IDs involved.
• The third line contains $M$ integers $S_1, S_2, \ldots, S_M$, the student IDs.
• The fourth line contains seven integers $T_a, T_b, T_c, T_d, A, H, E$. The meanings of the first six numbers are as described above. If $E$ is $1$, scores are recorded in Excel; if $E$ is $0$, they are not recorded.
• The fifth line contains a single integer $R$, the number of evaluations.
• The next $R$ lines each contain an evaluation record, with $\mathit{Pr}_i, \mathit{Sr}_i, \mathit{Sc}_i$ denoting the problem ID, the student ID, and the score for that evaluation, respectively.

Output Format

Output three lines.

• The first line is the total time for the traditional method.
• The second line is the total time for using Luogu, including the penalty time.
• The third line is the conclusion. If the time using Luogu is less than the time for the traditional method, output Use Luogu!. Otherwise, output Forget it....

4 4
501 502 503 504
2 3 5 7
50 30 10 5 93 50 1
10
501 2 10
501 2 80
501 2 70
502 3 0
502 3 0
504 5 100
503 7 0
503 7 0
503 7 0
503 7 10

480
372
Use Luogu!

2 3
101 102
1 2 3
70 60 50 1 80 100 0
6
101 1 100
101 2 100
101 3 100
102 1 100
102 2 100
102 3 100

500
650
Forget it...

Hint

【Sample Explanation #1】

Using the traditional method, loading $4$ problems takes $4 \times 50 = 200$. For students No. $2$ and No. $7$, the times to use the teacher’s machine are $30 \times 3 = 90$ and $30 \times 4 = 120$, respectively. However, clearly loading cena locally costs only $50 + 10 \times 3 = 80$ and $50 + 10 \times 4 = 90$, which are better. Students No. $3$ and No. $5$ should just use the teacher’s machine, costing $60$ and $30$. Student No. $2$’s first two evaluations are strictly increasing, so recording takes an extra $2 \times 5 = 10$ time. Student No. $3$ is too weak and always gets $0$, so no need to record. Students No. $5$ and No. $7$ each incur $5$. Therefore, the total time is $200 + 80 + 90 + 60 + 30 + 10 + 5 + 5 = 480$.

Using Luogu, uploading the problems takes $200$. The $10$ evaluations cost $10 \times 10 = 100$. Considering availability, the time is $$(200+100) / 93% = 322,$$ so the final total time is $322 + 50 = 372$. Therefore, choose Luogu.

Constraints

• In $50\%$ of the testdata, Excel score recording is not required.
• In $50\%$ of the testdata, both problem IDs and student IDs are between $0$ and $1000$, inclusive. (These two cases may overlap.)
• For $100\%$ of the testdata, it is guaranteed that $1 \le N, M \le 1000$, $1 \le T_a, T_b, T_c, T_d, H \le 10000$, $1 \le R < 100000$, $0 \le \mathit{Sc}_i \le 100$, $1 \le A \le 100$, and student IDs and problem IDs are less than $10^8$.

In fact, according to the certificate issued by Supervision, Luogu’s reliability (SLA) for Q1 2015 was $99.36 \%$. Also, perceptions can be changed.

Many of Luogu’s advantages are not quantifiable. Its essence lies in the community. Isn’t it great to learn and communicate with OIers nationwide?

One last note: last year’s “[Squeeze kkksc03]” notice is still valid; see details.

Translated by ChatGPT 5