Correct answer: $ dp $
Report problem solving:
Failing decided to write $ dp $ ($ bushi $. Reason this question one can feel in addition to $ dp $ algorithm also can do nothing good, so consider the $ dp $ chant
Look at the part of the sub? $ 30pts $ found that the number of prime factors to consider like a thief less pressure $ dp $ get away duck.
Then now $ 100pts $, found that the number of prime factors too much on the $ GG $.
But this is clearly time to consider each count a maximum of a $ \ geq \ sqrt (n) $ prime factors.
Therefore, in order to confront factor $ \ sqrt (n) $ bounded into two categories, greater than or equal to $ \ sqrt (n) $ $ X $ prime factors enumerated directly, apparently only in multiples of $ X $ a in collection or hold, so the direct enumeration of the $ x $ each, respectively, $ dp $ recombine them enough.
Specifically, set $ f_ {i, j} $ represents a first selected individuals $ \ leq \ sqrt (n) $ prime factor set is $ I $, second option is $ J $ program number. then set $ g_ {0/1, i, j} $ $ DP $ auxiliary array, i.e. enumeration $ X $ $ X $ when recording multiple programs do not set into a second / first set of number.
Note then that each of the G $ $ $ f $ reversed when the recursive formula is $ f_ {i, j} = g_ {0, i, j} + g_ {1, i, j} -f_ {i , j} $. on, as will include two $ G $ $ X $ of all multiples is not selected, it is necessary to re-find duplicate exactly $ f_ {i, j} $, subtracting like
$over$