Bird
Raised Fist0
DSA Rustprogramming~20 mins

Why Greedy Works and When It Fails in DSA Rust - Challenge Your Understanding

Choose your learning style10 modes available
Challenge - 5 Problems
🎖️
Greedy Mastery
Get all challenges correct to earn this badge!
Test your skills under time pressure!
❓ Predict Output
intermediate
2:00remaining
Output of Greedy Coin Change Algorithm
What is the output of the following Rust code that uses a greedy approach to make change with coins [25, 10, 5, 1] for amount 63?
DSA Rust
fn greedy_coin_change(mut amount: i32, coins: &[i32]) -> Vec<i32> {
    let mut result = Vec::new();
    for &coin in coins {
        while amount >= coin {
            amount -= coin;
            result.push(coin);
        }
    }
    result
}

fn main() {
    let coins = [25, 10, 5, 1];
    let change = greedy_coin_change(63, &coins);
    println!("{:?}", change);
}
A[25, 25, 10, 1, 1, 1]
B[25, 25, 5, 5, 1, 1, 1]
C[25, 10, 10, 10, 5, 1, 1, 1]
D[10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 3]
Attempts:
2 left
💡 Hint
Think about how the greedy algorithm picks the largest coin first until it cannot anymore.
🧠 Conceptual
intermediate
2:00remaining
When Does Greedy Fail in Coin Change?
Given coin denominations [10, 6, 1], what is the minimum number of coins needed to make 12? Does the greedy algorithm find the minimum?
AMinimum coins: 4 (6 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1), Greedy finds minimum
BMinimum coins: 3 (10 + 1 + 1), Greedy finds minimum
CMinimum coins: 2 (6 + 6), Greedy finds minimum
DMinimum coins: 2 (6 + 6), Greedy does NOT find minimum
Attempts:
2 left
💡 Hint
Try running the greedy algorithm step by step for amount 12.
🔧 Debug
advanced
2:00remaining
Identify the Bug in Greedy Interval Scheduling
What error does the following Rust code produce when trying to select maximum non-overlapping intervals using a greedy approach?
DSA Rust
fn max_non_overlapping_intervals(mut intervals: Vec<(i32, i32)>) -> Vec<(i32, i32)> {
    intervals.sort_by_key(|k| k.0); // sort by start time
    let mut result = Vec::new();
    let mut last_end = std::i32::MIN;
    for interval in intervals {
        if interval.0 >= last_end {
            result.push(interval);
            last_end = interval.1;
        }
    }
    result
}

fn main() {
    let intervals = vec![(1, 3), (2, 5), (4, 7)];
    let selected = max_non_overlapping_intervals(intervals);
    println!("{:?}", selected);
}
ANo error; output: [(1, 3), (2, 5), (4, 7)]
BLogic error: suboptimal selection due to sorting by start time instead of end time
CNo error; output: [(1, 3), (4, 7)]
DRuntime error: index out of bounds
Attempts:
2 left
💡 Hint
Check the sorting criteria for intervals in greedy scheduling.
🚀 Application
advanced
2:00remaining
Greedy Algorithm for Activity Selection Output
Given activities with start and end times [(0, 6), (1, 4), (3, 5), (5, 7), (8, 9), (5, 9)], what is the output of the greedy activity selection algorithm that picks activities by earliest finish time?
DSA Rust
fn activity_selection(mut activities: Vec<(i32, i32)>) -> Vec<(i32, i32)> {
    activities.sort_by_key(|k| k.1); // sort by finish time
    let mut selected = Vec::new();
    let mut last_finish = std::i32::MIN;
    for activity in activities {
        if activity.0 >= last_finish {
            selected.push(activity);
            last_finish = activity.1;
        }
    }
    selected
}

fn main() {
    let activities = vec![(0, 6), (1, 4), (3, 5), (5, 7), (8, 9), (5, 9)];
    let result = activity_selection(activities);
    println!("{:?}", result);
}
A[(0, 6), (5, 7), (8, 9)]
B[(0, 6), (8, 9)]
C[(1, 4), (5, 7), (8, 9)]
D[(1, 4), (3, 5), (5, 7), (8, 9)]
Attempts:
2 left
💡 Hint
Remember to pick activities that start after or when the last selected activity finishes.
🧠 Conceptual
expert
3:00remaining
Why Greedy Algorithm Guarantees Optimality in Huffman Coding
Why does the greedy approach of combining two least frequent nodes at each step guarantee an optimal prefix code in Huffman coding?
ABecause combining least frequent nodes first minimizes total weighted path length by ensuring smaller frequencies are deeper in the tree
BBecause the greedy approach maximizes the height of the tree
CBecause combining nodes randomly always produces optimal codes
DBecause it always produces codes with equal length
Attempts:
2 left
💡 Hint
Think about how frequency affects code length in prefix codes.

Practice

(1/5)
1. What is the main reason a greedy algorithm works correctly for some problems?
easy
A. Because it tries all possible solutions and picks the best one
B. Because choosing the best option at each step leads to an optimal solution
C. Because it uses recursion to explore all paths
D. Because it sorts the input data before processing

Solution

  1. Step 1: Understand greedy choice property

    A greedy algorithm works when making the best local choice at each step leads to a globally optimal solution.
  2. Step 2: Differentiate from other methods

    Unlike exhaustive search or recursion, greedy does not try all solutions but relies on local optimal choices.
  3. Final Answer:

    Because choosing the best option at each step leads to an optimal solution -> Option B
  4. Quick Check:

    Greedy choice property = A [OK]
Hint: Greedy picks best local choice aiming for global best [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Thinking greedy tries all solutions
  • Confusing greedy with recursion or backtracking
  • Assuming sorting alone makes greedy work
2. Which of the following Rust code snippets correctly implements a greedy approach to select intervals with earliest finishing time?
easy
A. intervals.sort_by_key(|x| x.start); let mut count = 0; let mut last_end = 0; for i in &intervals { if i.end >= last_end { count += 1; last_end = i.start; } }
B. intervals.sort_by_key(|x| x.end); let mut count = 0; for i in &intervals { count += 1; }
C. intervals.sort_by_key(|x| x.end); let mut count = 0; let mut last_end = 0; for i in &intervals { if i.start >= last_end { count += 1; last_end = i.end; } }
D. intervals.sort_by_key(|x| x.start); let mut count = 0; for i in &intervals { if i.start > last_end { count += 1; last_end = i.end; } }

Solution

  1. Step 1: Identify correct sorting key

    The greedy interval scheduling algorithm sorts intervals by their finishing time (end).
  2. Step 2: Check selection condition and update

    It selects intervals starting after or at the last selected interval's end, updating last_end accordingly.
  3. Final Answer:

    intervals.sort_by_key(|x| x.end); let mut count = 0; let mut last_end = 0; for i in &intervals { if i.start >= last_end { count += 1; last_end = i.end; } } -> Option C
  4. Quick Check:

    Sort by end, pick if start >= last_end = B [OK]
Hint: Sort by finish time, pick intervals starting after last end [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Sorting by start time instead of end time
  • Updating last_end incorrectly
  • Counting all intervals without condition
3. Consider the Rust code below that tries to find the minimum number of coins for a given amount using greedy approach with coin denominations [25, 10, 5, 1]. What is the output for amount = 30?
let coins = [25, 10, 5, 1];
let mut amount = 30;
let mut count = 0;
for &coin in &coins {
    count += amount / coin;
    amount %= coin;
}
println!("{}", count);
medium
A. 4
B. 3
C. 5
D. 2

Solution

  1. Step 1: Calculate coins for 25-cent

    30 / 25 = 1 coin, remainder 30 % 25 = 5
  2. Step 2: Calculate coins for 10-cent, 5-cent, 1-cent

    5 / 10 = 0 coins, remainder 5; 5 / 5 = 1 coin, remainder 0; 0 / 1 = 0 coins
  3. Step 3: Sum total coins

    1 (25-cent) + 0 (10-cent) + 1 (5-cent) + 0 (1-cent) = 2 coins
  4. Final Answer:

    2 -> Option D
  5. Quick Check:

    30 = 25 + 5 = 2 coins [OK]
Hint: Divide amount by largest coin, reduce remainder, sum counts [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Adding coins incorrectly
  • Using wrong coin order
  • Ignoring remainder after division
4. The following Rust code attempts to solve the coin change problem greedily with coins [10, 6, 1] and amount 12. It outputs the number of coins used. What is the bug?
let coins = [10, 6, 1];
let mut amount = 12;
let mut count = 0;
for &coin in &coins {
    count += amount / coin;
    amount %= coin;
}
println!("{}", count);
medium
A. The greedy approach fails to find minimum coins for these denominations
B. The code has a syntax error in the for loop
C. The amount variable is not mutable
D. The coins array is not sorted

Solution

  1. Step 1: Understand greedy failure for coin set

    Greedy picks 10 once, remainder 2, then two 1 coins = 3 coins total.
  2. Step 2: Check for better solution

    Using two 6 coins gives 12 with only 2 coins, better than greedy's 3.
  3. Step 3: Identify bug

    The bug is greedy approach itself fails to find minimum coins for this coin set.
  4. Final Answer:

    The greedy approach fails to find minimum coins for these denominations -> Option A
  5. Quick Check:

    Greedy fails on non-canonical coins = D [OK]
Hint: Greedy fails if coin set is non-canonical [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Thinking code syntax is wrong
  • Assuming sorting fixes greedy failure
  • Ignoring greedy algorithm limitations
5. You want to select activities from a list with start and end times to maximize the number of activities chosen. However, some activities overlap partially. Which approach correctly applies greedy algorithm to solve this, and why might it fail if you choose activities by earliest start time instead of earliest finish time?
hard
A. Sort activities by earliest finish time and pick compatible ones; choosing by start time can miss optimal sets
B. Sort activities by earliest start time and pick all that start earliest; this always works
C. Pick activities randomly; greedy always finds optimal solution
D. Sort activities by longest duration and pick those first; this maximizes usage

Solution

  1. Step 1: Identify correct greedy strategy

    Sorting by earliest finish time ensures maximum remaining time for other activities.
  2. Step 2: Explain failure of sorting by start time

    Choosing by earliest start time can select long activities blocking many others, missing optimal count.
  3. Step 3: Conclude correct approach and failure reason

    Greedy works with earliest finish time sorting; earliest start time sorting may fail to maximize activities.
  4. Final Answer:

    Sort activities by earliest finish time and pick compatible ones; choosing by start time can miss optimal sets -> Option A
  5. Quick Check:

    Earliest finish time sorting = A [OK]
Hint: Sort by finish time, not start time, to maximize activities [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Assuming earliest start time sorting always works
  • Picking longest duration first
  • Ignoring overlap constraints
Recommended

Ready to prove it?

Pass the test and this pattern moves unknown strong while earning +1 Grip toward your certificate.

10 questions~5 mineasy hard