Bird
Raised Fist0
Interview Prepchallenge-problemshardGoogleAmazon

Russian Doll Envelopes

Choose your preparation mode4 modes available
🎯
Russian Doll Envelopes
hardMIXEDGoogleAmazon

Imagine you have a collection of envelopes of different sizes, and you want to nest them inside each other like Russian dolls to save space.

💡 This problem is about finding the longest sequence of envelopes where each envelope can fit inside the next one. Beginners often struggle because it combines sorting with a complex subsequence problem, requiring careful ordering and optimization.
📋
Problem Statement

Given a list of envelopes with widths and heights, find the maximum number of envelopes you can nest inside each other. An envelope can fit into another if and only if both the width and height of one envelope are strictly less than those of the other. Input: an array of envelopes where each envelope is represented as [width, height]. Output: an integer representing the maximum number of envelopes that can be nested.

1 ≤ n ≤ 10^51 ≤ width, height ≤ 10^9
💡
Example
Input"[[5,4],[6,4],[6,7],[2,3]]"
Output3

The sequence [2,3] fits into [5,4], which fits into [6,7].

  • All envelopes have the same width and height → output 1
  • Envelopes sorted in descending order → output 1
  • Only one envelope → output 1
  • Envelopes with increasing width but same height → output 1
⚠️
Common Mistakes
Sorting both width and height ascending

Incorrect counting of envelopes with same width but different heights, leading to wrong answer

✅ Sort width ascending and height descending to avoid counting envelopes with same width multiple times

Using LIS on widths instead of heights after sorting

Incorrect subsequence calculation, as width is already sorted and may not reflect nesting

✅ Apply LIS on heights after sorting envelopes by width

Using <= instead of < in comparisons

Allows envelopes with equal width or height to nest, violating problem constraints

✅ Use strictly less than (<) for both width and height comparisons

Not handling empty input

Code may crash or return incorrect result

✅ Check for empty envelopes list and return 0

Using linear search instead of binary search in LIS

Solution becomes O(n²) and times out on large inputs

✅ Use binary search to find position in tails array for LIS

🧠
Brute Force (Nested Loops, O(n²))
💡 Starting with brute force helps understand the problem's core: checking all pairs to find the longest nesting sequence. It’s slow but conceptually straightforward.

Intuition

Try every envelope as a potential start and check all envelopes that can fit inside it, building sequences recursively or iteratively.

Algorithm

  1. Sort envelopes by width and height to have a consistent order.
  2. For each envelope, check all previous envelopes to see if it can fit inside.
  3. Use a DP array where dp[i] stores the max nesting ending at envelope i.
  4. Return the maximum value in dp as the answer.
💡 The nested loops and dp array are hard to visualize at first because you must compare pairs and track sequences simultaneously.
</>
Code
from typing import List

def maxEnvelopes(envelopes: List[List[int]]) -> int:
    envelopes.sort(key=lambda x: (x[0], x[1]))
    n = len(envelopes)
    dp = [1] * n
    for i in range(n):
        for j in range(i):
            if envelopes[j][0] < envelopes[i][0] and envelopes[j][1] < envelopes[i][1]:
                dp[i] = max(dp[i], dp[j] + 1)
    return max(dp) if dp else 0

# Driver code
if __name__ == '__main__':
    test = [[5,4],[6,4],[6,7],[2,3]]
    print(maxEnvelopes(test))
Line Notes
envelopes.sort(key=lambda x: (x[0], x[1]))Sort envelopes to ensure a consistent order for comparison, so we can build sequences in order
dp = [1] * nInitialize dp with 1 since each envelope can at least hold itself as a sequence of length 1
for i in range(n):Outer loop picks the current envelope to build sequences ending here
if envelopes[j][0] < envelopes[i][0] and envelopes[j][1] < envelopes[i][1]Check if envelope j can fit inside envelope i to extend the sequence
import java.util.*;

public class Solution {
    public int maxEnvelopes(int[][] envelopes) {
        Arrays.sort(envelopes, (a, b) -> {
            if (a[0] != b[0]) return a[0] - b[0];
            else return a[1] - b[1];
        });
        int n = envelopes.length;
        int[] dp = new int[n];
        Arrays.fill(dp, 1);
        int max = 1;
        for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
            for (int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
                if (envelopes[j][0] < envelopes[i][0] && envelopes[j][1] < envelopes[i][1]) {
                    dp[i] = Math.max(dp[i], dp[j] + 1);
                }
            }
            max = Math.max(max, dp[i]);
        }
        return max;
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Solution sol = new Solution();
        int[][] test = {{5,4},{6,4},{6,7},{2,3}};
        System.out.println(sol.maxEnvelopes(test));
    }
}
Line Notes
Arrays.sort(envelopes, (a, b) -> {Sort envelopes by width then height for consistent ordering to build sequences
int[] dp = new int[n];DP array to store max nesting ending at each envelope
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {Outer loop selects current envelope to build sequences
if (envelopes[j][0] < envelopes[i][0] && envelopes[j][1] < envelopes[i][1]) {Check if envelope j fits inside envelope i to extend sequence
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
using namespace std;

int maxEnvelopes(vector<vector<int>>& envelopes) {
    sort(envelopes.begin(), envelopes.end(), [](const vector<int>& a, const vector<int>& b) {
        if (a[0] != b[0]) return a[0] < b[0];
        return a[1] < b[1];
    });
    int n = envelopes.size();
    vector<int> dp(n, 1);
    int max_len = 1;
    for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
        for (int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
            if (envelopes[j][0] < envelopes[i][0] && envelopes[j][1] < envelopes[i][1]) {
                dp[i] = max(dp[i], dp[j] + 1);
            }
        }
        max_len = max(max_len, dp[i]);
    }
    return max_len;
}

int main() {
    vector<vector<int>> test = {{5,4},{6,4},{6,7},{2,3}};
    cout << maxEnvelopes(test) << endl;
    return 0;
}
Line Notes
sort(envelopes.begin(), envelopes.end(), [](const vector<int>& a, const vector<int>& b) {Sort envelopes by width then height for consistent order to build sequences
vector<int> dp(n, 1);Initialize dp with 1 for each envelope as minimal sequence length
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {Outer loop picks current envelope to build sequences
if (envelopes[j][0] < envelopes[i][0] && envelopes[j][1] < envelopes[i][1]) {Check if envelope j fits inside envelope i to extend sequence
var maxEnvelopes = function(envelopes) {
    envelopes.sort((a, b) => a[0] - b[0] || a[1] - b[1]);
    const n = envelopes.length;
    const dp = new Array(n).fill(1);
    let maxLen = 1;
    for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) {
        for (let j = 0; j < i; j++) {
            if (envelopes[j][0] < envelopes[i][0] && envelopes[j][1] < envelopes[i][1]) {
                dp[i] = Math.max(dp[i], dp[j] + 1);
            }
        }
        maxLen = Math.max(maxLen, dp[i]);
    }
    return maxLen;
};

// Test
console.log(maxEnvelopes([[5,4],[6,4],[6,7],[2,3]]));
Line Notes
envelopes.sort((a, b) => a[0] - b[0] || a[1] - b[1]);Sort envelopes by width then height for consistent order to build sequences
const dp = new Array(n).fill(1);Initialize dp array with 1 for each envelope as minimal sequence length
for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) {Outer loop selects current envelope to build sequences
if (envelopes[j][0] < envelopes[i][0] && envelopes[j][1] < envelopes[i][1]) {Check if envelope j fits inside envelope i to extend sequence
⏱
Complexity
TimeO(n²)
SpaceO(n)

Two nested loops over n envelopes lead to O(n²) time. DP array uses O(n) space.

💡 For n=20, this means about 400 comparisons, which is manageable but grows quickly for large n.
Interview Verdict: TLE for large inputs

This approach is too slow for large inputs but helps understand the problem and DP formulation.

🧠
Sorting + Longest Increasing Subsequence (LIS) O(n²)
💡 By sorting envelopes and then applying LIS on heights, we reduce complexity conceptually. This approach bridges brute force and optimal solutions.

Intuition

Sort envelopes by width ascending and height ascending, then find LIS on heights where heights must strictly increase.

Algorithm

  1. Sort envelopes by width ascending and height ascending.
  2. Extract the heights into a separate array.
  3. Find the LIS on the heights array using O(n²) DP.
  4. Return the length of the LIS as the maximum nesting.
💡 Separating width and height after sorting simplifies the problem to a classic LIS, easier to understand than nested loops on pairs.
</>
Code
from typing import List

def maxEnvelopes(envelopes: List[List[int]]) -> int:
    envelopes.sort(key=lambda x: (x[0], x[1]))
    heights = [h for _, h in envelopes]
    n = len(heights)
    dp = [1] * n
    for i in range(n):
        for j in range(i):
            if heights[j] < heights[i]:
                dp[i] = max(dp[i], dp[j] + 1)
    return max(dp) if dp else 0

# Driver code
if __name__ == '__main__':
    test = [[5,4],[6,4],[6,7],[2,3]]
    print(maxEnvelopes(test))
Line Notes
envelopes.sort(key=lambda x: (x[0], x[1]))Sort envelopes by width then height to prepare for LIS on heights
heights = [h for _, h in envelopes]Extract heights to reduce problem to LIS on one dimension
dp = [1] * nInitialize dp for LIS with 1 for each height as minimal subsequence length
if heights[j] < heights[i]:Check strictly increasing condition for LIS to build valid sequences
import java.util.*;

public class Solution {
    public int maxEnvelopes(int[][] envelopes) {
        Arrays.sort(envelopes, (a, b) -> {
            if (a[0] != b[0]) return a[0] - b[0];
            else return a[1] - b[1];
        });
        int n = envelopes.length;
        int[] heights = new int[n];
        for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) heights[i] = envelopes[i][1];
        int[] dp = new int[n];
        Arrays.fill(dp, 1);
        int max = 1;
        for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
            for (int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
                if (heights[j] < heights[i]) {
                    dp[i] = Math.max(dp[i], dp[j] + 1);
                }
            }
            max = Math.max(max, dp[i]);
        }
        return max;
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Solution sol = new Solution();
        int[][] test = {{5,4},{6,4},{6,7},{2,3}};
        System.out.println(sol.maxEnvelopes(test));
    }
}
Line Notes
Arrays.sort(envelopes, (a, b) -> {Sort envelopes by width then height for LIS preparation
int[] heights = new int[n];Extract heights to apply LIS on one dimension
Arrays.fill(dp, 1);Initialize dp for LIS with 1 as minimal subsequence length
if (heights[j] < heights[i]) {Check strictly increasing condition for LIS to build valid sequences
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
using namespace std;

int maxEnvelopes(vector<vector<int>>& envelopes) {
    sort(envelopes.begin(), envelopes.end(), [](const vector<int>& a, const vector<int>& b) {
        if (a[0] != b[0]) return a[0] < b[0];
        return a[1] < b[1];
    });
    int n = envelopes.size();
    vector<int> heights(n);
    for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) heights[i] = envelopes[i][1];
    vector<int> dp(n, 1);
    int max_len = 1;
    for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
        for (int j = 0; j < i; j++) {
            if (heights[j] < heights[i]) {
                dp[i] = max(dp[i], dp[j] + 1);
            }
        }
        max_len = max(max_len, dp[i]);
    }
    return max_len;
}

int main() {
    vector<vector<int>> test = {{5,4},{6,4},{6,7},{2,3}};
    cout << maxEnvelopes(test) << endl;
    return 0;
}
Line Notes
sort(envelopes.begin(), envelopes.end(), [](const vector<int>& a, const vector<int>& b) {Sort envelopes by width then height for LIS preparation
vector<int> heights(n);Extract heights for LIS on one dimension
vector<int> dp(n, 1);Initialize dp for LIS with 1 as minimal subsequence length
if (heights[j] < heights[i]) {Check strictly increasing condition for LIS to build valid sequences
var maxEnvelopes = function(envelopes) {
    envelopes.sort((a, b) => a[0] - b[0] || a[1] - b[1]);
    const heights = envelopes.map(e => e[1]);
    const n = heights.length;
    const dp = new Array(n).fill(1);
    let maxLen = 1;
    for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) {
        for (let j = 0; j < i; j++) {
            if (heights[j] < heights[i]) {
                dp[i] = Math.max(dp[i], dp[j] + 1);
            }
        }
        maxLen = Math.max(maxLen, dp[i]);
    }
    return maxLen;
};

// Test
console.log(maxEnvelopes([[5,4],[6,4],[6,7],[2,3]]));
Line Notes
envelopes.sort((a, b) => a[0] - b[0] || a[1] - b[1]);Sort envelopes by width then height for LIS preparation
const heights = envelopes.map(e => e[1]);Extract heights for LIS on one dimension
const dp = new Array(n).fill(1);Initialize dp for LIS with 1 as minimal subsequence length
if (heights[j] < heights[i]) {Check strictly increasing condition for LIS to build valid sequences
⏱
Complexity
TimeO(n²)
SpaceO(n)

Sorting is O(n log n), LIS with nested loops is O(n²), DP array uses O(n) space.

💡 For n=20, this means about 400 comparisons, better than brute force but still slow for large n.
Interview Verdict: Accepted but slow for large inputs

This approach is a conceptual improvement but still not efficient enough for very large inputs.

🧠
Optimal: Sorting + LIS with Binary Search (O(n log n))
💡 This approach uses sorting and then applies a binary search optimized LIS on heights, making it efficient for large inputs.

Intuition

Sort envelopes by width ascending and height descending to avoid conflicts, then find LIS on heights using binary search to maintain a tails array.

Algorithm

  1. Sort envelopes by width ascending and height descending to handle equal widths.
  2. Extract heights into an array.
  3. Initialize an empty array tails to store the smallest tail of all increasing subsequences.
  4. For each height, use binary search to find its position in tails and replace or append accordingly.
  5. Return the length of tails as the maximum nesting.
💡 Sorting by descending height for equal widths prevents counting envelopes with same width multiple times, binary search speeds up LIS.
</>
Code
from typing import List
import bisect

def maxEnvelopes(envelopes: List[List[int]]) -> int:
    envelopes.sort(key=lambda x: (x[0], -x[1]))
    heights = [h for _, h in envelopes]
    tails = []
    for h in heights:
        idx = bisect.bisect_left(tails, h)
        if idx == len(tails):
            tails.append(h)
        else:
            tails[idx] = h
    return len(tails)

# Driver code
if __name__ == '__main__':
    test = [[5,4],[6,4],[6,7],[2,3]]
    print(maxEnvelopes(test))
Line Notes
envelopes.sort(key=lambda x: (x[0], -x[1]))Sort by width ascending and height descending to avoid counting envelopes with same width multiple times
tails = []Initialize tails array to store smallest possible tail of increasing subsequences
idx = bisect.bisect_left(tails, h)Find position to insert height h in tails using binary search for efficiency
tails[idx] = hReplace or append height to maintain minimal tails for LIS, keeping options open for longer sequences
import java.util.*;

public class Solution {
    public int maxEnvelopes(int[][] envelopes) {
        Arrays.sort(envelopes, (a, b) -> {
            if (a[0] != b[0]) return a[0] - b[0];
            else return b[1] - a[1];
        });
        int[] heights = new int[envelopes.length];
        for (int i = 0; i < envelopes.length; i++) heights[i] = envelopes[i][1];
        List<Integer> tails = new ArrayList<>();
        for (int h : heights) {
            int idx = Collections.binarySearch(tails, h);
            if (idx < 0) idx = -(idx + 1);
            if (idx == tails.size()) tails.add(h);
            else tails.set(idx, h);
        }
        return tails.size();
    }

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        Solution sol = new Solution();
        int[][] test = {{5,4},{6,4},{6,7},{2,3}};
        System.out.println(sol.maxEnvelopes(test));
    }
}
Line Notes
Arrays.sort(envelopes, (a, b) -> {Sort by width ascending and height descending to handle equal widths correctly
List<Integer> tails = new ArrayList<>();Use list to store tails of increasing subsequences efficiently
int idx = Collections.binarySearch(tails, h);Binary search to find insertion point for height h in tails
tails.set(idx, h);Replace element at idx to maintain minimal tails, allowing longer LIS
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
using namespace std;

int maxEnvelopes(vector<vector<int>>& envelopes) {
    sort(envelopes.begin(), envelopes.end(), [](const vector<int>& a, const vector<int>& b) {
        if (a[0] != b[0]) return a[0] < b[0];
        return a[1] > b[1];
    });
    vector<int> heights;
    for (auto& e : envelopes) heights.push_back(e[1]);
    vector<int> tails;
    for (int h : heights) {
        auto it = lower_bound(tails.begin(), tails.end(), h);
        if (it == tails.end()) tails.push_back(h);
        else *it = h;
    }
    return tails.size();
}

int main() {
    vector<vector<int>> test = {{5,4},{6,4},{6,7},{2,3}};
    cout << maxEnvelopes(test) << endl;
    return 0;
}
Line Notes
sort(envelopes.begin(), envelopes.end(), [](const vector<int>& a, const vector<int>& b) {Sort by width ascending and height descending to avoid duplicates and ensure correct LIS
auto it = lower_bound(tails.begin(), tails.end(), h);Binary search to find position to insert or replace height h in tails
if (it == tails.end()) tails.push_back(h);Append height if it extends the longest subsequence
else *it = h;Replace to keep tails minimal for future extensions and maintain LIS property
var maxEnvelopes = function(envelopes) {
    envelopes.sort((a, b) => a[0] - b[0] || b[1] - a[1]);
    const heights = envelopes.map(e => e[1]);
    const tails = [];
    for (const h of heights) {
        let left = 0, right = tails.length;
        while (left < right) {
            const mid = Math.floor((left + right) / 2);
            if (tails[mid] < h) left = mid + 1;
            else right = mid;
        }
        if (left === tails.length) tails.push(h);
        else tails[left] = h;
    }
    return tails.length;
};

// Test
console.log(maxEnvelopes([[5,4],[6,4],[6,7],[2,3]]));
Line Notes
envelopes.sort((a, b) => a[0] - b[0] || b[1] - a[1]);Sort by width ascending and height descending to handle equal widths correctly
const tails = [];Initialize tails array for LIS to track minimal tails of subsequences
while (left < right) {Binary search to find correct position for height h in tails efficiently
tails[left] = h;Replace or append height to maintain minimal tails and allow longer LIS
⏱
Complexity
TimeO(n log n)
SpaceO(n)

Sorting is O(n log n), binary search LIS is O(n log n), total O(n log n). Space is O(n) for tails and heights.

💡 For n=100000, this approach is efficient and practical, unlike previous O(n²) methods.
Interview Verdict: Accepted and optimal

This is the best approach to implement in interviews for large inputs.

📊
All Approaches - One-Glance Tradeoffs
💡 For interviews, code the optimal O(n log n) approach unless asked otherwise. Understand brute force to explain problem clearly.
ApproachTimeSpaceStack RiskReconstructUse In Interview
1. Brute ForceO(n²)O(n)NoYesMention only - never code
2. Sorting + LIS O(n²)O(n²)O(n)NoYesMention as improvement, not optimal
3. Sorting + LIS with Binary Search O(n log n)O(n log n)O(n)NoYes, with extra trackingCode this approach
💼
Interview Strategy
💡 Use this guide to understand the problem deeply, practice all approaches, and know when to optimize. Read before every mock interview to build confidence.

How to Present

Step 1: Clarify problem constraints and input/output format.Step 2: Explain brute force approach and its limitations.Step 3: Introduce sorting + LIS approach to improve clarity.Step 4: Present optimal binary search LIS solution.Step 5: Code the optimal solution and test edge cases.

Time Allocation

Clarify: 3min → Approach: 7min → Code: 10min → Test: 5min. Total ~25min

What the Interviewer Tests

Interviewer tests your problem understanding, ability to optimize from brute force to optimal, and coding accuracy with edge cases.

Common Follow-ups

  • What if envelopes can have equal width or height? → Sort height descending for equal widths.
  • Can you reconstruct the actual sequence? → Track predecessors during LIS.
  • What if nesting condition changes? → Adjust comparison logic accordingly.
  • How to handle very large inputs efficiently? → Use O(n log n) approach.
💡 These follow-ups test your grasp of problem variations and ability to adapt your solution.
🔍
Pattern Recognition

When to Use

1) Problem involves nesting or sequences with two dimensions; 2) Requires strict ordering; 3) Can be reduced to LIS after sorting; 4) Large input size demands optimization.

Signature Phrases

maximum number of envelopesone envelope can fit into anotherstrictly less width and height

NOT This Pattern When

Problems involving only one dimension LIS or unrelated sorting problems

Similar Problems

Longest Increasing Subsequence - core subproblemBox Stacking Problem - similar nesting logic

Practice

(1/5)
1. What is the time complexity of the optimal bottom-up DFS solution for computing the diameter of a binary tree with n nodes?
medium
A. O(n) because each node is visited once in the DFS traversal
B. O(n^2) due to repeated height computations in recursion
C. O(n log n) because height computations take log n time per node
D. O(n) but with additional O(n) space for memoization arrays

Solution

  1. Step 1: Identify that naive recursive approach causes repeated height computations

    In naive recursion without memoization, height computations are repeated, causing O(n^2) time complexity.
  2. Step 2: Confirm that optimal bottom-up DFS avoids repeated computations

    The question asks for the optimal bottom-up DFS solution, which is O(n), but the options are designed to test understanding of naive vs optimal.
  3. Step 3: Since O(n) because each node is visited once in the DFS traversal states optimal O(n), but O(n^2) due to repeated height computations in recursion states O(n^2) due to repeated computations, and question asks for optimal solution, correct answer is A.

  4. Final Answer:

    Option A -> Option A
  5. Quick Check:

    Single DFS traversal over n nodes -> O(n) time [OK]
Hint: Single DFS traversal means linear time [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Confusing with brute force O(n^2)
  • Assuming height calls cost log n each
2. The following code attempts to compute the diameter of a binary tree. Identify the line that contains a subtle bug that causes incorrect results when the longest path does not pass through the root.
medium
A. Line updating diameter: diameter = max(diameter, max(left_height, right_height))
B. Line returning height: return 1 + max(left_height, right_height)
C. Line checking for null node: if not node: return 0
D. Line computing left subtree height: left_height = height(node.left)

Solution

  1. Step 1: Understand diameter update logic

    The diameter should be updated with left_height + right_height, representing the longest path through current node.
  2. Step 2: Identify incorrect update using max(left_height, right_height)

    Using max(left_height, right_height) only considers one side, missing paths crossing the node, causing incorrect diameter.
  3. Final Answer:

    Option A -> Option A
  4. Quick Check:

    Diameter must consider sum of left and right heights, not max of one side [OK]
Hint: Diameter = sum of left and right heights, not max [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Updating diameter with max of one subtree height
  • Forgetting to handle null nodes
  • Returning nodes count instead of edges
3. What is the time complexity of the optimized LIS algorithm using binary search on an input array of length n?
medium
A. O(n log n)
B. O(n)
C. O(n²)
D. O(log n)

Solution

  1. Step 1: Identify outer loop complexity

    The algorithm iterates over all n elements once, so at least O(n).
  2. Step 2: Identify inner operation complexity

    For each element, binary search on tails array takes O(log n) time.
  3. Final Answer:

    Option A -> Option A
  4. Quick Check:

    n iterations x log n binary search -> O(n log n) [OK]
Hint: Binary search inside loop gives n log n [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Assuming O(n²) because of nested loops
  • Ignoring binary search complexity
  • Confusing with brute force exponential
4. Suppose the problem is modified so that caps can be assigned to multiple people (i.e., caps are no longer unique). Which of the following algorithmic changes correctly adapts the solution to count the number of ways to assign caps without uniqueness constraints?
hard
A. Remove bitmask tracking and use simple multiplication of counts per person
B. Keep bitmask DP but allow assigning the same cap multiple times by not checking mask bits
C. Use a DP over persons only, multiplying the number of caps each person can wear
D. Use a nested loop over persons and caps without bitmask, summing ways for each person independently

Solution

  1. Step 1: Understand the uniqueness constraint removal

    Without uniqueness, caps can be reused freely, so no need to track assigned caps with bitmasks.
  2. Step 2: Simplify counting approach

    Counting ways reduces to multiplying the number of caps each person can wear, as assignments are independent.
  3. Step 3: Why other options fail

    Bitmask DP is unnecessary and incorrect if caps can be reused; summing independently without multiplication misses combinations.
  4. Final Answer:

    Option A -> Option A
  5. Quick Check:

    Removing bitmask and multiplying counts per person matches problem relaxation [OK]
Hint: No uniqueness -> no bitmask needed, multiply counts [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Trying to keep bitmask DP unnecessarily
  • Summing instead of multiplying counts
5. Suppose the problem is modified so that you can revisit cells multiple times (cycles allowed) and the path must be strictly increasing. Which approach correctly handles this variant without infinite loops?
hard
A. Use DFS with memoization and cycle detection to avoid infinite loops
B. Use topological sort based DP after detecting and removing cycles
C. Use BFS ignoring value order to find longest path
D. Use DFS without memoization to explore all paths

Solution

  1. Step 1: Understand cycle implications

    Allowing revisits with strict increasing values can create cycles if not carefully handled, risking infinite loops.
  2. Step 2: Identify safe approach

    DFS with memoization plus cycle detection prevents infinite recursion and correctly computes longest paths even with cycles.
  3. Final Answer:

    Option A -> Option A
  4. Quick Check:

    Memoization + cycle detection ensures correctness and termination [OK]
Hint: Cycle detection needed when revisits allowed [OK]
Common Mistakes:
  • Using naive DFS causing infinite loops
  • Ignoring cycles in topological sort
  • Using BFS without value order
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