Practice
next with input prices [100, 80, 60]?Solution
Step 1: Trace the first two calls
Call 1 with price=100: stack empty, span=1, stack=[0], prices=[100]. Call 2 with price=80: top price=100 > 80, no pop, span=2-0=1, stack=[0,1], prices=[100,80].Step 2: Trace the third call with price=60
Top price=80 > 60, no pop, span=3-1=1, stack=[0,1,2], prices=[100,80,60]. Return 1.Final Answer:
Option D -> Option DQuick Check:
Each price less than previous yields span 1 [OK]
- Confusing index difference calculation
- Off-by-one errors in span computation
def isValid(s: str) -> bool:
stack = []
pairs = {')': '(', ']': '[', '}': '{'}
for char in s:
if char in pairs.values():
stack.append(char)
elif char in pairs:
if not stack or stack[-1] != pairs[char]:
return False
stack.pop()
else:
return False
return not stack
Solution
Step 1: Trace input "([)]" through the code
Push '(' then push '['. Next char is ')', expected to match '[' but pairs[')'] = '(', top of stack is '[' -> mismatch -> return False immediately.Step 2: Confirm final output
Function returns False as soon as mismatch is detected.Final Answer:
Option A -> Option AQuick Check:
Mismatch detected at third character -> returns False [OK]
- Assuming order doesn't matter and returning True incorrectly
Solution
Step 1: Understand the complexity introduced by '*'
The '*' character can represent multiple possibilities, requiring tracking multiple states.Step 2: Evaluate approaches for handling wildcards
Dynamic programming can efficiently track valid substring lengths considering '*' as '(', ')' or empty, unlike counters or naive stack approaches.Step 3: Rule out brute force due to exponential possibilities
Brute force checking all substrings with '*' replacements is infeasible for large inputs.Final Answer:
Option A -> Option AQuick Check:
DP handles wildcard substitutions efficiently [OK]
- Ignoring '*' in counters
- Assuming stack alone can handle wildcards
- Trying brute force for large inputs
Solution
Step 1: Understand the role of popping condition
To correctly handle duplicates, the stack must pop elements that are greater than or equal to the current element to maintain strictly increasing order.Step 2: Evaluate options for duplicates and negative numbers
Using '>=' ensures duplicates are popped, preventing incorrect previous smaller elements; other options either break correctness or efficiency.Final Answer:
Option D -> Option DQuick Check:
Pop equal or greater elements to maintain correct monotonic stack with duplicates [OK]
- Using '>' only causes duplicates to remain on stack
- Replacing stack with BST increases complexity unnecessarily
- Pushing values instead of indexes loses position info
k can vary dynamically during the iteration. Which of the following approaches correctly adapts the monotonic deque solution to handle this efficiently?Solution
Step 1: Understand dynamic window size impact
Window boundaries change, so indices outside the current window must be removed accordingly.Step 2: Adapt monotonic deque maintenance
Instead of rebuilding, update boundary checks and pop indices outside the new window size dynamically.Step 3: Evaluate alternatives
Rebuilding deque or switching to heap is inefficient; brute force is too slow.Final Answer:
Option A -> Option AQuick Check:
Dynamic boundary checks maintain O(n) amortized complexity [OK]
- Rebuilding deque wastes time
- Assuming heap is better for variable k
