Practice
n = 4 and edges = [[3,1,2],[3,2,3],[1,1,3],[2,3,4]], what is the final return value of max_num_edges_to_remove_sorted(n, edges)?Solution
Step 1: Sort edges by type descending
Edges sorted: type 3 edges first: [3,1,2], [3,2,3], then type 1: [1,1,3], then type 2: [2,3,4].Step 2: Process edges with union-find
Type 3 edges connect nodes 0-1 and 1-2 for both Alice and Bob, used=2. Type 1 edge connects 0-2 for Alice, but already connected, so no increment. Type 2 edge connects 2-3 for Bob, used=3 total. Both have count=1 (fully connected). Edges used=3, total edges=4, so removable=1.Final Answer:
Option C -> Option CQuick Check:
Used edges=3, removable=4-3=1 -> careful: used=3, removable=1 [OK]
- Off-by-one in indexing nodes
- Ignoring type 3 edges first
- Counting used edges incorrectly
n vertices and m edges?Solution
Step 1: Identify sorting cost
Sorting edges takes O(m log m) time, which is equivalent to O(m log n) since m ≤ n^2.Step 2: Analyze union-find operations
Union-find operations take O(m α(n)) where α(n) is inverse Ackermann function, almost constant.Step 3: Combine complexities
The total complexity is O(m log n) dominated by sorting, as α(n) is negligible.Final Answer:
Option D -> Option DQuick Check:
Sorting dominates, union-find nearly linear [OK]
- Confusing α(n) with log n or n
- Assuming union-find is O(n) per operation
- Ignoring sorting cost or assuming O(m log n)
Solution
Step 1: Identify path compression implementation
The find method should assign the parent during recursion:self.parent[x] = self.find(self.parent[x])to flatten the tree.Step 2: Understand impact of missing assignment
Without path compression, find operations become slower and can cause TLE or incorrect component counts on large inputs.Final Answer:
Option A -> Option AQuick Check:
Missing path compression assignment is a classic subtle bug [OK]
- Forgetting path compression assignment
- Misplacing rank increment
- Incorrectly decrementing count
Solution
Step 1: Analyze union-find operations
Union-find performs m union/find operations in O(m α(n)) time, where α(n) is very slow growing and almost constant.Step 2: Analyze sorting step
Sorting characters in all connected components combined takes O(n log n) time.Final Answer:
Option A -> Option AQuick Check:
Union-find plus sorting dominates runtime as O(n log n + m α(n)) [OK]
- Assuming O(n*m) due to nested loops
- Confusing sorting cost as O(n²)
- Ignoring inverse Ackermann factor
Solution
Step 1: Understand the new constraint
Emails can belong to multiple users, so union-find's single parent per node model breaks down.Step 2: Choose correct data structure
A bipartite graph connecting accounts and emails with connected components allows shared emails without forcing merges.Step 3: Evaluate other options
Union-find cannot represent multiple parents; greedy assignment loses correctness.Final Answer:
Option A -> Option AQuick Check:
Graph approach models shared emails correctly [OK]
- Trying to modify union-find for multiple parents
- Ignoring shared emails and merging incorrectly
