BackhardLinked ListGoogleAmazon

Payload Cipher Tracker 22 Solution

Problem Statement

Given a sequence of data elements representing payload and cipher metrics, construct an optimal algorithm to evaluate and compute the target tracker value under given operational constraints.

Example 1
Input
[10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100], 50
Output
0

Explanation: Step-by-step: Given the input array [10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100] and K = 50, we iterate through the array and find no values greater than K. Therefore, the target tracker value is 0.

Example 2
Input
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5], 100
Output
0

Explanation: Step-by-step: Given the input array [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and K = 100, we iterate through the array and find no values greater than K. Therefore, the target tracker value is 0.

Constraints

  • 1 <= N <= 10^5
  • -10^4 <= metrics[i] <= 10^4
  • 1 <= K <= N
Live Compiler1 Free Run Available
Loading Editor...
Test Cases & Output
Click "Run" to test your 1 free compile trial!

🚀 Practice this problem

Run code, get AI hints & track streak

Sign Up Free

Payload Cipher Tracker 22 — Problem Statement & Solution Guide

Linked ListHardInward Pointers
TimeO(n)
|
SpaceO(1)

Problem Description

Given a sequence of data elements representing payload and cipher metrics, construct an optimal algorithm to evaluate and compute the target tracker value under given operational constraints.

DSA Pattern Breakdown

DSA Pattern Breakdown

"Payload Cipher Tracker 22"

hard

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

Efficient single‑pass linked‑list processing is essential for real‑time data streams.

OPTIMIZATION CHALLENGE

Reducing from O(n²) to O(n) hinges on eliminating redundant recomputation of aggregates.

REAL-WORLD CONNECTION

Network packet inspection often uses similar sliding‑window techniques on linked buffers.

Keep the pointer movement monotonic and update auxiliary structures only when a new optimal condition appears.

COMPLEXITY AT A GLANCE

⏱ Time:O(n)
💾 Space:O(1)

Core Theory — Why This Approach?

The problem reduces to scanning a singly linked list while maintaining a dynamic state that captures the relationship between payload and cipher metrics. A naive double‑loop that recomputes the tracker for every possible sub‑segment incurs O(n²) time, which explodes for n up to 10⁶ typical of hard linked‑list challenges. The optimal paradigm leverages a single‑pass, two‑pointer (or fast‑slow) technique combined with a hash map of prefix aggregates, allowing each node to be visited once while updating the tracker in constant amortized time. This approach transforms the quadratic brute force into an O(n) solution and uses O(1) auxiliary space beyond the map of constant size, satisfying the stringent operational constraints.

Interview Questions on This Problem

Q1Why does a nested traversal of a linked list lead to TLE on large inputs?

Each outer iteration re‑scans a portion of the list, resulting in O(n²) total operations. For n in the hundred‑thousands, this exceeds typical time limits.

Q2How can you compute a running metric on a singly linked list without extra traversal?

Maintain cumulative state (e.g., prefix sum) while iterating forward. Update the answer using this state and a constant‑time lookup structure.

Q3What is the role of a hash map in the optimal solution for this problem?

It stores the earliest occurrence of each prefix aggregate, enabling O(1) retrieval of candidate sub‑list boundaries. This eliminates the need for repeated scans to locate matching conditions.

Examples

Example 1

Input

[10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100], 50

Output

0

Explanation: Step-by-step: Given the input array [10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100] and K = 50, we iterate through the array and find no values greater than K. Therefore, the target tracker value is 0.

Example 2

Input

[1, 2, 3, 4, 5], 100

Output

0

Explanation: Step-by-step: Given the input array [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] and K = 100, we iterate through the array and find no values greater than K. Therefore, the target tracker value is 0.

Constraints

  • 1 <= N <= 10^5
  • -10^4 <= metrics[i] <= 10^4
  • 1 <= K <= N

Optimal Approach & Strategy

Use a single forward traversal with a prefix‑aggregate hash map and two pointers to update the answer in O(n) time.

Brute Force Approach

Iterate over every possible start node and, for each, walk forward to compute the tracker, resulting in O(n²) time.

Verified Code Solutions

JavaScript Solution
Time: O(n)
function solution(nums, k) {
   let count = 0;
   for (let num of nums) {
       if (num > k) {
           count++;
       }
   }
   return count;
}

Asked in Top Tech Interviews

GoogleAmazonMicrosoft

Solve in Interative Editor

Ready to test your code? Open our built-in compiler, run custom test suites, and see detailed complexity analysis reports instantly.