BackhardBacktrackingGoogleAmazon

Payload Sequence Synthesizer 31 Solution

Problem Statement

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

Example 1
Input
[10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100] and K = 1
Output
55

Explanation: Step-by-step: Given the input array and K = 1, we first find the maximum of the first K elements, which is 10. Then, we sum all elements in the array that are less than or equal to 10, resulting in 55.

Example 2
Input
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10] and K = 2
Output
3

Explanation: Step-by-step: Given the input array and K = 2, we first find the maximum of the first K elements, which is 2. Then, we sum all elements in the array that are less than or equal to 2, resulting in 1 + 2 = 3.

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 Sequence Synthesizer 31 — Problem Statement & Solution Guide

BacktrackingHardInward Pointers
TimeO(2ⁿ) worst‑case, but often much less due to pruning
|
SpaceO(n) recursion stack

Problem Description

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

DSA Pattern Breakdown

DSA Pattern Breakdown

"Payload Sequence Synthesizer 31"

hard

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

The backtracking pattern is essential for problems where the solution space is combinatorial and constraints are tight enough to allow aggressive pruning. It enables interviewees to demonstrate systematic search, state management, and the ability to reason about exponential complexity reductions.

OPTIMIZATION CHALLENGE

The breakthrough is recognizing that a simple cumulative sum check can serve as a powerful bound. By maintaining the best metric seen so far, any branch whose maximum possible future metric (currentMetric + sum of remaining items) cannot beat this bound is cut off, collapsing the exponential tree dramatically.

REAL-WORLD CONNECTION

Think of a distributed job scheduler that must pack tasks (payloads) onto a node respecting CPU, memory, and latency budgets. The scheduler explores task combinations, discarding any partial packing that would exceed a budget – exactly the prune‑and‑search behavior of backtracking.

During an interview, write the recursive helper first with clear parameters (idx, curWeight, curMetric). Then immediately add the pruning condition before the recursive calls. This shows you think about correctness and performance simultaneously.

COMPLEXITY AT A GLANCE

⏱ Time:O(2ⁿ) worst‑case, but often much less due to pruning
💾 Space:O(n) recursion stack

Core Theory — Why This Approach?

Backtracking is a depth‑first search paradigm that incrementally builds candidates for the solution and abandons a candidate (backtracks) as soon as it determines that this candidate cannot possibly lead to a valid final solution. In the "Payload Sequence Synthesizer 31" problem the search space is the power set of the input sequence – each element can be either taken or skipped – which grows exponentially (2ⁿ). A naive exhaustive enumeration therefore blows up for n > 30, exceeding both time and memory limits. The optimal backtracking solution leverages three key ideas: (1) ordering the payloads by a heuristic (e.g., descending metric) to encounter infeasible branches early, (2) maintaining running aggregates (cumulative payload weight, metric sum) and pruning whenever the aggregates violate the operational constraints, and (3) optionally memoizing states defined by the current index and remaining capacity to avoid recomputation of identical sub‑problems. This transforms the brute‑force exponential scan into a pruned exponential search that, for typical constraint‑tight inputs, runs in a fraction of the original time while using only O(n) auxiliary space for the recursion stack.

Interview Questions on This Problem

Q1How would you modify the backtracking solution if the synthesizer constraints become a multi‑dimensional knapsack (e.g., both weight and power limits)?

Introduce additional running aggregates for each dimension and extend the pruning condition to check all constraints simultaneously. Optionally sort items by a combined density metric to improve early pruning, and consider using a memoization map keyed by (index, remainingWeight, remainingPower) to avoid recomputing identical sub‑states.

Q2Explain why sorting the payloads by descending metric before backtracking can dramatically reduce the search space.

Sorting places high‑value items first, so the algorithm reaches a feasible (or optimal) solution quickly. Once a feasible solution is found, its aggregate metric provides a lower bound for the best possible answer; any branch that cannot surpass this bound can be pruned immediately, cutting off large portions of the exponential tree.

Q3Compare backtracking with DP for this problem. When would a DP table be preferable, and what are its trade‑offs?

DP (typically a 2‑D table for knapsack‑style constraints) guarantees polynomial time O(n·C) where C is the capacity, but it consumes O(n·C) memory and loses the ability to enumerate all valid sequences. Backtracking uses O(n) space and can generate actual sequences, but its runtime is exponential in the worst case. DP is preferable when only the optimal value is required and the capacity is modest; backtracking shines when the solution set must be enumerated or when constraints are too many for a feasible DP dimension.

Examples

Example 1

Input

[10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100] and K = 1

Output

55

Explanation: Step-by-step: Given the input array and K = 1, we first find the maximum of the first K elements, which is 10. Then, we sum all elements in the array that are less than or equal to 10, resulting in 55.

Example 2

Input

[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10] and K = 2

Output

3

Explanation: Step-by-step: Given the input array and K = 2, we first find the maximum of the first K elements, which is 2. Then, we sum all elements in the array that are less than or equal to 2, resulting in 1 + 2 = 3.

Constraints

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

Optimal Approach & Strategy

Use recursive backtracking with early weight pruning and a global best‑metric bound to cut off branches that cannot improve the answer.

Brute Force Approach

Generate all 2ⁿ subsets, compute weight and metric for each, and keep the best valid one.

Verified Code Solutions

JavaScript Solution
Time: O(2ⁿ) worst‑case, but often much less due to pruning
function solution(nums, K) {
   if (K > nums.length || nums.length === 0) return 0;
   let max = Math.max(...nums.slice(0, K));
   let sum = 0;
   for (let num of nums) {
       if (num <= max) sum += num;
   }
   return sum;
}

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.