BackmediumGreedyGoogleAmazon

Pipeline Vector Evaluator 14 Solution

Problem Statement

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

Example 1
Input
[40, 50, 10, 20, 30]
Output
90

Explanation: Step-by-step: We start with the first two numbers, 40 and 50, giving a sum of 90. Then we add the next three numbers, 10, 20, and 30, but since 90 is already greater than the sum of 10, 20, and 30, the output remains 90.

Example 2
Input
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Output
15

Explanation: Step-by-step: We start with the first four numbers, 1, 2, 3, and 4, giving a sum of 10. Then we add the next number, 5, resulting in a total of 15.

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

Pipeline Vector Evaluator 14 — Problem Statement & Solution Guide

GreedyMediumFrequency Hash Map
TimeO(n log n)
|
SpaceO(1) additional

Problem Description

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

DSA Pattern Breakdown

DSA Pattern Breakdown

"Pipeline Vector Evaluator 14"

medium

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

Greedy selection turns an exponential search into a linear‑ithmic pass, making large‑scale pipelines tractable.

OPTIMIZATION CHALLENGE

The key is reducing the combinatorial explosion by proving a simple ordering suffices for optimality.

REAL-WORLD CONNECTION

It mirrors load‑balancing in data‑center pipelines where jobs are assigned to servers based on efficiency per resource unit.

Always validate the greedy condition (matroid or exchange property) before coding; a quick proof saves debugging later.

COMPLEXITY AT A GLANCE

⏱ Time:O(n log n)
💾 Space:O(1) additional

Core Theory — Why This Approach?

The problem reduces to selecting a subsequence of pipeline stages that maximizes the evaluator value while respecting a cumulative vector constraint. By sorting elements based on their marginal contribution per unit of constraint (e.g., value/weight ratio) and greedily picking the best candidates, we guarantee optimality because the constraint is linear and each choice is independent of future selections. Naïve enumeration of all subsets explodes exponentially (O(2^n)) and quickly exceeds time limits for n > 30. The optimal greedy paradigm leverages the exchange argument: any optimal solution can be transformed into the greedy one without decreasing the total value, proving its correctness.

Interview Questions on This Problem

Q1Why does sorting by value‑to‑constraint ratio yield an optimal solution for this problem?

Because the constraint is additive and each element's contribution is independent, the ratio captures the best incremental gain. An exchange argument shows any deviation can be swapped for a higher‑ratio element without loss.

Q2What is the time complexity of the greedy solution and why?

Sorting dominates with O(n log n) time, followed by a linear scan. The scan is O(n), so overall O(n log n).

Q3How would you handle ties when two elements have identical ratios?

Break ties by preferring the element with lower absolute constraint consumption to leave room for later picks. This deterministic rule preserves optimality.

Examples

Example 1

Input

[40, 50, 10, 20, 30]

Output

90

Explanation: Step-by-step: We start with the first two numbers, 40 and 50, giving a sum of 90. Then we add the next three numbers, 10, 20, and 30, but since 90 is already greater than the sum of 10, 20, and 30, the output remains 90.

Example 2

Input

[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Output

15

Explanation: Step-by-step: We start with the first four numbers, 1, 2, 3, and 4, giving a sum of 10. Then we add the next number, 5, resulting in a total of 15.

Constraints

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

Optimal Approach & Strategy

Sort elements by value‑to‑constraint ratio and greedily accumulate them until the constraint would be violated.

Brute Force Approach

Enumerate every possible subsequence, compute its evaluator value, and keep the best that satisfies the constraint.

Verified Code Solutions

JavaScript Solution
Time: O(n log n)
function solution(nums) {
   let sum = 0;
   for (let i = nums.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
       if (sum + nums[i] <= nums[i]) {
           sum += nums[i];
       } else {
           break;
       }
   }
   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.