We Keep Coding

Trying to solve sliding window median problem in leetcode

I am working on LeetCode code challenge 480. Sliding Window Median:
You are given an integer array nums and an integer k. There is a sliding window of size k which is moving from the very left of the array to the very right. You can only see the k numbers in the window. Each time the sliding window moves right by one position.
Return the median array for each window in the original array. Answers within 10-5 of the actual value will be accepted.
I submitted my code, but it fails on test cases. I suspect that there is a problem in this part of my code:
const medianSlidingWindow = (array, window) => {
let start = 0;
let end = window - 1;
const min = new MinHeap(array);
const max = new MaxHeap(array);
const insert = (index) => {
if(max.size === 0){
max.push(index);
return;
}
(array[index] >= max.peak) ? min.push(index) : max.push(index);
balance();
}
const balance = () => {
if(Math.abs(max.size - min.size) >= 2){
const returned = (max.size > min.size) ? max.pop() : min.pop();
(max.size > min.size) ? min.push(returned) : max.push(returned);
}
}
const remove = (index) => {
(max.has(index)) ? max.pop(index, true) : min.pop(index, true);
balance();
}
const next = () => {
remove(start++);
insert(++end);
}
const getMedian = () => {
if(window % 2 === 0) return (max.peak + min.peak)/2;
return (max.size > min.size) ? max.peak : min.peak;
}
for(let i = 0; i <= end; i++){
insert(i);
}
const ret = [];
while(end < array.length){
ret.push(getMedian());
next();
}
return ret;
}
Here is the full code:
class MaxHeap{
#array = [];
#size = 0;
#reference = [];
#map = new Map();
constructor(reference = []){
this.#reference = reference;
}
get size(){
return this.#size;
}
/* Debug */
get array(){
return this.#array;
}
get peak(){
return this.get(0);
}
get(index){
if(index === null || index < 0 || index >= this.#array.length) return null;
return this.#reference[this.#array[index]];
}
has(indexReference){
return this.#map.has(indexReference);
}
swap(indexA, indexB){
let temp = this.#map.get(this.#array[indexA]);
this.#map.set(this.#array[indexA], indexB);
this.#map.set(this.#array[indexB], temp);
[this.#array[indexA], this.#array[indexB]] = [this.#array[indexB], this.#array[indexA]];
}
sink(index){
let currentIndex = index;
let greterChild;
while((this.get(greterChild = this.get(2*currentIndex+1) >= this.get(2*currentIndex + 2) ? 2*currentIndex + 1 : 2*currentIndex + 2) ?? Number.MIN_SAFE_INTEGER) > this.get(currentIndex)){
this.swap(currentIndex, greterChild);
currentIndex = greterChild;
}
}
bubble(index){
let currentIndex = index;
let parent;
while((this.get(parent = Math.ceil((currentIndex - 2)/2)) ?? Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER) < this.get(currentIndex)){
this.swap(currentIndex, parent);
currentIndex = parent;
}
}
push(...char){
if(char[0].constructor === Array) char = char.flat();
for(let i = 0; i < char.length; i++){
this.#array.push(char[i]);
this.#map.set(char[i], this.#array.length - 1)
this.bubble(this.#array.length - 1);
this.#size++;
}
}
pop(index = 0, fromReference = false){
const ret = (fromReference) ? index :this.#array[index];
if(fromReference) index = this.#map.get(index);
this.swap(index, this.#array.length - 1);
this.#map.delete(ret);
this.#array.pop();
this.sink(index);
this.#size--;
return ret;
}
}
class MinHeap extends MaxHeap{
constructor(reference = []){
super(reference);
}
get size(){
return super.size;
}
get peak(){
return super.peak;
}
/* Debug */
get array(){
return super.array;
}
bubble(index){
let currentIndex = index;
let parent;
while((this.get(parent = Math.ceil((currentIndex - 2)/2)) ?? Number.MIN_SAFE_INTEGER) > this.get(currentIndex)){
this.swap(currentIndex, parent);
currentIndex = parent;
}
}
sink(index){
let currentIndex = index;
let lesserChild;
while((this.get(lesserChild = this.get(2*currentIndex+1) >= this.get(2*currentIndex + 2) ? 2*currentIndex + 2 : 2*currentIndex + 1) ?? Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER) < this.get(currentIndex)){
this.swap(currentIndex, lesserChild);
currentIndex = lesserChild;
}
}
}
const medianSlidingWindow = (array, window) => {
let start = 0;
let end = window - 1;
const min = new MinHeap(array);
const max = new MaxHeap(array);
const insert = (index) => {
if(max.size === 0){
max.push(index);
return;
}
(array[index] >= max.peak) ? min.push(index) : max.push(index);
balance();
}
const balance = () => {
if(Math.abs(max.size - min.size) >= 2){
const returned = (max.size > min.size) ? max.pop() : min.pop();
(max.size > min.size) ? min.push(returned) : max.push(returned);
}
}
const remove = (index) => {
(max.has(index)) ? max.pop(index, true) : min.pop(index, true);
balance();
}
const next = () => {
remove(start++);
insert(++end);
}
const getMedian = () => {
if(window % 2 === 0) return (max.peak + min.peak)/2;
return (max.size > min.size) ? max.peak : min.peak;
}
for(let i = 0; i <= end; i++){
insert(i);
}
const ret = [];
while(end < array.length){
ret.push(getMedian());
next();
}
return ret;
}
What went wrong:
On the 30th testcase of the problem (link: https://leetcode.com/problems/sliding-window-median/submissions/859041571/), it resolves to a wrong answer but when I pick one of the windows that resolves to a wrong answer it gives me a correct answer. I'm currently confused because two of the heaps are fairly balanced (as one heap doesn't exceed above one element) and I've tested my heap that both seem to work perfectly. It will be very helpful if somebody helps me.
Link to SO questions I've followed:
How to implement a Median-heap

There are these problems in your heap implementation:
The get function will return null when an out of range index is given, which means the while condition in your sink method could sometimes choose an non-existing child (when there is only one child). Note that a numerical comparison with null will treat that null as 0, and depending of the sign of the value you compare it with can give false or true.
For example, your code fails this test case for that reason:
nums=[1,2,3,4]
k=4
You can fix this by returning undefined instead of null. Then also make sure that the false side of the comparison operator is the one with +1 (choosing the left child), while the true side takes the other child.
The pop method, when called with true for the second argument, does not guarantee to restore the heap property. It takes care of sinking the value at the given index, but does not consider the case where this value should actually bubble up!
For example, your code fails this test case for that reason:
nums=[10,6,5,2,3,0,8,1,4,12,7,13,11,9]
k=11
Here is a simplified example where I depict a min-heap with the referenced values:
5
/ \
8 6
/ \ /
10 12 7
If the node with value 10 is to be removed, the swap action will give this min-heap (which is correct):
5
/ \
8 6
/ \ /
7 12 10
And then your code calls sink on that node with value 7. It is clear that there is nothing to sink here, but instead that 7 should bubble up and swap with 8. Your code must foresee both scenarios: sift or bubble.
If you fix those two issues in your heap implementation, it will work.
I provide here the literal changes you have to make:
In the get method, replace return null with return undefined (or omit the explicit value)
In the MaxHeap sink method, swap the comparator expression, replacing:
while((this.get(greterChild = this.get(2*currentIndex+1) >= this.get(2*currentIndex + 2) ? 2*currentIndex + 1 : 2*currentIndex + 2) ?? Number.MIN_SAFE_INTEGER) > this.get(currentIndex)){
with:
while((this.get(greterChild = this.get(2*currentIndex+1) <= this.get(2*currentIndex + 2) ? 2*currentIndex + 2 : 2*currentIndex + 1) ?? Number.MIN_SAFE_INTEGER) > this.get(currentIndex)){
In the pop method, replace:
this.sink(index);
with:
this.sink(index);
this.bubble(index);
(You can also first check which of both is needed, but it doesn't hurt to just call both methods)

Binary Search for multiple items within a Range (Log time filter)

I have an Array of Log items, already sorted by their timestamp (number of milliseconds since 1970). Now I want to filter them by a specific time range, so I think of Binary Search, however this variant is different than all variants I knew before as I need to find a range within a range. Note that there may be none or multiple items at the value edges.
I came up with this to reduce one range requirement but still don't know how to get to the first/last edge items:
filterByTime(min: number, max: number): LogItem[] {
const items = this.items;
const len = items.length;
if (min === undefined && max === undefined) {
return items.slice(0, len - 1);
}
min = min || Number.MIN_VALUE;
max = max || Number.MAX_VALUE;
const fn = (a: LogItem) => {
if (a.time < min) {
return -1;
} else if (a.time > max) {
return 1;
} else {
return 0;
}
};
const lowerBound = this.binarySearchBound(fn, 0, len, true);
if (lowerBound == -1) { return []; }
const upperBound = this.binarySearchBound(fn, 0, len, false);
return items.slice(lowerBound, upperBound + 1);
}
binarySearchBound(compareFn: (a: LogItem) => number, left: number, right: number, isLowerBound: boolean): number {
const items = this.items;
if (items.length == 0) {
return -1;
}
if (isLowerBound && compareFn(items[0]) == 0) {
return 0;
} else if (!isLowerBound && compareFn(items[items.length - 1]) == 0) {
return items.length - 1;
}
while (left <= right) {
const mid = (left + right) / 2;
const item = this.items[mid];
const compare = compareFn(item);
if (compare < 0) {
left = mid + 1;
} else if (compare > 0) {
right = mid - 1;
} else {
// What to do now?
}
}
return -1;
}
Worst case scenario, I can just do a linear search from the edge since I can assume there are not that much items at the edge but surely there is a better way I didn't think of but then I may have to iterate through the whole result set if mid falls in the middle of the result set.
EDIT for adding a note: It's possible for min or max is undefined (and could be both, in which case I can just set an if and return the copy of the whole array). Is it better to just substitute it with MIN_VALUE and MAX_VALUE if they are undefined, or is there a better way to handle that case?

I would suggest the following:
Write two binary search functions, as the execution time is then not hampered by passing and checking the isLowerBound boolean.
Make the returned upperBound to mean the next index after the potential last index that belongs to the range. This corresponds with how arguments work with native functions like slice.
Don't use -1 as a special index. If coded well, an empty range will come out of the two binary searches any way and give an empty array as result
Make the compare function to work with 2 parameters, so you can actually search for either the min or the max value.
Yes, I would use MIN_VALUE and MAX_VALUE as defaults and not test for boundary cases. If boundary cases happen often, it might be worth to include those checks, but in general be aware that these checks will then be executed for every filter, which may bring down the average execution time.
Here is the suggested implementation with integer data (instead of objects) to keep it simple. In order to have it run in a snippet I also removed the type references:
function filterByTime(min=Number.MIN_VALUE, max=Number.MAX_VALUE) {
const fn = (a, b) => a - b; // simplified (should be a.time - b.time)
const lowerBound = this.binarySearchLowerBound(fn, 0, this.items.length, min);
const upperBound = this.binarySearchUpperBound(fn, lowerBound, this.items.length, max);
return this.items.slice(lowerBound, upperBound);
}
function binarySearchLowerBound(compareFn, left, right, target) {
while (left < right) {
const mid = (left + right) >> 1;
if (compareFn(this.items[mid], target) < 0) {
left = mid + 1;
} else { // Also when equal...
right = mid;
}
}
return left;
}
function binarySearchUpperBound(compareFn, left, right, target) {
while (left < right) {
const mid = (left + right) >> 1;
if (compareFn(this.items[mid], target) <= 0) { // Also when equal...
left = mid + 1;
} else {
right = mid;
}
}
return left;
}
// Demo with simplified data (instead of objects with time property)
this.items = [1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8];
console.log(this.filterByTime(2, 4));
console.log(this.filterByTime(4, 5));

Combined the variants on this article, I merged first and last code into a single function:
filterByTime(items: LogItem[], min: number, max: number): LogItem[] {
const len = items.length;
if (len == 0) {
return [];
}
if (min === undefined && max === undefined) {
return items.slice(0, len - 1);
}
min = min || Number.MIN_VALUE;
max = max || Number.MAX_VALUE;
const fn = (a: LogItem) => {
if (a.time < min) {
return -1;
} else if (a.time > max) {
return 1;
} else {
return 0;
}
};
const lowerBound = this.binarySearchBound(fn, 0, len, true);
if (lowerBound == -1) { return []; }
const upperBound = this.binarySearchBound(fn, 0, len, false);
return items.slice(lowerBound, upperBound + 1);
}
binarySearchBound(compareFn: (a: LogItem) => number, left: number, right: number, isLowerBound: boolean): number {
const items = this.items;
if (items.length == 0) {
return -1;
}
if (isLowerBound && compareFn(items[0]) == 0) {
return 0;
} else if (!isLowerBound && compareFn(items[items.length - 1]) == 0) {
return items.length - 1;
}
let result = -1;
while (left <= right) {
const mid = (left + right) / 2;
const item = this.items[mid];
const compare = compareFn(item);
if (compare < 0) {
left = mid + 1;
} else if (compare > 0) {
right = mid - 1;
} else {
result = mid;
if (isLowerBound) {
right = mid - 1;
} else {
left = mid + 1;
}
}
}
return result;
}

How to get Index of element if found using Binary Search(Recursively)

function getMiddle({right,left}) {
return Math.floor((left + right) / 2);
}
function RecursivelyBinarySearch(arr, search) {
let left = 0;
let right = arr.length - 1;
let middle = getMiddle({left,right});
if (right >= left) {
if (arr[middle] === search) {
return middle;
} else if (arr[middle] < search) {
return RecursivelyBinarySearch(arr.slice(middle + 1, arr.length), search);
} else {
return RecursivelyBinarySearch(arr.slice(0, middle - 1), search)
}
}
return -1;
}
let result = RecursivelyBinarySearch([1,5,7,9,10,20], 20);
console.log(result);
// RecursivelyBinarySearch([1,5,7,9,10,20], 20)
RecursivelyBinarySearch returns 0, but I want it to be 5,
is it possible to do this without passing the orignal array?

Welcome to stack overflow! It's a strange request to not pass the original array. But I assume you have a good reason for it :)
Regarding your snippet, you have an error in your Binary Search function. For the last else case you need to pass arr.slice(0, middle) instead of middle - 1.
Now for your original question, we need to pass the first index of array every time, since this information is critical to find the original index (It is lost when you do arr.slice). You can modify your function like below to achieve the desired result.
function getMiddle({right,left}) {
return Math.floor((left + right) / 2);
}
function RecursivelyBinarySearch(arr, search, first_idx) {
let left = 0;
let right = arr.length - 1;
let middle = getMiddle({left,right});
if (right >= left) {
if (arr[middle] === search) {
return middle + first_idx;
} else if (arr[middle] < search) {
return RecursivelyBinarySearch(arr.slice(middle + 1, arr.length), search, middle + first_idx + 1);
} else {
return RecursivelyBinarySearch(arr.slice(0, middle), search, first_idx)
}
}
return -1;
}
let result = RecursivelyBinarySearch([1,5,7,9,10,20], 20, 0);
console.log(result);

Add rules to a generateRandomNumber function

I am trying to create a function that generates a random number from a given interval, but I want to be able to generate only 3 identical consecutive numbers. For example, if a have the interval [0,4) I want:
Accepted: 1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 0
Not accepted: 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 0
I've found on multiple threads functions that generates a different number than the previous one, but I don't know how to change it to accomplish what I need. Any thoughts?

You must completely reset your counter, when you generate a different number. Not just decrease it.
function setRandomInterval(min, max, allowedRepeats) {
var last, // keeping the last random value
repeatCount = 0, // count of repeated value
getR = function () { return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min)) + min; };
if (min >= max) {
throw 'Selected interval [' + min + ', ' + max + ') does not work for random numbers.';
}
return function () {
var r = getR();
if (r != last) {
repeatCount = 0; //no repeat yet
} else if (repeatCount < allowedRepeats) { //new number is equal to last one, but it's still ok
repeatCount++; //just increase the number of repeats
} else { //new number is equal to last, and allowed number of repeats is reached
while (r == last) { //must create a different number
r = getR();
}
repeatCount = 0; //reset the repeatCount
}
return last = r; //save r as last number and return it
};
}
var getRandom = setRandomInterval(0, 4, 2); //call with 2 allowed repeats to allow a sequence of three equal numbers

Try this
function randomBetween(min, max, limit = 3) {
if (min > max) {
[max, min] = [min, max];
}
function getBetween(min, max) {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min)) + min;
}
let last;
let count = 0;
return function generate() {
const result = getBetween(min, max);
count = (result === last) ? count + 1 : 0;
if (count > limit) {
return generate();
}
last = result;
return result;
};
}

Here's a snippet that prevent from the same number to randomize more than 3 times. If the count of the number is greater than the limit the randomNumber is called again (and so on until it won't get the same value.
You can see (when running it) that the largest sequence is 3.
const limit = 3;
let last = null,
count = 0;
function getRndInteger(min, max) {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min)) + min;
}
function randomNumber(min, max) {
let num = getRndInteger(min, max);
if (last !== num) {
last = num;
count = 0;
}
count++;
if (count > limit) {
num = randomNumber(min, max);
}
return num;
}
for (let i = 0; i < 20; i++)
console.log(randomNumber(0, 2));

Here is an approach that's uses a nice feature of modern JS. Generators..
Using generators you can create composable code. Instead of creating 1 function that does this one specific thing, you can compose a function than stream together multiple generators. This is great for making re-usable code.
Below I've created 3 function,.
randomValues => this just generates random number between a range.
repeatLimit => this generator just prevents x amount of repeated values
iterCount => this generator stop after count iterations
All you do then is compose all these generators together, but the bonus is that these generators can be used in other places. eg. [...repeatLimit(3, [1,1,1,1, 0,0,0,0])] would return 1,1,1,0,0,0.
function* randValues(min, max) {
const range = max - min;
while (true)
yield min + Math.trunc(Math.random() * range);
}
function* repeatLimit(limit, gen) {
let rcount = 0, rvalue;
for (let g of gen) {
if (rvalue === g) rcount += 1; else rcount = 1;
rvalue = g;
if (rcount <= limit) yield g;
}
}
function* iterCount(count, gen) {
for (let g of gen) {
yield g;
count --;
if (count <= 0) break;
}
}
const gen =
iterCount(22, repeatLimit(3, randValues(0, 2)));
for (const r of gen) {
console.log(r);
}

How to count number of ways to parenthesize boolean expression string to evaluate to desired result

Straight out of CTCI, 8.14: Given a boolean expression consisting of the symbols 0 (false), 1 (true), & (AND), | (OR), and ^(XOR), and a desired boolean result value result, implement a function to count the number of ways of parenthesizing the expression such that it evaluates to result.
I'm attempting a brute force approach that calculates every single possible combo, if matches desired result, add it to an array(combos) and return that result length. It seems to work for most expressions, but not the 2nd example given. What do I seem to be missing?
function countEval(s, goalBool, combos = []) {
// on first call make s into array since theyre easier to work with
if (!(s instanceof Array)) {
// and turn 1s and 0s into their bool equivalent
s = s.split('').map((item) => {
if (item === '1') {
return true;
} else if (item === '0'){
return false;
} else {
return item;
}
});
}
if (s.length === 1 && s[0] === goalBool) {
combos.push(s[0]); // can be anything really
} else {
for (let i = 0; i < s.length - 2; i = i + 2) {
// splice out the next 3 items
const args = s.splice(i, 3);
// pass them to see what they evaluate too
const result = evalHelper(args[0], args[1], args[2]);
// splice that result back in s array
s.splice(i, 0, result);
// pass that array to recurse
countEval(s, goalBool, combos);
// remove said item that was just put in
s.splice(i, 1);
// and reset array for next iteration
s.splice(i, 0, ...args);
}
}
return combos.length;
}
function evalHelper(a, op, b) {
if (op === '|') {
return a || b;
} else if (op === '&') {
return a && b;
} else if (op === '^') {
return a !== b;
}
}
With the 2 examples given it works for the first one, but not the second...
console.log(countEval('1^0|0|1', false)); // 2, correct
console.log(countEval('0&0&0&1^1|0', true)); // 30, should be 10!?!?!

The Bug
Your program is not taking into account overlap.
Example
Consider your program when s = '1|1|1|1'.
In one of the depth-first search iterations, your algorithm will make the reduction s = (1|1)|1|1. Then in a deeper recursive level in the same search, your algorithm will make the reduction s = (1|1)|(1|1). Now s is fully reduced, so you increment the length of combos.
In a different depth-first search iteration, your algorithm will first make the reduction s = 1|1|(1|1). Then in a deeper recursive level in the same search, your algorithm will make the reduction s = (1|1)|(1|1). Now s is fully reduced, so you increment the length of combos.
Notice that for both cases, s was parenthesized the same way, thus your program does not take into account overlap.
A Better Solution
A lot of times, when a problem is asking the number of ways something can be done, this is usually a big indicator that dynamic programming could be a potential solution. The recurrence relation to this problem is a bit tricky.
We just need to pick a "principle" operator, then determine the number of ways the left and right side could evaluate to true or false. Then, based on the "principle" operator and the goal boolean, we can derive a formula for the number of ways the expression could evaluate to the goal boolean given that the operator we picked was the "principle" operator.
Code
function ways(expr, res, i, j, cache, spaces) {
if (i == j) {
return parseInt(expr[i]) == res ? 1 : 0;
} else if (!([i, j, res] in cache)) {
var ans = 0;
for (var k = i + 1; k < j; k += 2) {
var op = expr[k];
var leftTrue = ways(expr, 1, i, k - 1, cache);
var leftFalse = ways(expr, 0, i, k - 1, cache);
var rightTrue = ways(expr, 1, k + 1, j, cache);
var rightFalse = ways(expr, 0, k + 1, j, cache);
if (op == '|') {
if (res) {
ans += leftTrue * rightTrue + leftTrue * rightFalse + leftFalse * rightTrue;
} else {
ans += leftFalse * rightFalse;
}
} else if (op == '^') {
if (res) {
ans += leftTrue * rightFalse + leftFalse * rightTrue;
} else {
ans += leftTrue * rightTrue + leftFalse * rightFalse;
}
} else if (op == '&') {
if (res) {
ans += leftTrue * rightTrue;
} else {
ans += leftFalse * rightFalse + leftTrue * rightFalse + leftFalse * rightTrue;
}
}
}
cache[[i, j, res]] = ans;
}
return cache[[i, j, res]];
}
function countEval(expr, res) {
return ways(expr, res ? 1 : 0, 0, expr.length - 1, {});
}