2225 - Find Players With Zero or One Losses (Medium)
Problem Link
https://leetcode.com/problems/find-players-with-zero-or-one-losses/
Problem Statement
You are given an integer array matches
where matches[i] = [winneri, loseri]
indicates that the player winneri
defeated player loseri
in a match.
Return a list answer
of size 2
where:
answer[0]
is a list of all players that have not lost any matches.answer[1]
is a list of all players that have lost exactly one match.
The values in the two lists should be returned in increasing order.
Note:
- You should only consider the players that have played at least one match.
- The testcases will be generated such that no two matches will have the same outcome.
Example 1:
Input: matches = [[1,3],[2,3],[3,6],[5,6],[5,7],[4,5],[4,8],[4,9],[10,4],[10,9]]
Output: [[1,2,10],[4,5,7,8]]
Explanation:
Players 1, 2, and 10 have not lost any matches.
Players 4, 5, 7, and 8 each have lost one match.
Players 3, 6, and 9 each have lost two matches.
Thus, answer[0] = [1,2,10] and answer[1] = [4,5,7,8].
Example 2:
Input: matches = [[2,3],[1,3],[5,4],[6,4]]
Output: [[1,2,5,6],[]]
Explanation:
Players 1, 2, 5, and 6 have not lost any matches.
Players 3 and 4 each have lost two matches.
Thus, answer[0] = [1,2,5,6] and answer[1] = [].
Constraints:
1 <= matches.length <= 10^5
matches[i].length == 2
1 <= winneri, loseri <= 10^5
winneri != loseri
- All
matches[i]
are unique.
Approach 1: Hash Map (1062ms)
Check the number of times to lose for each player. If it is , then this player belongs to . If it is , then it belongs to .
Let be the number of matches then the
- Time complexity is we need to look at all the matches which would be but the sort at the end is (kudos @learner_9 for spotting and pointing out the mistake) and the
- Space complexity is .
- C++
class Solution {
public:
vector<vector<int>> findWinners(vector<vector<int>>& matches) {
vector<vector<int>> ans(2);
unordered_map<int, int> lost;
// calculate lost matches
for (auto x : matches) {
if (!lost.count(x[0])) lost[x[0]] = 0;
if (!lost.count(x[1])) lost[x[1]] = 0;
lost[x[1]]++;
}
// categorise players
for (auto x : lost) {
int who = x.first, lostMatches = x.second;
if (lostMatches == 0) ans[0].push_back(who);
else if (lostMatches == 1) ans[1].push_back(who);
}
// the values in the two lists should be returned in increasing order
sort(ans[0].begin(), ans[0].end());
sort(ans[1].begin(), ans[1].end());
return ans;
}
};
Approach 2: Set (1249 ms)
Let be the number of matches then the
- Time complexity is because of the insertion into the set / map and the
- Space complexity is .
- C++
static vector<vector<int>> findWinners(const vector<vector<int>>& matches) noexcept {
vector<vector<int>> ans(2);
set<int> win;
map<int, int> loss;
for (const vector<int>& match : matches) {
win.insert(match[0]);
++loss[match[1]];
}
for (int p : win)
if (loss.find(p) == end(loss)) ans[0].push_back(p);
for (auto [p, l] : loss)
if (l == 1) ans[1].push_back(p);
return ans;
}
Variant with a single map (1069ms)
Picking up on a idea from @stanislav-iablokov we can turn this into a solution with only one map. This is as fast as the solution with the hash set / map.
- C++
static vector<vector<int>> findWinners(const vector<vector<int>>& matches) noexcept {
vector<vector<int>> ans(2);
map<int, int> loss;
for (const vector<int>& match : matches) {
loss[match[0]] += 0; // make sure the winners are in the map too., just loss[match[0]]; would work as well
++loss[match[1]];
}
for (auto [p, l] : loss) {
if (l == 0) {
ans[0].push_back(p);
} else if (l == 1) {
ans[1].push_back(p);
}
}
return ans;
}
Approach 3: Arrays (749ms)
The range of the play number is limited enough that we can just use arrays instead of a hash map / set.
- C++
static vector<vector<int>> findWinners(const vector<vector<int>>& matches) noexcept {
array<bool, 100001> played = {};
array<int, 100001> losses = {};
for (const vector<int>& match : matches) {
played[match[0]] = true;
played[match[1]] = true;
++losses[match[1]];
}
vector<vector<int>> ans(2);
for (int i = 0; i < size(played); ++i) {
if (played[i]) {
if (losses[i] == 0) {
ans[0].push_back(i);
} else if (losses[i] == 1) {
ans[1].push_back(i);
}
}
}
return ans;
}
Let be the number of matches then the
- Time complexity is we need to look at all the matches, but there is a significat constant factor as we need look over the entier arrays and the
- Space complexity is , which means it's constant, but it's a large constant.