最近我参加了一个面试,面试官要求我“编写一个程序,从一个包含10亿个数字的数组中找出100个最大的数字”。
我只能给出一个蛮力解决方案,即以O(nlogn)时间复杂度对数组进行排序,并取最后100个数字。
Arrays.sort(array);
面试官正在寻找一个更好的时间复杂度,我尝试了几个其他的解决方案,但都没有回答他。有没有更好的时间复杂度解决方案?
最近我参加了一个面试,面试官要求我“编写一个程序,从一个包含10亿个数字的数组中找出100个最大的数字”。
我只能给出一个蛮力解决方案,即以O(nlogn)时间复杂度对数组进行排序,并取最后100个数字。
Arrays.sort(array);
面试官正在寻找一个更好的时间复杂度,我尝试了几个其他的解决方案,但都没有回答他。有没有更好的时间复杂度解决方案?
当前回答
I would find out who had the time to put a billion numbers into an array and fire him. Must work for government. At least if you had a linked list you could insert a number into the middle without moving half a billion to make room. Even better a Btree allows for a binary search. Each comparison eliminates half of your total. A hash algorithm would allow you to populate the data structure like a checkerboard but not so good for sparse data. As it is your best bet is to have a solution array of 100 integers and keep track of the lowest number in your solution array so you can replace it when you come across a higher number in the original array. You would have to look at every element in the original array assuming it is not sorted to begin with.
其他回答
此代码用于在未排序数组中查找N个最大的数字。
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
#define Array_Size 5 // No Of Largest Numbers To Find
#define BILLION 10000000000
void findLargest(int max[], int array[]);
int checkDup(int temp, int max[]);
int main() {
int array[BILLION] // contains data
int i=0, temp;
int max[Array_Size];
findLargest(max,array);
cout<< "The "<< Array_Size<< " largest numbers in the array are: \n";
for(i=0; i< Array_Size; i++)
cout<< max[i] << endl;
return 0;
}
void findLargest(int max[], int array[])
{
int i,temp,res;
for(int k=0; k< Array_Size; k++)
{
i=0;
while(i < BILLION)
{
for(int j=0; j< Array_Size ; j++)
{
temp = array[i];
res= checkDup(temp,max);
if(res == 0 && max[j] < temp)
max[j] = temp;
}
i++;
}
}
}
int checkDup(int temp, int max[])
{
for(int i=0; i<N_O_L_N_T_F; i++)
{
if(max[i] == temp)
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
这可能不是一个有效的方法,但可以完成工作。
希望这能有所帮助
我用Python写了一个简单的解决方案,以防有人感兴趣。它使用bisect模块和一个临时返回列表,它保持排序。这类似于优先级队列实现。
import bisect
def kLargest(A, k):
'''returns list of k largest integers in A'''
ret = []
for i, a in enumerate(A):
# For first k elements, simply construct sorted temp list
# It is treated similarly to a priority queue
if i < k:
bisect.insort(ret, a) # properly inserts a into sorted list ret
# Iterate over rest of array
# Replace and update return array when more optimal element is found
else:
if a > ret[0]:
del ret[0] # pop min element off queue
bisect.insort(ret, a) # properly inserts a into sorted list ret
return ret
使用100,000,000个元素和最坏情况输入是一个排序列表:
>>> from so import kLargest
>>> kLargest(range(100000000), 100)
[99999900, 99999901, 99999902, 99999903, 99999904, 99999905, 99999906, 99999907,
99999908, 99999909, 99999910, 99999911, 99999912, 99999913, 99999914, 99999915,
99999916, 99999917, 99999918, 99999919, 99999920, 99999921, 99999922, 99999923,
99999924, 99999925, 99999926, 99999927, 99999928, 99999929, 99999930, 99999931,
99999932, 99999933, 99999934, 99999935, 99999936, 99999937, 99999938, 99999939,
99999940, 99999941, 99999942, 99999943, 99999944, 99999945, 99999946, 99999947,
99999948, 99999949, 99999950, 99999951, 99999952, 99999953, 99999954, 99999955,
99999956, 99999957, 99999958, 99999959, 99999960, 99999961, 99999962, 99999963,
99999964, 99999965, 99999966, 99999967, 99999968, 99999969, 99999970, 99999971,
99999972, 99999973, 99999974, 99999975, 99999976, 99999977, 99999978, 99999979,
99999980, 99999981, 99999982, 99999983, 99999984, 99999985, 99999986, 99999987,
99999988, 99999989, 99999990, 99999991, 99999992, 99999993, 99999994, 99999995,
99999996, 99999997, 99999998, 99999999]
我花了40秒计算1亿个元素,所以我不敢计算10亿个元素。为了公平起见,我给它提供了最坏情况的输入(具有讽刺意味的是,一个已经排序的数组)。
我对此的直接反应是使用堆,但有一种方法可以使用QuickSelect,而不需要在任何时候保留所有的输入值。
创建一个大小为200的数组,并用前200个输入值填充它。运行QuickSelect并丢弃低100个位置,留下100个空闲位置。读入接下来的100个输入值并再次运行QuickSelect。继续执行,直到以100个批次为单位运行整个输入。
最后是前100个值。对于N个值,您运行QuickSelect大约N/100次。每个快速选择的代价大约是某个常数的200倍,所以总代价是某个常数的2N倍。在我看来,输入的大小是线性的,不管我在这个解释中硬连接的参数大小是100。
我看到了很多O(N)的讨论,所以我提出了一些不同的想法。
关于这些数字的性质有什么已知的信息吗?如果答案是随机的,那就不要再进一步了,看看其他答案。你不会得到比他们更好的结果。
However! See if whatever list-populating mechanism populated that list in a particular order. Are they in a well-defined pattern where you can know with certainty that the largest magnitude of numbers will be found in a certain region of the list or on a certain interval? There may be a pattern to it. If that is so, for example if they are guaranteed to be in some sort of normal distribution with the characteristic hump in the middle, always have repeating upward trends among defined subsets, have a prolonged spike at some time T in the middle of the data set like perhaps an incidence of insider trading or equipment failure, or maybe just have a "spike" every Nth number as in analysis of forces after a catastrophe, you can reduce the number of records you have to check significantly.
不管怎样,还是有一些值得思考的东西。也许这会帮助你给未来的面试官一个深思熟虑的回答。我知道,如果有人问我这样一个问题来回应这样的问题,我会印象深刻——这将告诉我,他们正在考虑优化。只是要认识到,优化的可能性并不总是存在的。
复杂度为O(N)
首先创建一个100个int的数组,将这个数组的第一个元素初始化为N个值的第一个元素, 用另一个变量CurrentBig来跟踪当前元素的索引
遍历N个值
if N[i] > M[CurrentBig] {
M[CurrentBig]=N[i]; ( overwrite the current value with the newly found larger number)
CurrentBig++; ( go to the next position in the M array)
CurrentBig %= 100; ( modulo arithmetic saves you from using lists/hashes etc.)
M[CurrentBig]=N[i]; ( pick up the current value again to use it for the next Iteration of the N array)
}
完成后,从CurrentBig中打印M数组100次模100:-) 对于学生:确保代码的最后一行在代码退出之前没有胜过有效数据