← Meta Interview Insights

Meta·Software Engineer·Technical Phone Screen·Intermediate

Intermediate
Jun 2026

Summary

Meta coding screen for a software engineer role, basically a maze problem dressed up in a few different ways. Nothing too wild but the follow-up questions on scaling pushed me more than I expected.

Questions Asked (4)

Q1

Given a 2D grid maze with walls, open cells, a start, and a target, determine whether the target is reachable from the start and return the shortest path using BFS.

Algorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

I jumped straight to BFS which was right, but I fumbled the neighbor enumeration early on.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the problem constraints (e.g., grid size, movement allowed, path definition) and then explain the BFS approach: use a queue to explore cells level by level, track visited cells, and store parent pointers to reconstruct the shortest path. Walk through a small example to demonstrate correctness and discuss time/space complexity.

Pro tip: Mention that BFS guarantees the shortest path in unweighted grids, and proactively discuss edge cases like unreachable target, start equals target, and large grids to show thoroughness.

1. Clarify the problem

Ask about grid dimensions, movement directions (4-way or 8-way), whether diagonal moves are allowed, and what constitutes a valid path. Confirm that the grid contains only walls and open cells.

2. Outline BFS approach

Explain that BFS explores cells in increasing distance from the start, ensuring the first time the target is reached, the path is shortest. Use a queue for traversal and a visited set or matrix to avoid cycles.

3. Detail path reconstruction

Describe how to store parent pointers (or previous cell coordinates) for each visited cell. Once the target is found, backtrack from target to start to build the path.

4. Analyze complexity and edge cases

State that time complexity is O(R*C) and space complexity is O(R*C) for the queue and visited structures. Discuss edge cases: start equals target, target unreachable, and empty grid.

5. Walk through an example

Trace BFS on a small grid (e.g., 3x3) to show how the queue evolves and how the path is reconstructed. This demonstrates understanding and catches off-by-one errors.

Key Points to Mention

  • BFS guarantees shortest path in unweighted graphs
  • Use a queue for level-order traversal
  • Track visited cells to avoid infinite loops
  • Store parent pointers for path reconstruction
  • Time and space complexity: O(R*C)
  • Handle edge cases: unreachable target, start equals target

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q2

How would you handle edge cases like the start equaling the target, a fully blocked maze, or when the start or target cell itself is a wall?

Algorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

They asked this almost as a checklist thing.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the problem constraints and defining the expected behavior for each edge case. Then systematically walk through each scenario, explaining how your algorithm handles it, and if necessary, propose modifications to ensure correctness and efficiency.

Pro tip: Demonstrate proactive thinking by mentioning that you would write unit tests for these edge cases before coding the solution. This shows you prioritize robustness and test-driven development, which is highly valued at Meta.

1. Clarify requirements and constraints

Ask the interviewer about the maze representation, movement rules, and expected output for edge cases. Confirm whether start and target are guaranteed to be valid and distinct.

2. Define behavior for each edge case

Explicitly state what should happen when start equals target (return 0 or empty path), when the maze is fully blocked (return -1 or no path), and when start or target is a wall (return -1 or handle as invalid input).

3. Adapt algorithm to handle edge cases

Explain how your chosen algorithm (e.g., BFS, DFS, A*) can incorporate early checks for these conditions to avoid unnecessary computation or errors.

4. Discuss testing and validation

Mention that you would write unit tests for these edge cases to ensure the solution behaves as expected and to catch regressions.

5. Summarize and connect to broader principles

Conclude by emphasizing the importance of handling edge cases in production code and how this reflects good software engineering practices.

Key Points to Mention

  • Early termination when start equals target to avoid unnecessary search.
  • Handling invalid inputs (start or target on a wall) by returning an error or -1.
  • Detecting fully blocked maze by checking if start or target is isolated or if no path exists.
  • Using BFS for shortest path in unweighted grids, with appropriate boundary checks.
  • Writing unit tests for edge cases to ensure robustness.
  • Communicating assumptions and asking clarifying questions before coding.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q3

If the maze has weighted edges instead of uniform movement costs, how would you adapt your approach?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Said Dijkstra, explained the priority queue swap.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Acknowledge that the problem shifts from BFS to a shortest-path algorithm like Dijkstra's, then discuss the trade-offs between different approaches (e.g., Dijkstra vs. A* vs. Bellman-Ford) based on edge weight properties. Emphasize the need to adapt the data structures (e.g., priority queue) and analyze time/space complexity.

Pro tip: Mention that if edge weights are small integers, you can use Dial's algorithm (bucket queue) for O(V+E) time, showing depth beyond standard Dijkstra. Also, clarify whether negative weights exist, as that would require Bellman-Ford.

1. Identify the change

Recognize that uniform costs allowed BFS, but weighted edges require a shortest-path algorithm that accounts for varying costs.

2. Choose the right algorithm

Select Dijkstra's algorithm for non-negative weights, A* if a heuristic is available, or Bellman-Ford if negative weights exist. Justify your choice.

3. Adapt data structures

Replace the simple queue with a priority queue (min-heap) for Dijkstra, or use a bucket queue if weights are small integers.

4. Analyze complexity

Compare time and space complexity of the chosen algorithm (e.g., Dijkstra with binary heap: O((V+E) log V)) and discuss potential optimizations.

5. Consider edge cases

Address scenarios like negative weights, zero-weight edges, or large graphs, and how they affect algorithm choice and implementation.

Key Points to Mention

  • Dijkstra's algorithm for non-negative weights
  • Priority queue (min-heap) implementation
  • Time complexity: O((V+E) log V) with binary heap
  • A* search with admissible heuristic for optimization
  • Bellman-Ford for negative weights (and detect negative cycles)
  • Dial's algorithm (bucket queue) for small integer weights

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q4

How would you handle very large mazes where memory becomes a bottleneck? Walk through the trade-offs between A* with a heuristic and bidirectional BFS.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offsSystem Design
Author's notes

This is where the conversation got interesting.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by acknowledging that memory is the bottleneck and propose memory-efficient strategies like iterative deepening or external memory algorithms. Then compare A* with a heuristic and bidirectional BFS in terms of memory usage, time complexity, and practical applicability, emphasizing trade-offs. Conclude with a recommendation based on the maze's characteristics and available resources.

Pro tip: Mention that bidirectional BFS can be more memory-efficient than A* when the branching factor is high, but A* with a good heuristic often explores fewer nodes. Also, consider using a memory-bounded variant like IDA* to combine the benefits of A* with low memory.

1. Identify memory constraints

Discuss how large mazes can exceed available memory, leading to swapping or out-of-memory errors. Mention that the frontier (open set) and visited set are the main memory consumers.

2. Analyze A* with heuristic

Explain that A* stores all generated nodes in memory, which can be prohibitive. However, a good heuristic reduces the number of expanded nodes, potentially saving memory. Mention that memory usage is O(b^d) in the worst case.

3. Analyze bidirectional BFS

Explain that bidirectional BFS expands from both start and goal, potentially reducing the search depth and thus memory. However, it still stores visited nodes from both directions, and memory can be high if the frontiers meet late.

4. Compare trade-offs

Compare time and memory: A* with a strong heuristic often explores fewer nodes but may still use significant memory; bidirectional BFS can reduce time but may use more memory due to two frontiers. Discuss when each is preferable.

5. Propose memory-efficient alternatives

Suggest algorithms like IDA* (Iterative Deepening A*) which uses less memory, or external memory algorithms that store data on disk. Also mention using a memory-bounded heuristic search like SMA*.

Key Points to Mention

  • Memory complexity of A*: O(b^d) where b is branching factor and d is depth.
  • Memory complexity of bidirectional BFS: O(b^(d/2)) for each direction, but constant factor may be higher.
  • Heuristic quality: A* with a perfect heuristic explores minimal nodes, but memory still an issue.
  • Bidirectional BFS requires knowing the goal state and being able to search backwards.
  • IDA* combines A*'s heuristic with depth-first search to reduce memory to O(d).
  • External memory algorithms: use disk storage for visited nodes, but slower due to I/O.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.