← Bloomberg Interview Insights
The naive approach works but they're probably watching to see if you jump straight to a priority queue or think through it first.
Start by clarifying the problem constraints (e.g., k and list sizes) and discussing trade-offs between approaches. Then present a solution using a min-heap of size k to repeatedly extract the smallest node, achieving O(N log k) time and O(k) space. Walk through the algorithm with a small example and analyze complexity.
Pro tip: Mention that for small k, a divide-and-conquer merge might be more cache-friendly and avoid heap overhead, showing you consider practical performance beyond big-O.
Ask about the range of k, list lengths, memory limits, and whether lists can be empty. Discuss edge cases like k=0 or all lists empty.
Compare naive sequential merging (O(kN)), divide-and-conquer (O(N log k)), and heap-based (O(N log k)). Explain trade-offs in time, space, and implementation complexity.
Describe initializing a min-heap with the head of each non-empty list, then repeatedly pop the smallest node, append it to the result, and push its next node if it exists.
State time O(N log k) and space O(k) for the heap. Mention that for very small k, a simpler merge might be faster due to lower constant factors.
Walk through a small example (e.g., k=3 lists) to verify correctness, and consider edge cases like one list empty or all lists of length 1.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.