← Instacart Interview Insights

Instacart·Software Engineer·Technical Phone Screen·Senior

SeniorPrefer not to say
Apr 2026Remote

Summary

Interviewed for a Software Engineer role at Instacart and got a pretty involved coding round built around simulating bus routes. Four tasks stacked on top of each other, each one extending the last, which I wasn't fully expecting.

Questions Asked (4)

Q1

Given a large list of passenger events for a bus simulation, implement a downsampling function that reduces the passenger count by a given factor while preserving the distribution across origin-destination pairs.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

My first instinct was to just randomly sample the whole list, which is wrong because you'd skew the OD distribution.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Clarify the input format and downsampling requirements, then propose a two-pass algorithm: first count events per origin-destination pair, then sample a proportional number of events from each pair. Discuss trade-offs between exact proportional sampling and approximate methods, and analyze time/space complexity.

Pro tip: Mention that preserving distribution is crucial for simulation validity, and suggest using a random seed for reproducibility. Also, consider edge cases like small counts and zero counts.

1. Clarify Requirements

Ask about the input data structure (e.g., list of events with origin and destination), the downsampling factor (e.g., reduce by 50%), and whether exact proportional representation is required or approximate is acceptable.

2. Design Algorithm

Propose a two-pass approach: first, count the total number of events and the count per OD pair; second, for each OD pair, randomly sample a number of events proportional to its original count, ensuring the total is reduced by the factor.

3. Handle Edge Cases

Discuss how to handle OD pairs with very few events (e.g., ensure at least one event if the pair exists, or use probabilistic rounding) and how to deal with rounding errors to match the exact target total.

4. Analyze Complexity

Analyze time and space complexity: O(N) time for counting and O(N) for sampling, with O(K) space for counts where K is number of OD pairs. Mention that this is optimal for a single pass.

5. Discuss Trade-offs

Compare exact proportional sampling (which may require careful rounding) with approximate methods like Poisson sampling or systematic sampling. Discuss memory vs. accuracy trade-offs if the dataset is too large to fit in memory.

Key Points to Mention

  • Importance of preserving distribution for simulation fidelity
  • Two-pass algorithm: count then sample
  • Random sampling with a fixed seed for reproducibility
  • Handling rounding to ensure exact total reduction
  • Edge cases: small counts, zero counts, and large datasets
  • Time and space complexity analysis

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

Q2

Implement the core bus simulation: for each scheduled bus arrival, drop off passengers whose destination matches the current stop, then board waiting passengers without exceeding bus capacity, and emit a log entry for every board and drop action.

Algorithms & Data StructuresSystem Design
Author's notes

This was the meat of the problem.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Model the bus simulation as a state machine that processes each stop in order, maintaining passenger queues and bus occupancy. For each stop, first drop off passengers whose destination matches, then board waiting passengers up to capacity, logging each action. Use appropriate data structures like queues for waiting passengers and a set or list for onboard passengers.

Pro tip: Clarify assumptions upfront (e.g., bus capacity, passenger order, log format) and discuss trade-offs between different data structures, showing you consider real-world constraints and scalability.

1. Clarify requirements and assumptions

Ask about input format, bus capacity, passenger ordering, and log format. Confirm whether passengers board in FIFO order and if multiple buses are involved.

2. Design data structures

Choose structures: a queue for waiting passengers per stop, a list or set for onboard passengers, and a list for log entries. Consider using a map from stop to queue for efficient lookup.

3. Implement drop-off logic

For each stop, iterate through onboard passengers and remove those whose destination equals the current stop, logging each drop-off. Update bus occupancy accordingly.

4. Implement boarding logic

While bus has capacity and waiting queue is not empty, dequeue passengers and add them to onboard list, logging each boarding. Stop when capacity is reached or queue is empty.

5. Process all stops and output log

Iterate through scheduled stops in order, applying drop-off and boarding at each. After processing, return or print the log entries in the required format.

Key Points to Mention

  • Order of operations: drop-offs must happen before boardings at each stop to free capacity.
  • Capacity constraint: boarding must not exceed bus capacity; check before each boarding.
  • Data structures: use queues for waiting passengers to maintain FIFO order, and a list/set for onboard passengers for efficient removal.
  • Logging: emit a log entry for every board and drop action, including passenger ID, stop, and action type.
  • Edge cases: empty queues, full bus, passengers with destination same as current stop (should not board), and multiple buses if applicable.
  • Time complexity: O(total passengers + stops) if implemented efficiently; discuss potential optimizations.

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

Q3

Given a potentially buggy simulation log, write a validator that checks whether bus occupancy ever goes negative or exceeds capacity, and whether any passenger boards more than once or drops off without having boarded.

Algorithms & Data StructuresRoot Cause Analysis
Author's notes

Straightforward once you figure out what state to track: current occupancy per bus, and a set of currently-boarded passengers.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the log format and event types, then design a single-pass validator that maintains a set of currently onboard passengers and a running occupancy count. For each event, update state and check invariants: occupancy must stay within [0, capacity], and each passenger must board before dropping off and board at most once.

Pro tip: Mention that you'd treat the log as a stream and validate incrementally, which is O(n) time and O(p) space (p = passengers onboard), and that you'd return all violations with line numbers rather than failing on the first one for easier debugging.

1. Clarify log format and assumptions

Ask about the event schema (e.g., BOARD/DROPOFF, passenger ID, timestamp) and whether capacity is fixed. Confirm edge cases like duplicate events or out-of-order timestamps.

2. Define state and invariants

Maintain a set of onboard passenger IDs and an integer occupancy count. Invariants: 0 <= occupancy <= capacity, a passenger can board only if not already onboard, and can drop off only if currently onboard.

3. Process events in a single pass

Iterate through the log, updating state per event and checking invariants immediately. Record any violation with event index and details instead of stopping early.

4. Handle edge cases and final state

Consider empty logs, unknown event types, and passengers still onboard at the end (which may or may not be a violation). Also validate that occupancy matches the size of the onboard set.

5. Return structured results and discuss complexity

Return a list of violations (or a boolean plus details). State time complexity O(n) and space O(p), and mention how to extend for multiple buses or time windows.

Key Points to Mention

  • Single-pass O(n) algorithm with O(p) auxiliary space using a hash set for onboard passengers.
  • Invariant checks: occupancy bounds, board-before-dropoff, and no double boarding.
  • Handling of malformed or unknown events and reporting all violations with context.
  • Edge cases: empty log, capacity zero, passengers never dropping off, and duplicate IDs.
  • Clear separation between parsing, state update, and validation logic for testability.
  • Potential extensions: multiple buses, timestamps, and concurrency if logs are interleaved.

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

Q4

Extend the boarding logic to support priority passengers: passengers with a priority pass should board before regular passengers at each stop, with tie-breaking by appear_time and then passenger_id. Capacity constraints still apply.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Basically just a sorting step before the boarding loop.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Clarify the existing boarding logic and data structures, then propose a priority queue (heap) that orders passengers by priority flag, appear_time, and passenger_id. Simulate each stop by popping eligible passengers while respecting capacity, and discuss time/space trade-offs.

Pro tip: Mention that you would encapsulate the ordering logic in a comparator to keep the code extensible and testable, and explicitly handle edge cases like priority passengers arriving after regular ones or capacity being reached mid-stop.

1. Clarify requirements and constraints

Confirm the definition of priority (e.g., boolean flag), tie-breaking rules, and that capacity is per stop. Ask about expected input size to guide data structure choice.

2. Design the ordering comparator

Define a comparator that sorts by priority (descending), then appear_time (ascending), then passenger_id (ascending). This ensures deterministic ordering.

3. Choose data structures and algorithm

Use a priority queue (min-heap or max-heap with custom comparator) to efficiently retrieve the next passenger. For each stop, add newly arrived passengers to the heap, then pop up to capacity.

4. Simulate boarding and handle capacity

Iterate through stops, add passengers whose appear_time <= current stop time, then board up to remaining capacity. Track boarded passengers and update capacity.

5. Analyze complexity and trade-offs

Discuss time complexity O(N log N) due to heap operations, and space O(N). Compare with alternative approaches like sorting per stop or using buckets.

Key Points to Mention

  • Priority queue (heap) with custom comparator for multi-key ordering
  • Tie-breaking rules: priority flag, appear_time, passenger_id
  • Capacity constraint enforcement at each stop
  • Time and space complexity analysis (O(N log N) time, O(N) space)
  • Edge cases: priority passengers arriving late, capacity reached mid-stop, empty stops
  • Extensibility: encapsulating ordering logic for future changes

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