I recognized it as a graph problem pretty fast but my first instinct was BFS with binary search on the answer, which works but they pushed me toward something cleaner.
Model the grid as a graph where each cell's weight is its elevation, and the time to traverse a path is the maximum elevation along that path. Use a modified Dijkstra's algorithm (or a priority queue) to find the path from top-left to bottom-right that minimizes this maximum elevation. Alternatively, use binary search on time t and BFS to check if a path exists where all cells have elevation ≤ t.
Pro tip: Clarify that the problem is equivalent to finding the minimax path (bottleneck shortest path) and mention that both Dijkstra and binary search + BFS are valid, but Dijkstra is more efficient for large grids. Also, discuss edge cases like n=1 and the fact that the start and end cells' elevations are always included in the maximum.
Restate the problem: water rises uniformly, and you can move between adjacent cells only when the water level covers both. The minimum time to travel from start to end is the minimum possible maximum elevation along any path.
Decide between Dijkstra-like algorithm (minimax path) or binary search on time with BFS. Explain the trade-offs: Dijkstra runs in O(n^2 log n) while binary search + BFS runs in O(n^2 log(max_elevation)).
For Dijkstra: use a priority queue storing (max_elevation_so_far, row, col), and update neighbors with max(current_max, neighbor_elevation). For binary search: define check(t) that runs BFS from start to end only through cells with elevation ≤ t.
Discuss time and space complexity. Handle edge cases: n=1 (answer is grid[0][0]), unreachable cells (though problem guarantees connectivity? Actually water rises so eventually all cells are covered, so always reachable).
Walk through a small example to verify the approach. For instance, a 2x2 grid with elevations [[0,2],[1,3]]: the minimax path is 0->1->3 with max 3, or 0->2->3 with max 3, so answer is 3.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.