← Amazon Interview Insights

Amazon·Software Engineer·Online Assessment (OA)·Intermediate

Intermediate
May 2026

Summary

Amazon SWE online assessment with two algorithmic problems. Neither was straightforward and the second one in particular had some tricky edge cases around the constraint logic that I didn't fully work through in time.

Questions Asked (2)

Q1

You're given an integer array. Repeatedly find the smallest undeleted element (leftmost if tied), add it to a running total, then delete it along with its immediate original-array neighbors if they haven't been deleted yet. Return the total after all elements are gone.

Algorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

The leftmost-on-tie rule tripped me up more than I expected.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Clarify the problem constraints and edge cases, then propose an efficient algorithm using a priority queue to always select the smallest undeleted element, while tracking deletions with a doubly linked list or a boolean array. Analyze time and space complexity, and discuss potential optimizations or alternative approaches.

Pro tip: Demonstrate Amazon Leadership Principles by proactively discussing trade-offs between different data structures and considering scalability for large inputs. Also, walk through a small example to validate your approach before coding.

1. Understand the problem

Restate the problem in your own words, ask clarifying questions about constraints (e.g., array size, element range, duplicates), and confirm the deletion rule: when an element is selected, its immediate original neighbors are deleted if not already deleted.

2. Identify key operations

Recognize that you need to efficiently find the minimum among undeleted elements and support deletion of an element and its neighbors. This suggests using a min-heap for selection and a doubly linked list or union-find for tracking neighbors.

3. Design the algorithm

Propose using a min-heap of (value, index) pairs, and a doubly linked list to represent the current sequence of undeleted elements. When popping the heap, skip if already deleted; otherwise, add to total, mark as deleted, and delete its current left and right neighbors from the linked list.

4. Analyze complexity

Explain that each element is pushed and popped once, and each deletion is O(1) with the linked list, leading to O(n log n) time and O(n) space. Discuss if any further optimization is possible.

5. Test and validate

Walk through a small example (e.g., [3,1,2]) to verify the algorithm, and consider edge cases like all elements equal, single element, or already sorted array.

Key Points to Mention

  • Use a min-heap to efficiently retrieve the smallest undeleted element.
  • Maintain a doubly linked list to quickly access and delete immediate neighbors.
  • Handle duplicates and ties by leftmost index (heap can store index as tiebreaker).
  • Skip elements that are already deleted when popping from the heap.
  • Time complexity: O(n log n) due to heap operations; space complexity: O(n).
  • Consider alternative approaches like sorting with a segment tree, but heap+linked list is optimal.

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

Q2

A warehouse starts empty with a fixed max capacity. Each day its inventory changes by a given amount. Before any day you can do an emergency refill up to the capacity limit. Days where the change is zero require non-negative inventory at day's end; other days can temporarily go negative. Find the minimum number of refill days needed, or return -1 if it's impossible.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

This one broke me a little.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

First, clarify the problem constraints and edge cases, especially the temporary negative inventory rule. Then, model the problem as a greedy or dynamic programming task, focusing on when to refill to minimize refill days. Finally, discuss the algorithm's time and space complexity and potential optimizations.

Pro tip: Emphasize the importance of handling the temporary negative inventory correctly—many candidates overlook that only zero-change days require non-negative end-of-day inventory. Also, consider using a priority queue or greedy approach to decide refill days efficiently.

1. Clarify the problem

Restate the problem in your own words and ask clarifying questions about constraints, such as the range of daily changes, capacity limits, and whether refills can be done on any day including zero-change days.

2. Identify key constraints and edge cases

Discuss edge cases like empty warehouse, capacity zero, large negative changes, and sequences that might make it impossible. Determine what makes the problem infeasible (e.g., a single day's change exceeds capacity).

3. Develop a strategy

Propose a greedy approach: simulate day by day, and when inventory would go below zero on a zero-change day, refill as late as possible (or as early as needed) to maximize future flexibility. Alternatively, consider dynamic programming if greedy fails.

4. Analyze complexity and trade-offs

Explain the time and space complexity of your approach. Compare greedy vs. DP in terms of efficiency and correctness, and justify your choice.

5. Test with examples

Walk through a few examples, including edge cases, to validate your algorithm. Mention how you would handle large inputs and ensure correctness.

Key Points to Mention

  • The distinction between zero-change days (require non-negative inventory) and other days (can go temporarily negative).
  • The need to refill up to capacity, not just to zero, to maximize future flexibility.
  • Greedy strategy: refill only when necessary, and as late as possible to avoid wasting capacity.
  • Feasibility check: if any single day's change exceeds capacity, return -1.
  • Time complexity: O(n) for greedy simulation, O(n^2) or O(n log n) for DP with optimizations.
  • Space complexity: O(1) for greedy, O(n) for DP.

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