← Meta Interview Insights

Meta·Software Engineer·Onsite - Coding / Algorithms·Intermediate

Intermediate
May 2026

Summary

Meta SWE coding round with two problems, one tree traversal question and one string manipulation question, each with a pile of follow-ups. The follow-ups are where things get interesting and probably where they're actually evaluating you.

Questions Asked (7)

Q1

Given the root of a binary tree, group node values by vertical column using x-coordinates (left child decrements x, right child increments x). Within each column, nodes should appear top-to-bottom, with ties broken by left-to-right traversal order. Return a list of columns, each containing a list of integers. Walk through your algorithm, the data structures you'd use, and give a time and space complexity analysis.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

BFS with a hashmap from column index to list of values.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Use a BFS traversal while tracking each node's x-coordinate, storing nodes in a map from x to list of values. Since BFS processes nodes level by level, nodes within each column are naturally ordered top-to-bottom, and left-to-right order is preserved by enqueueing left child before right child. Finally, sort the x-coordinates and output the lists.

Pro tip: Clarify that BFS ensures the required ordering without extra sorting within columns, and mention that if the tree is very deep, an iterative BFS avoids recursion stack overflow.

1. Understand the problem and edge cases

Restate the problem: group nodes by vertical column (x-coordinate), order top-to-bottom and left-to-right. Consider edge cases: empty tree, single node, skewed tree.

2. Choose traversal and data structures

Use BFS (level-order) with a queue storing (node, x). Use a hash map (e.g., defaultdict(list)) to map x to list of node values. Track min and max x to avoid sorting later.

3. Traverse and populate columns

While queue not empty, pop node, append its value to map[x]. Enqueue left child with x-1 and right child with x+1. Update min_x and max_x.

4. Collect and return result

Iterate from min_x to max_x, appending map[x] to result list. Return result.

5. Analyze complexity

Time: O(n) for traversal and O(n) for output, where n is number of nodes. Space: O(n) for queue and map.

Key Points to Mention

  • BFS ensures top-to-bottom and left-to-right ordering within columns.
  • Using a hash map with x-coordinate as key efficiently groups nodes.
  • Tracking min and max x avoids sorting keys, keeping time O(n).
  • Time complexity: O(n) because each node is visited once and output size is n.
  • Space complexity: O(n) for the queue and the map in the worst case.
  • Edge cases: empty tree returns empty list; skewed tree still works.

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

Q2

Follow-up to the binary tree column grouping: how would you stream results column by column without storing the entire traversal in memory first?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

This one tripped me up a bit.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Explain that you can avoid storing the entire traversal by using a BFS-like level-order traversal with a queue, but instead of collecting all nodes, you process and emit each column as soon as it's complete. Alternatively, use a DFS with a hash map of column indices to lists, but that still stores all nodes; so the streaming approach requires a different strategy like iterative deepening or a queue-based level-order traversal that tracks column boundaries. Emphasize the trade-off between memory and time, and propose a solution that uses O(width) memory by processing nodes column by column using a queue of (node, column) pairs and emitting when the column index changes.

Pro tip: Mention that in a real interview, you should clarify whether the tree is static or dynamic, and whether you can assume the tree fits in memory; then discuss how to handle infinite streams or very large trees by using a bounded queue and external sorting. Also, note that the column-by-column output can be achieved by a modified BFS that processes nodes in order of their column index, but that requires a priority queue if columns are not contiguous.

1. Clarify requirements and constraints

Ask whether the tree is static, whether memory is strictly limited, and whether the output must be in exact column order. Confirm that 'streaming' means emitting columns one at a time without storing all nodes.

2. Identify the challenge with standard traversals

Explain that BFS stores O(width) nodes, which is already better than O(n), but to emit column by column you need to know when a column ends. DFS with a map stores O(n) in the worst case, so it's not streaming.

3. Propose a streaming BFS with column tracking

Use a queue of (node, column) pairs, process level by level, and maintain a min-heap or sorted structure of columns to emit in order. Alternatively, use a two-pass approach: first find min and max column indices, then for each column, do a BFS that only emits nodes in that column, but that's O(n * width) time.

4. Discuss trade-offs and optimizations

Compare time vs. memory: the two-pass approach uses O(width) memory but O(n * width) time; the heap-based approach uses O(width) memory and O(n log width) time. Mention that if columns are contiguous, a simple queue with a column offset can work.

5. Conclude with a recommended solution

Recommend the heap-based BFS: enqueue root with column 0, use a min-heap keyed by column to process nodes in column order, and emit a column when the next node has a different column. This uses O(width) memory and O(n log width) time.

Key Points to Mention

  • BFS uses O(width) memory, which is better than O(n) for balanced trees.
  • DFS with a hash map stores all nodes, so it's not streaming.
  • Use a min-heap or priority queue to process nodes in column order.
  • Emit a column when the column index changes in the heap.
  • Trade-off: heap-based approach uses O(width) memory and O(n log width) time.
  • Alternative: two-pass approach with O(width) memory but O(n * width) time.

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

Q3

Follow-up: if there are two nodes in the same row and column, how would you change the tie-breaking rule to sort by node value instead of traversal order?

Algorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

Easy change, just sort within each (row, col) bucket by value.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

First, clarify the problem context: this is likely a vertical order traversal where nodes in the same row and column are currently ordered by traversal order. To sort by node value instead, modify the comparator used when grouping nodes by column and row. Then, explain how to implement this change in code, ensuring that the sorting is stable and efficient.

Pro tip: Mention that changing the tie-breaking rule may affect the overall time complexity, so it's important to consider the trade-offs and whether the problem constraints allow for it. Also, note that this change might require adjusting the data structures used to collect nodes.

1. Clarify the problem and current tie-breaking

Restate the problem: nodes are grouped by column and row, and within the same row and column, they are currently sorted by traversal order. Confirm that the goal is to sort by node value instead.

2. Identify where the tie-breaking occurs

Locate the part of the algorithm where nodes with the same row and column are ordered. This is typically when adding nodes to a list for a specific (row, column) pair.

3. Modify the comparator or sorting logic

Change the sorting key from traversal order to node value. If using a list, sort it by node value after collecting all nodes for that (row, column). If using a priority queue, adjust the comparator.

4. Consider data structure and complexity implications

Discuss how this change affects time and space complexity. For example, sorting each group adds O(k log k) per group, where k is the number of nodes in that group.

5. Test with edge cases

Mention testing with cases where multiple nodes share the same row and column, and ensure the output is sorted by value as expected.

Key Points to Mention

  • Vertical order traversal and the role of row and column indices
  • Tie-breaking rules in sorting and how they affect output order
  • Comparator functions or sorting keys in programming languages
  • Time complexity impact of additional sorting
  • Stability of sorting algorithms and whether it matters here
  • Potential need to adjust data structures (e.g., from list to priority queue)

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

Q4

Follow-up: how does your approach scale to trees with up to 100,000 nodes? What breaks and what holds up?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Talked through memory usage and worst-case column spread (a completely skewed tree gives you n distinct columns).

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Acknowledge that scaling to 100,000 nodes shifts the focus from correctness to resource constraints like recursion depth, memory, and time complexity. Discuss how your approach handles these by converting recursion to iteration, using memory-efficient data structures, and analyzing asymptotic behavior. Conclude by identifying which parts of the algorithm remain efficient and which require adaptation.

Pro tip: Mention that at 100,000 nodes, recursion depth can cause stack overflow in languages like Python or Java, so an iterative solution with an explicit stack is often necessary. Also, highlight that constant factors and memory locality can matter as much as Big-O at this scale.

1. Clarify constraints and environment

Ask about the tree's properties (balanced vs. skewed), available memory, and language/runtime. This shows you consider practical factors before diving into solutions.

2. Analyze time and space complexity

State the Big-O for your algorithm (e.g., O(n) time, O(h) space) and explain how it behaves for n=100,000. Discuss worst-case scenarios like a skewed tree causing O(n) recursion depth.

3. Identify potential bottlenecks

Point out specific issues: stack overflow from recursion, memory overhead from storing nodes, and performance hits from pointer chasing or cache misses.

4. Propose scalable adaptations

Describe modifications: iterative traversal with explicit stack, Morris traversal for O(1) space, or using arrays for complete trees. Explain trade-offs like increased code complexity.

5. Validate with empirical reasoning

Estimate actual memory usage (e.g., 100,000 nodes * ~40 bytes = 4MB) and time (e.g., 100,000 operations is trivial for modern CPUs). Mention testing with large inputs.

Key Points to Mention

  • Recursion depth and stack overflow risk for skewed trees
  • Time complexity O(n) and space complexity O(h) vs O(n)
  • Iterative traversal using explicit stack or Morris traversal
  • Memory overhead of node objects and pointers
  • Cache performance and pointer chasing
  • Trade-offs between code simplicity and scalability

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

Q5

Given a string containing lowercase letters and parentheses, remove the minimum number of parentheses so the remaining string is balanced. Return any valid result. Provide an O(n) time solution and explain why it's correct.

Algorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

Classic stack-based approach: track indices of unmatched open parens, and do a single pass marking unmatched closes as you go.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Use a two-pass stack-based approach: first pass removes unmatched closing parentheses, second pass removes unmatched opening parentheses. Alternatively, use a counter-based method to mark invalid parentheses in O(n) time and O(n) space. Explain the algorithm step-by-step, prove its correctness by showing it removes exactly the minimum number, and analyze time and space complexity.

Pro tip: Mention that the problem can be solved with a single pass using a stack to track indices of unmatched parentheses, then mark them for removal. This demonstrates deeper understanding and efficiency, and you can discuss trade-offs between stack and counter approaches.

1. Clarify the problem and constraints

Confirm that the string contains only lowercase letters and parentheses, and that we need to remove the minimum number to make it balanced. Ask if multiple valid answers are acceptable (yes, any).

2. Outline the algorithm

Describe a two-pass approach: first, scan left to right, using a stack to track indices of '(' and removing unmatched ')'. Second, scan right to left, removing unmatched '(' (or use a counter). Alternatively, use a single pass with a stack to mark invalid parentheses.

3. Walk through an example

Choose a sample string like 'a)b(c)d' and demonstrate how the algorithm processes it, showing which parentheses are removed and the resulting balanced string.

4. Prove correctness and minimality

Explain that every unmatched closing parenthesis must be removed, and every unmatched opening parenthesis must be removed. The algorithm removes exactly these, so it's minimal. Argue that no balanced string can be obtained by removing fewer parentheses.

5. Analyze complexity and edge cases

State that time complexity is O(n) because each character is processed at most twice, and space complexity is O(n) for the stack or boolean array. Discuss edge cases: empty string, no parentheses, all parentheses, nested parentheses.

Key Points to Mention

  • Use a stack to track indices of unmatched opening parentheses, or use a counter to avoid extra space for indices.
  • Two-pass approach: left-to-right to remove excess ')', right-to-left to remove excess '('.
  • Mark invalid parentheses in a boolean array and build the result in a final pass.
  • Proof of minimality: any balanced string must have equal numbers of '(' and ')', and the algorithm removes exactly the characters that cannot be part of any balanced subsequence.
  • Time complexity O(n), space complexity O(n) (or O(1) if using counters and modifying in place, but typically O(n) for output).
  • Edge cases: empty string, string with no parentheses, string with only parentheses, deeply nested parentheses.

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

Q6

Follow-up: can you solve the balanced parentheses removal problem in a single pass?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Yes, two counters: one for open parens seen but not yet matched, one for closes that had nothing to match.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Clarify the exact problem variant (e.g., remove minimum invalid parentheses to make string valid, or just check balance) and then outline a single-pass algorithm using a stack or counter. Emphasize that you can achieve O(n) time and O(1) space for the check, or O(n) space for removal, and discuss trade-offs.

Pro tip: Mention that you can solve the check in one pass with two counters (open and close) without a stack, but for removal you need to track indices; this shows you understand the space-time trade-off and can adapt to constraints.

1. Clarify the problem

Ask whether the goal is to check if parentheses are balanced, or to remove minimum invalid parentheses to make the string valid. Also confirm the character set (only parentheses or other chars).

2. Propose a single-pass approach

For checking balance, use a counter: increment on '(', decrement on ')', and if counter goes negative, it's invalid. For removal, use a stack to track indices of unmatched parentheses.

3. Analyze time and space complexity

State that the check is O(n) time and O(1) space, while removal is O(n) time and O(n) space due to the stack. Discuss if O(1) space removal is possible (e.g., two-pass with counters).

4. Handle edge cases

Mention empty string, all open or all close, and strings with other characters. Ensure the algorithm correctly handles these.

5. Discuss trade-offs and optimizations

Compare stack vs. counter approaches, and mention that for removal, a two-pass approach can achieve O(1) space if we only need to remove minimum parentheses (but not if we need to return the string).

Key Points to Mention

  • Single-pass algorithm using a counter for balance check
  • Stack-based approach for removal with index tracking
  • Time complexity O(n) and space complexity O(1) for check, O(n) for removal
  • Edge cases: empty string, unbalanced open/close, other characters
  • Trade-off between space and simplicity: stack vs. two-pass counter method
  • Ability to adapt to constraints (e.g., O(1) space if only count needed)

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

Q7

Follow-up: if in-place edits are allowed on the string, can you reduce extra space to O(1)?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

I said yes in theory but fumbled the actual mechanics a bit.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

First, clarify that in-place edits mean modifying the input array directly, so we can use two pointers to overwrite characters without extra space. Then, explain the algorithm: one pointer reads, one writes, and we handle edge cases like consecutive duplicates or removal. Finally, discuss trade-offs: O(1) space but O(n) time, and note that in-place may not be suitable if the input must be preserved.

Pro tip: Mention that in-place edits can be risky if the input is immutable or shared, so always confirm with the interviewer whether mutating the input is acceptable. Also, highlight that O(1) space often comes at the cost of increased code complexity and potential bugs, so balance clarity with optimization.

1. Clarify constraints and assumptions

Confirm that in-place edits are allowed and that the input is mutable (e.g., a character array). Ask if the final length needs to be returned or if the string can be truncated.

2. Choose two-pointer technique

Use a read pointer to scan the original string and a write pointer to overwrite characters. This allows O(1) extra space by reusing the input array.

3. Handle edge cases and conditions

Define the condition for writing (e.g., skip duplicates, remove specific characters). Ensure the write pointer does not overtake the read pointer and handle empty or single-character inputs.

4. Analyze time and space complexity

State that time complexity remains O(n) as each character is processed once, and space complexity is O(1) since only pointers are used.

5. Discuss trade-offs and alternatives

Mention that in-place modification destroys the original input, which may be undesirable. Compare with using extra space for clarity or if the input is immutable.

Key Points to Mention

  • Two-pointer technique for in-place modification
  • Time complexity remains O(n) with O(1) space
  • Mutating input may have side effects; confirm with interviewer
  • Edge cases: empty string, all duplicates, no duplicates
  • Return value: often the new length of the modified string
  • Trade-off: O(1) space vs. code readability and safety

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