← Meta Interview Insights

Meta·Software Engineer·Technical Phone Screen·Intermediate

Intermediate
May 2026

Summary

Meta software engineer interview, coding round focused on a frequency-based selection problem with a twist: they wanted you to walk through three different solutions in order of efficiency, not just jump to the optimal one. Felt like a trap for people who skip straight to the clever answer.

Questions Asked (1)

Q1

Given an array of integers and a value k, return any k elements that appear most frequently. Walk through a naive approach, a heap-based approach, and a linear-time approach, analyzing the trade-offs of each.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

The multi-part structure is what got me.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying the problem constraints (e.g., array size, value range, whether k is valid) and then systematically present three approaches: naive (count and sort), heap-based (count and use a min-heap of size k), and linear-time (bucket sort by frequency). For each, analyze time and space complexity, discuss trade-offs, and justify which approach is optimal for given constraints.

Pro tip: Meta values production-ready code and clear communication. After presenting the optimal approach, mention edge cases (e.g., k > unique elements, ties) and how you would test your solution, showing you think beyond the algorithm.

1. Clarify requirements and constraints

Ask about input size, value range, whether k is guaranteed valid, and if the output order matters. This shows you consider practical scenarios before diving into solutions.

2. Present naive approach

Describe counting frequencies with a hash map, then sorting the unique elements by frequency and taking the top k. Analyze time O(n + m log m) and space O(m), where m is unique elements.

3. Present heap-based approach

Explain using a hash map for frequencies, then maintaining a min-heap of size k to keep the top k frequent elements. Time O(n + m log k), space O(m + k). Discuss when this is better than sorting (e.g., k << m).

4. Present linear-time approach

Introduce bucket sort: create buckets indexed by frequency (up to n), place elements into buckets, then iterate from highest frequency to collect k elements. Time O(n), space O(n). Note it requires frequency as index and works when frequencies are bounded by n.

5. Compare trade-offs and conclude

Summarize when each approach is preferable: naive for simplicity, heap for large m and small k, bucket for optimal time when memory allows. Mention that bucket sort is not comparison-based and leverages the frequency range.

Key Points to Mention

  • Time and space complexity of each approach with clear variables (n = array length, m = unique elements, k = desired count).
  • Hash map for frequency counting is common to all approaches.
  • Heap approach uses a min-heap to efficiently maintain top k, avoiding full sort.
  • Bucket sort achieves linear time by using frequency as an index, but requires extra space proportional to n.
  • Trade-offs: naive is simple but slower; heap is efficient for large m and small k; bucket is fastest but uses more memory.
  • Edge cases: k >= number of unique elements, ties in frequency (any k elements are acceptable), and empty array.

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