← IMC Interview Insights

IMC·Machine Learning Engineer·Technical Phone Screen·Intermediate

Intermediate
May 2026

Summary

IMC ML Engineer interview that went into some surprisingly quant-heavy territory. The probability and linear algebra questions felt more like a quant finance screen than anything ML-specific, which I wasn't fully prepared for.

Questions Asked (2)

Q1

You have a probability model with three outcomes where the probabilities are defined as q, q squared, and 1 minus q minus q squared. What is the valid range of q such that all three values are legitimate probabilities?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

This one required more care than I initially gave it.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by stating the two fundamental constraints for probabilities: each probability must be non-negative and their sum must equal 1. Then solve the resulting inequalities for q, considering the quadratic nature of the expressions and the need for all three probabilities to be valid simultaneously.

Pro tip: After finding the range, verify it by testing boundary values and a midpoint to ensure all probabilities stay within [0,1]. This demonstrates rigor and catches potential mistakes.

1. State probability axioms

Recall that for any probability distribution, each probability must be between 0 and 1 inclusive, and the sum of all probabilities must equal 1.

2. Set up inequalities

Write the three inequalities: q ≥ 0, q² ≥ 0, and 1 - q - q² ≥ 0. Also ensure each probability ≤ 1, but note that q ≤ 1 and q² ≤ 1 are automatically satisfied if q is in [0,1] and the third inequality holds.

3. Solve the quadratic inequality

Solve 1 - q - q² ≥ 0, which is equivalent to q² + q - 1 ≤ 0. Find the roots of q² + q - 1 = 0 using the quadratic formula: q = (-1 ± √5)/2. The inequality holds between the roots.

4. Combine constraints

Intersect the solution of the quadratic inequality with q ≥ 0. The roots are approximately -1.618 and 0.618, so the valid range is 0 ≤ q ≤ (√5 - 1)/2.

5. Verify and conclude

Check that at the boundaries and within the range, all three probabilities are between 0 and 1. Conclude that the valid range is [0, (√5 - 1)/2].

Key Points to Mention

  • Probability axioms: non-negativity and sum to 1.
  • The sum of the three probabilities is q + q² + (1 - q - q²) = 1, so the sum constraint is automatically satisfied.
  • The inequality 1 - q - q² ≥ 0 leads to q² + q - 1 ≤ 0.
  • Solving the quadratic gives roots (-1 ± √5)/2, and the valid interval is between them.
  • Since q must be non-negative, the lower bound is 0.
  • The upper bound is the golden ratio conjugate, (√5 - 1)/2 ≈ 0.618.

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

Q2

Given a payoff matrix A for three assets across three states of the world, how would you express a portfolio constraint in matrix form, such as requiring non-negative payoff in every state?

System DesignTechnical Trade-offsData Modeling
Author's notes

They framed this as a follow-up but it felt like its own question.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by defining the portfolio weight vector w and the payoff matrix A, then express the portfolio payoff as Aw. The non-negativity constraint is simply Aw ≥ 0, which can be written in matrix form as -Aw ≤ 0 or with an identity matrix as -I(Aw) ≤ 0. Finally, connect this to optimization problems like linear programming or quadratic programming, and mention how it ensures no arbitrage or meets risk limits.

Pro tip: In practice, you often need to handle numerical issues and scalability; mentioning that you'd use a solver like scipy.optimize or cvxpy and that the constraint is linear (hence convex) shows you understand both theory and implementation.

1. Define variables and matrix

Clearly state that A is a 3x3 matrix where rows are states and columns are assets, and w is a 3x1 vector of portfolio weights. The portfolio payoff in each state is given by the vector Aw.

2. Express the constraint

The requirement of non-negative payoff in every state means Aw ≥ 0 componentwise. In matrix form, this is -Aw ≤ 0, or equivalently -I(Aw) ≤ 0 where I is the identity matrix.

3. Connect to optimization

Explain that this constraint is linear and can be incorporated into a linear program or quadratic program, e.g., maximizing expected return subject to Aw ≥ 0 and budget constraints.

4. Discuss implications and extensions

Mention that such constraints prevent arbitrage or ensure minimum payoffs, and can be extended to include transaction costs, leverage limits, or robust constraints under uncertainty.

Key Points to Mention

  • Matrix-vector multiplication: payoff = A w
  • Componentwise inequality: Aw ≥ 0
  • Equivalent matrix form: -A w ≤ 0 or -I (A w) ≤ 0
  • Linear programming formulation for portfolio optimization
  • Convexity of the constraint set
  • Practical implementation with solvers (e.g., scipy, cvxpy)

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