We use cookies to ensure you have the best browsing experience on our website. Please read our cookie policy for more information about how we use cookies.

This is under dynamic i guess because we solving it by dividing it smaller problem (getting numbers of candies by iterating it in one direction) and then using this partial solution to iterate in reverese direction

I solved this problem differently, but with what I believe is a Dynamic Programming solution. In DP questions, you are asked to calculate F[i] for some i. In this case, F[i] is the number of candies given to child i. (Then we sum the values.) The complexity is that the value F[i] depends on other values, in this case for values of i both smaller and larger. The key to Dynamic Programming is that you calculate the values F[i] in an order such that you always have the previous values (i.e., dependencies) you need. So in this problem, what values are needed to calculate F[i]? Well if Ratings[i] is a local minimum, that is, child #i has a lower rating than her neighbors, then we should give her only one candy. So her candy amount didn’t depend on other candy amounts. If Ratings[i] is a local maximum, then child #i gets one more candy than the larger amount of candy between her two neighbors. If Ratings[i] is between Ratings[i-1] and Ratings[i+1], then whichever neighbor has a lower rating, child #i gets one more candy than that neighbor. So in summary, F[i] depends on 0, 2, or 1 of the adjacent values depending on whether Ratings[i] is a local minimum, maximum, or neither, respectively. So to solve this problem, you can write helper functions is_min(), is_max(), get_next_min(), and get_next_max(), and use them to find the first two local mins; set their candies to 1. Find the single local max between them and iterate inward from the mins to the max (up the mountain), giving each child one more candy than the last. Then give the max child one more candy than the neighbor who got more than the other. Then repeat by finding the next local max and min. The other important thing is that if two neighbors have the same rating, then all the children can be split into 2 groups between them, and the two groups can be solved separately. So in a subproblem, adjacent children will never have the same rating. My solution is here:
https://www.hackerrank.com/challenges/candies/submissions/code/20326952

Oh! I used the same approach. O(N+m) where m is the total length of descending subsequences(desc_buf's). At local max we start the buffer, at local min we release it.

## Candies

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Return to all comments →

I don't see why this is listed under dynamic programming.

This is under dynamic i guess because we solving it by dividing it smaller problem (getting numbers of candies by iterating it in one direction) and then using this partial solution to iterate in reverese direction

I solved this problem differently, but with what I believe is a Dynamic Programming solution. In DP questions, you are asked to calculate F[i] for some i. In this case, F[i] is the number of candies given to child i. (Then we sum the values.) The complexity is that the value F[i] depends on other values, in this case for values of i both smaller

and larger. The key to Dynamic Programming is that you calculate the values F[i] in an order such that you always have the previous values (i.e., dependencies) you need. So in this problem, what values are needed to calculate F[i]? Well if Ratings[i] is a local minimum, that is, child #i has a lower rating than her neighbors, then we should give her only one candy. So her candy amount didn’t depend on other candy amounts. If Ratings[i] is a local maximum, then child #i gets one more candy than the larger amount of candy between her two neighbors. If Ratings[i] is between Ratings[i-1] and Ratings[i+1], then whichever neighbor has a lower rating, child #i gets one more candy than that neighbor. So in summary, F[i] depends on 0, 2, or 1 of the adjacent values depending on whether Ratings[i] is a local minimum, maximum, or neither, respectively. So to solve this problem, you can write helper functions is_min(), is_max(), get_next_min(), and get_next_max(), and use them to find the first two local mins; set their candies to 1. Find the single local max between them and iterate inward from the mins to the max (up the mountain), giving each child one more candy than the last. Then give the max child one more candy than the neighbor who got more than the other. Then repeat by finding the next local max and min. The other important thing is that if two neighbors have the same rating, then all the children can be split into 2 groups between them, and the two groups can be solved separately. So in a subproblem, adjacent children will never have the same rating. My solution is here: https://www.hackerrank.com/challenges/candies/submissions/code/20326952Oh! I used the same approach. O(N+m) where m is the total length of descending subsequences(desc_buf's). At local max we start the buffer, at local min we release it.

It's very logical, Thanks