3sum problem (finding triplets) in better than o (n^2) asked 13 years, 5 months ago modified 2 years, 8 months ago viewed 6k times Leaving the question of is o (1) faster than o (log n), exampling it with my code. I'm studying the 3 sum to implement it on my own, and came across the following implementation with the rules
Given an array s of n integers, are there elements a, b, c in s such that a + b + c =. Asked3 years, 4 months ago modified 2 years, 8 months ago viewed 627 times 2 in the scenario i present to you, my solution is supposed to represent o (n^2 * log n), and the pointers solution, which i assume is the fastest way to resolve the 3sum problem, represents o (n^2 * 1) This looks like the standard approach to solving 3sum in quadratic time
Solving the leetcode 3sum problem in python asked 7 years, 1 month ago modified 7 years, 1 month ago viewed 2k times I am working on the 3sum problem (taken from leetcode), which takes a list as input and finds all unique triplets in the lists such that a+b+c=0 A problem called 3sum smaller on leetcode asks Given an array of n integers nums and a target, find the number of index triplets i, j, k with 0 <= i < j < k < n that satisfy the condi.
Given an array a of integers, find any 3 of them that sum to any given t I saw this on some online post, which claims it has a o(nlogn) solution For 2 numbers, i know hashtable could help for o. I tried an alternative approach to the 3sum problem
Basically the approach is this Once a pair of elements (say a[. How can i make use of binary search for improving my algorithms time complexity I'm reviewing time complexity for some interviews &
I'm having trouble making my algorithm more time efficient.
