Given an integer array arr
, partition the array into (contiguous) subarrays of length at most k
. After partitioning, each subarray has their values changed to become the maximum value of that subarray.
Return the largest sum of the given array after partitioning. Test cases are generated so that the answer fits in a 32-bit integer.
For example:
Consider the array arr = [1,15,7,9,2,5,10]
and k = 3
. The optimal partitioning would be [15,15,15,9,10,10,10]
. The sum is 15 + 15 + 15 + 9 + 10 + 10 + 10 = 84
. Therefore, the function should return 84.
Another example, if arr = [1,4,1,5,7,3,6,1,9,9,3]
and k = 4
, what is the maximum sum after partitioning?
Could you write a function to solve this problem efficiently?
Let's analyze the problem. We are given an array and an integer k. We need to partition the array into subarrays of length at most k. After partitioning, each subarray will have all its values changed to the maximum value of that subarray. We need to find the largest possible sum of the array after this partitioning.
A brute force solution involves trying out all possible partitions of the array into subarrays of length at most k. For each partition, we calculate the sum of the modified array and keep track of the maximum sum seen so far.
The algorithm works as follows:
This approach has exponential time complexity, as it explores all possible partitions.
Big O Analysis
We can optimize the solution using dynamic programming. We can define dp[i]
as the largest sum achievable for the first i
elements of the array.
The recurrence relation is as follows:
dp[i] = max(dp[i-j] + max_val * j)
for all 1 <= j <= k
where max_val
is the maximum value in the subarray arr[i-j+1...i]
.
Algorithm:
dp
array of size n+1
initialized with 0.i = 1
to n
.i
, iterate through all possible lengths j
from 1
to k
.arr[i-j...i-1]
.dp[i]
using the recurrence relation: dp[i] = max(dp[i], dp[i-j] + max_val * j)
.dp[n]
.Edge Cases:
Example:
Consider arr = [1,15,7,9,2,5,10]
and k = 3
.
dp[0] = 0
i = 1
: dp[1] = max(dp[0] + 1 * 1) = 1
i = 2
: dp[2] = max(dp[1] + 15 * 1, dp[0] + 15 * 2) = max(16, 30) = 30
i = 3
: dp[3] = max(dp[2] + 7 * 1, dp[1] + 15 * 2, dp[0] + 15 * 3) = max(37, 31, 45) = 45
i = 4
: dp[4] = max(dp[3] + 9 * 1, dp[2] + 9 * 2, dp[1] + 15 * 3) = max(54, 48, 46) = 54
i = 5
: dp[5] = max(dp[4] + 2 * 1, dp[3] + 9 * 2, dp[2] + 9 * 3) = max(56, 63, 57) = 63
i = 6
: dp[6] = max(dp[5] + 5 * 1, dp[4] + 5 * 2, dp[3] + 9 * 3) = max(68, 64, 72) = 72
i = 7
: dp[7] = max(dp[6] + 10 * 1, dp[5] + 10 * 2, dp[4] + 10 * 3) = max(82, 83, 84) = 84
The final answer is 84.
def maxSumAfterPartitioning(arr, k):
n = len(arr)
dp = [0] * (n + 1)
for i in range(1, n + 1):
max_val = 0
for j in range(1, min(k, i) + 1):
max_val = max(max_val, arr[i - j])
dp[i] = max(dp[i], dp[i - j] + max_val * j)
return dp[n]
Big O Analysis