Off-by-one on range boundaries
Wrong move: Loop endpoints miss first/last candidate.
Usually fails on: Fails on minimal arrays and exact-boundary answers.
Fix: Re-derive loops from inclusive/exclusive ranges before coding.
Move from brute-force thinking to an efficient approach using array strategy.
Given an integer array nums where every element appears three times except for one, which appears exactly once. Find the single element and return it.
You must implement a solution with a linear runtime complexity and use only constant extra space.
Example 1:
Input: nums = [2,2,3,2] Output: 3
Example 2:
Input: nums = [0,1,0,1,0,1,99] Output: 99
Constraints:
1 <= nums.length <= 3 * 104-231 <= nums[i] <= 231 - 1nums appears exactly three times except for one element which appears once.Problem summary: Given an integer array nums where every element appears three times except for one, which appears exactly once. Find the single element and return it. You must implement a solution with a linear runtime complexity and use only constant extra space.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array · Bit Manipulation
[2,2,3,2]
[0,1,0,1,0,1,99]
single-number)single-number-iii)find-the-xor-of-numbers-which-appear-twice)Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #137: Single Number II
class Solution {
public int singleNumber(int[] nums) {
int ans = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
int cnt = 0;
for (int num : nums) {
cnt += num >> i & 1;
}
cnt %= 3;
ans |= cnt << i;
}
return ans;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #137: Single Number II
func singleNumber(nums []int) int {
ans := int32(0)
for i := 0; i < 32; i++ {
cnt := int32(0)
for _, num := range nums {
cnt += int32(num) >> i & 1
}
cnt %= 3
ans |= cnt << i
}
return int(ans)
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #137: Single Number II
class Solution:
def singleNumber(self, nums: List[int]) -> int:
ans = 0
for i in range(32):
cnt = sum(num >> i & 1 for num in nums)
if cnt % 3:
if i == 31:
ans -= 1 << i
else:
ans |= 1 << i
return ans
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #137: Single Number II
impl Solution {
pub fn single_number(nums: Vec<i32>) -> i32 {
let mut ans = 0;
for i in 0..32 {
let count = nums.iter().map(|v| (v >> i) & 1).sum::<i32>();
ans |= count % 3 << i;
}
ans
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #137: Single Number II
function singleNumber(nums: number[]): number {
let ans = 0;
for (let i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
const count = nums.reduce((r, v) => r + ((v >> i) & 1), 0);
ans |= (count % 3) << i;
}
return ans;
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
Sort the array in O(n log n), then scan for the missing or unique element by comparing adjacent pairs. Sorting requires O(n) auxiliary space (or O(1) with in-place sort but O(n log n) time remains). The sort step dominates.
Bitwise operations (AND, OR, XOR, shifts) are O(1) per operation on fixed-width integers. A single pass through the input with bit operations gives O(n) time. The key insight: XOR of a number with itself is 0, which eliminates duplicates without extra space.
Review these before coding to avoid predictable interview regressions.
Wrong move: Loop endpoints miss first/last candidate.
Usually fails on: Fails on minimal arrays and exact-boundary answers.
Fix: Re-derive loops from inclusive/exclusive ranges before coding.