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.
You are given an array nums consisting of n prime integers.
You need to construct an array ans of length n, such that, for each index i, the bitwise OR of ans[i] and ans[i] + 1 is equal to nums[i], i.e. ans[i] OR (ans[i] + 1) == nums[i].
Additionally, you must minimize each value of ans[i] in the resulting array.
If it is not possible to find such a value for ans[i] that satisfies the condition, then set ans[i] = -1.
Example 1:
Input: nums = [2,3,5,7]
Output: [-1,1,4,3]
Explanation:
i = 0, as there is no value for ans[0] that satisfies ans[0] OR (ans[0] + 1) = 2, so ans[0] = -1.i = 1, the smallest ans[1] that satisfies ans[1] OR (ans[1] + 1) = 3 is 1, because 1 OR (1 + 1) = 3.i = 2, the smallest ans[2] that satisfies ans[2] OR (ans[2] + 1) = 5 is 4, because 4 OR (4 + 1) = 5.i = 3, the smallest ans[3] that satisfies ans[3] OR (ans[3] + 1) = 7 is 3, because 3 OR (3 + 1) = 7.Example 2:
Input: nums = [11,13,31]
Output: [9,12,15]
Explanation:
i = 0, the smallest ans[0] that satisfies ans[0] OR (ans[0] + 1) = 11 is 9, because 9 OR (9 + 1) = 11.i = 1, the smallest ans[1] that satisfies ans[1] OR (ans[1] + 1) = 13 is 12, because 12 OR (12 + 1) = 13.i = 2, the smallest ans[2] that satisfies ans[2] OR (ans[2] + 1) = 31 is 15, because 15 OR (15 + 1) = 31.Constraints:
1 <= nums.length <= 1002 <= nums[i] <= 109nums[i] is a prime number.Problem summary: You are given an array nums consisting of n prime integers. You need to construct an array ans of length n, such that, for each index i, the bitwise OR of ans[i] and ans[i] + 1 is equal to nums[i], i.e. ans[i] OR (ans[i] + 1) == nums[i]. Additionally, you must minimize each value of ans[i] in the resulting array. If it is not possible to find such a value for ans[i] that satisfies the condition, then set ans[i] = -1.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array · Bit Manipulation
[2,3,5,7]
[11,13,31]
Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #3315: Construct the Minimum Bitwise Array II
class Solution {
public int[] minBitwiseArray(List<Integer> nums) {
int n = nums.size();
int[] ans = new int[n];
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
int x = nums.get(i);
if (x == 2) {
ans[i] = -1;
} else {
for (int j = 1; j < 32; ++j) {
if ((x >> j & 1) == 0) {
ans[i] = x ^ 1 << (j - 1);
break;
}
}
}
}
return ans;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #3315: Construct the Minimum Bitwise Array II
func minBitwiseArray(nums []int) (ans []int) {
for _, x := range nums {
if x == 2 {
ans = append(ans, -1)
} else {
for i := 1; i < 32; i++ {
if x>>i&1 == 0 {
ans = append(ans, x^1<<(i-1))
break
}
}
}
}
return
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #3315: Construct the Minimum Bitwise Array II
class Solution:
def minBitwiseArray(self, nums: List[int]) -> List[int]:
ans = []
for x in nums:
if x == 2:
ans.append(-1)
else:
for i in range(1, 32):
if x >> i & 1 ^ 1:
ans.append(x ^ 1 << (i - 1))
break
return ans
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #3315: Construct the Minimum Bitwise Array II
impl Solution {
pub fn min_bitwise_array(nums: Vec<i32>) -> Vec<i32> {
let mut ans: Vec<i32> = Vec::new();
for x in nums {
if x == 2 {
ans.push(-1);
} else {
for i in 1..32 {
if (((x >> i) & 1) ^ 1) != 0 {
ans.push(x ^ (1 << (i - 1)));
break;
}
}
}
}
ans
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #3315: Construct the Minimum Bitwise Array II
function minBitwiseArray(nums: number[]): number[] {
const ans: number[] = [];
for (const x of nums) {
if (x === 2) {
ans.push(-1);
} else {
for (let i = 1; i < 32; ++i) {
if (((x >> i) & 1) ^ 1) {
ans.push(x ^ (1 << (i - 1)));
break;
}
}
}
}
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.