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 array of points where points[i] = [xi, yi] represents a point on the X-Y plane and an integer k, return the k closest points to the origin (0, 0).
The distance between two points on the X-Y plane is the Euclidean distance (i.e., √(x1 - x2)2 + (y1 - y2)2).
You may return the answer in any order. The answer is guaranteed to be unique (except for the order that it is in).
Example 1:
Input: points = [[1,3],[-2,2]], k = 1 Output: [[-2,2]] Explanation: The distance between (1, 3) and the origin is sqrt(10). The distance between (-2, 2) and the origin is sqrt(8). Since sqrt(8) < sqrt(10), (-2, 2) is closer to the origin. We only want the closest k = 1 points from the origin, so the answer is just [[-2,2]].
Example 2:
Input: points = [[3,3],[5,-1],[-2,4]], k = 2 Output: [[3,3],[-2,4]] Explanation: The answer [[-2,4],[3,3]] would also be accepted.
Constraints:
1 <= k <= points.length <= 104-104 <= xi, yi <= 104Problem summary: Given an array of points where points[i] = [xi, yi] represents a point on the X-Y plane and an integer k, return the k closest points to the origin (0, 0). The distance between two points on the X-Y plane is the Euclidean distance (i.e., √(x1 - x2)2 + (y1 - y2)2). You may return the answer in any order. The answer is guaranteed to be unique (except for the order that it is in).
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array · Math
[[1,3],[-2,2]] 1
[[3,3],[5,-1],[-2,4]] 2
kth-largest-element-in-an-array)top-k-frequent-elements)top-k-frequent-words)find-nearest-point-that-has-the-same-x-or-y-coordinate)minimum-rectangles-to-cover-points)Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #973: K Closest Points to Origin
class Solution {
public int[][] kClosest(int[][] points, int k) {
Arrays.sort(
points, (p1, p2) -> Math.hypot(p1[0], p1[1]) - Math.hypot(p2[0], p2[1]) > 0 ? 1 : -1);
return Arrays.copyOfRange(points, 0, k);
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #973: K Closest Points to Origin
func kClosest(points [][]int, k int) [][]int {
sort.Slice(points, func(i, j int) bool {
return math.Hypot(float64(points[i][0]), float64(points[i][1])) < math.Hypot(float64(points[j][0]), float64(points[j][1]))
})
return points[:k]
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #973: K Closest Points to Origin
class Solution:
def kClosest(self, points: List[List[int]], k: int) -> List[List[int]]:
points.sort(key=lambda p: hypot(p[0], p[1]))
return points[:k]
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #973: K Closest Points to Origin
impl Solution {
pub fn k_closest(mut points: Vec<Vec<i32>>, k: i32) -> Vec<Vec<i32>> {
points.sort_by(|a, b| {
let dist_a = f64::hypot(a[0] as f64, a[1] as f64);
let dist_b = f64::hypot(b[0] as f64, b[1] as f64);
dist_a.partial_cmp(&dist_b).unwrap()
});
points.into_iter().take(k as usize).collect()
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #973: K Closest Points to Origin
function kClosest(points: number[][], k: number): number[][] {
points.sort((a, b) => Math.hypot(a[0], a[1]) - Math.hypot(b[0], b[1]));
return points.slice(0, k);
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
Two nested loops check every pair or subarray. The outer loop fixes a starting point, the inner loop extends or searches. For n elements this gives up to n²/2 operations. No extra space, but the quadratic time is prohibitive for large inputs.
Most array problems have an O(n²) brute force (nested loops) and an O(n) optimal (single pass with clever state tracking). The key is identifying what information to maintain as you scan: a running max, a prefix sum, a hash map of seen values, or two pointers.
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.
Wrong move: Temporary multiplications exceed integer bounds.
Usually fails on: Large inputs wrap around unexpectedly.
Fix: Use wider types, modular arithmetic, or rearranged operations.