The key is to sort the array and pair consecutive elements, ensuring the greedy invariant holds. By always taking the smaller of each pair in order, you maximize the sum of minimums. This method avoids the combinatorial explosion of brute-force pairing while guaranteeing correctness.
Problem Statement
You are given an integer array nums consisting of 2n integers. Your task is to divide these integers into n pairs such that the sum of the minimum of each pair is maximized. Return the highest possible sum of these minimum values.
For example, given nums = [1,4,3,2], pairing the elements as (1,2) and (3,4) yields min(1,2) + min(3,4) = 1 + 3 = 4, which is the maximum sum achievable. Another example: nums = [6,2,6,5,1,2], the optimal pairs are (1,2), (2,5), and (6,6), producing a sum of 9.
Examples
Example 1
Input: nums = [1,4,3,2]
Output: 4
All possible pairings (ignoring the ordering of elements) are:
- (1, 4), (2, 3) -> min(1, 4) + min(2, 3) = 1 + 2 = 3
- (1, 3), (2, 4) -> min(1, 3) + min(2, 4) = 1 + 2 = 3
- (1, 2), (3, 4) -> min(1, 2) + min(3, 4) = 1 + 3 = 4 So the maximum possible sum is 4.
Example 2
Input: nums = [6,2,6,5,1,2]
Output: 9
The optimal pairing is (2, 1), (2, 5), (6, 6). min(2, 1) + min(2, 5) + min(6, 6) = 1 + 2 + 6 = 9.
Constraints
- 1 <= n <= 104
- nums.length == 2 * n
- -104 <= nums[i] <= 104
Solution Approach
Sort and Pair Consecutively
Sort the array in ascending order and pair each element with its immediate neighbor. Sum the first element of each pair to maximize the sum of minimums. This leverages the greedy choice and invariant property directly.
Validate Greedy Invariant
After sorting, the greedy invariant ensures that selecting consecutive elements maintains the highest possible minimums across all pairs. Skipping elements or choosing non-consecutive pairs risks reducing the sum.
Optimize for Time and Space
A standard sort yields O(n log n) time and O(1) extra space beyond input. For bounded integer ranges, counting sort can reduce time to O(n) while still respecting the greedy invariant, improving efficiency for large arrays.
Complexity Analysis
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Time | Depends on the final approach |
| Space | Depends on the final approach |
Sorting-based solution runs in O(n log n) time and O(1) space for in-place operations. Using counting sort for limited ranges reduces time to O(n). The space complexity depends on whether a standard sort or counting sort is used.
What Interviewers Usually Probe
- Ask about greedy strategy versus brute force to test understanding of invariant validation.
- Expect reasoning on why pairing sorted consecutive elements maximizes the sum of minimums.
- Look for discussion of time-space trade-offs, such as using counting sort for bounded integer arrays.
Common Pitfalls or Variants
Common pitfalls
- Attempting all possible pair combinations leads to exponential time complexity.
- Pairing without sorting may violate the greedy invariant and produce suboptimal sums.
- Misunderstanding that the sum of maximums in each pair is not the goal; the minimums drive the result.
Follow-up variants
- Compute the maximum sum if elements can be negative and positive, emphasizing the same greedy principle.
- Adapt the problem to k-sized groups instead of pairs, testing generalization of invariant reasoning.
- Determine the minimum sum of maximums of pairs, which flips the greedy selection logic.
How GhostInterview Helps
- Highlights the correct greedy invariant for pairing consecutive sorted elements efficiently.
- Guides through example arrays to visualize why non-consecutive pairing reduces the sum.
- Provides clarity on time-space trade-offs and optimization choices for large arrays.
Topic Pages
Related GhostInterview Pages
- LeetCode Interview Copilot - Use GhostInterview as a live solver when you want direct help with LeetCode-style coding questions.
- Coding Interview Assistant - See how GhostInterview supports array, string, linked list, graph, and tree interview workflows.
- How GhostInterview Works - Review the screenshot, reasoning, and answer flow before using the solver in a live interview.
FAQ
What is the best strategy to solve Array Partition efficiently?
Sort the array and sum every other element starting from the first. This guarantees maximum sum of minimums due to the greedy invariant.
Can negative numbers affect the greedy pairing approach?
No, the greedy invariant still holds for negative numbers; pairing consecutive sorted elements ensures the sum of minimums is maximized.
Is brute force ever feasible for Array Partition?
No, trying all pair combinations has exponential complexity and becomes impractical even for small n.
How does counting sort optimize this problem?
For arrays with elements in a limited range, counting sort sorts in O(n) time, preserving the greedy consecutive pairing strategy.
Why do we sum the first element of each sorted pair?
Summing the first element captures the minimum of each pair while respecting the greedy invariant that maximizes the total sum.
Need direct help with Array Partition instead of spending more time grinding it?
Download GhostInterview when you want a LeetCode solver, not another long practice loop. Capture Array Partition from a screenshot, get the answer path and complexity, and use supported stealth workflows that stay outside captured layers.
Capture the prompt fast instead of rewriting the problem by hand.
Get the solution path, trade-offs, and complexity summary in one pass.
Stay outside captured layers on supported screen-share workflows.
Stay in the same pattern family
Find the shortest unsorted continuous subarray that, if sorted, would sort the entire array.
Open problem page#611 Valid Triangle NumberCount all triplets in an integer array that satisfy the triangle inequality to form valid triangles efficiently using sorting and binary search.
Open problem page#502 IPOMaximize total capital by selecting up to k projects, based on initial capital and project profits using a greedy strategy.
Open problem page