DEV102's Programming Job Interview Challenge 8
« Previous article:  Next article: »  
DEV102's Programming Job Interview Challenge 6  Blog Home  Dev102's Challenge 10  The Missing Number 
I skipped last week’s DEV102 challenge. I didn’t think my answer was right. Turns out that it was. I was assuming that it had a limitation that would disqualify it. I assumed that my solution would only work if you placed the coins in a tight grid with each newlyplaced coin touching an existing coin. As a practical matter, this is true. It would be virtually impossible to properly place a coin mirroring the freelyplaced previous coin without resorting to a tape measure and protractor. And the placement would have to be exact for it to work. So I suppressed my solution for lack of practicality, when all they really wanted was a theoretic solution.
Anyway, onward to this week’s challenge, #8 (excerpted):
You are writing a software component that receives a binary record every 20 millisecond. …. Your component goal is to alert whenever it identifies a specific expression (which is provided at the initialization process) in the stream of records  you are looking for a specific combination of binary records.
The answer is, of course, a Finite State Machine. To explain how one works, we need to come up with a example expression to search for. Let’s say these records come it four formats: Type A, type B, type C and Type D, and we are looking a sequence of records in the following pattern: ABACB (if you’d like, you can assume that there are many record types, and Type D represents “any record that’s not type A, B or C”). So, we start in state “0”. State 0 can be called “looking for first A record”. At state 0, if we find an A record, we move into state 1 (“Found first A, looking for first B”). If we find any other kind of record, we stay in state 0. This can be expressed in table form as:
Next State  When  Record  Found  

Current State ⇓  A  B  C  D 
0  1  0  0  0 
Next when we are in state 1, if we find a B record, we move into state 2, but the other transitions are a bit trickier. If we find a C or D, we’re back to state 0 (“looking for 1st A”), but if we find another A, we have to stay in state 1. Adding that to our graph:
Next State  When  Record  Found  

Current State ⇓  A  B  C  D 
0  1  0  0  0 
1  1  2  0  0 
Ok, now, we are in state 2 (“found AB, looking for 2nd A”), Here if we find an A, we move on to state 3 — anything else, and we’re back to state 0.
Next State  When  Record  Found  

Current State ⇓  A  B  C  D 
0  1  0  0  0 
1  1  2  0  0 
2  3  0  0  0 
State 3 (“found ABA, looking for C”), is a bit tricky again. If we find a C, naturally, we move into state 4. And if we find a D, were back into state 0. But, if we an A, we step back to state 1. And if we find a B, we step back only to state 2 (ie, we’ve found “ABAB” and the second “AB” may be the start of the pattern we want.)
Next State  When  Record  Found  

Current State ⇓  A  B  C  D 
0  1  0  0  0 
1  1  2  0  0 
2  3  0  0  0 
3  1  2  4  0 
At state 4, we enter the endgame. We’re trying to find “ABACB”, and so far we’re found “ABAC”. If the next record is a B, we have success (“Let loose the pigeons!”). If it’s an A, we go to state 1 (as usual). Anything else, and we start over at state 0.
Next State  When  Record  Found  

Current State ⇓  A  B  C  D 
0  1  0  0  0 
1  1  2  0  0 
2  3  0  0  0 
3  1  2  4  0 
4  1  ⊕  0  0 
Now, to put this into C# code, we merely need a simple preinitialized int array following the structure of the chart we just built, and start with our state at 0.
const int[,] states = new int [5,4]
{
{1,0,0,0},
{1,2,0,0}
{3,0,0,0}
{1,2,4,0}
{1,1,0,0}
};
int state = 0;
Then as a new record comes in, we just determine it’s type, and update the state:
bool MatchFound(Record newRecord)
{
// returns 0,1,2 or 3 for record type A,B,C or D respectively.
// Can be assumed to be present, as per the spec.
int type = GetRecordType(newRecord);
// Here's where the magic happens
// just a simple index into an array.
state = states[state, type];
return state < 0; // Report success or failure.
}
And that’s it. Total state held between records: one integer. Total work needed per record to determine pattern: one array lookup and one int comparison.
And the real beauty of this approach is that if we wanted to look for other patterns at the same time, it could be done. For example, by just changing the states[] array in the above to this
const int[,] states = new int [13,4]
{
{1,5,9,0},
{1,2,9,0},
{3,6,9,0},
{1,2,4,0},
{10,1,9,0},
{1, 6, 9, 0},
{1, 6, 7, 0},
{10, 5, 8, 0},
{2, 5, 9, 0},
{10,5, 9, 0},
{1, 11, 9, 0},
{3, 6, 12, 0},
{3, 6, 9, 0}
};
Then we’d be able to search for ABACB (as before, found when state = 1) and BBCCA (found when state = 2), plus one more pattern (found when state = 3).
Class Homework

(simple) Try to figure out the third pattern that can be found using that state table. (It’s a sequence of 5 records using just A B & C)

(hopefully not possible) Try to figure out a sequence of records that would cause the state machine to miss one of those patterns (Note: after one is found, we start over at state 0, so it’s not intended to find overlapping sequences, such as “ABACBBCCA”. It’ll find the first but not the second.)