medium Validate Stack Sequences
Problem Statement
Given two integer arrays, pushed and popped, each with unique values, return true if this could have been the result of a sequence of push and pop operations on an initially empty stack. Otherwise, return false.
Examples
Example 1
- Input:
pushed = [1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7],popped = [4, 6, 3, 2, 7, 1] - Expected Output:
true - Explanation:
- We can perform the following operations:
- Push 1, push 2, push 3, push 4, pop 4, push 6, pop 6, pop 3, pop 2, push 7, pop 7, pop 1.
- We can perform the following operations:
Example 2
- Input:
pushed = [1, 2, 3, 4],popped = [4, 3, 2, 1] - Expected Output:
true - Explanation:
- We can perform the following operations:
- Push 1, push 2, push 3, push 4, pop 4, pop 3, pop 2, pop 1.
- We can perform the following operations:
Example 3
- Input:
pushed = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5],popped = [4, 5, 3, 1, 2] - Expected Output:
false - Explanation:
- There's no way to pop 4, 5, 3, 1, 2 in that order with the given
pushedsequence. However, 4, 5, 3, 2, 1 can be a valid sequence.
- There's no way to pop 4, 5, 3, 1, 2 in that order with the given
Constraints:
1 <= pushed.length <= 10000 <= pushed[i] <= 1000- All the elements of
pushedare unique. popped.length == pushed.lengthpoppedis a permutation of pushed.
Try it yourself
Try solving this question here:
🎯 STRICT STANDOUT — Validate Stack Sequences (problem)
0. Why this page exists
Family: Stack simulation / push-pop schedule validation
Recognition: two permutations of the same multiset (here unique values) claim to be push order and pop order of a stack. The only structure that decides is the LIFO constraint — simulate greedily.
1. Pattern + when-NOT (K12)
Pattern / template: i over pushed; stack=[]; j over popped. For each push, while stack top equals popped[j], pop and j++. At end accept iff stack empty (or j==n). Greedy is correct: if you can pop now you must — delaying never helps because pushed order is fixed.
When-NOT: When-NOT queue sequences (FIFO different); when-NOT if duplicates and problem allows ambiguous matches without unique values (still works if you only pop when top matches next required); when-NOT if ops include peek-only or multi-stack.
2. Complexity derivation (K11)
Each of n values pushed once and popped at most once → O(n) time.
Stack holds ≤n → O(n) space.
Not O(n²): the while-pop is amortized O(1) per element.
3. Edge hand-run (K13)
true: pushed=[1,2,3,4,6,7], popped=[4,6,3,2,7,1].
false: pushed=[1,2,3,4,5], popped=[4,5,3,1,2] — after 4,5,3 top is 2 but need 1.
n=1: always true. Fully nested reverse pop: always true.
4. Interviewer follow-ups & drills
Q1. Why must you pop as soon as tops match?
Model answer: Pushed order fixed; delaying a legal pop can only bury needed values under later pushes.
Q2. How is this different from 'next greater' monotonic stack?
Model answer: Here stack models an external schedule; monotonic stack enforces order for range queries.
Q3. Space O(1) possible?
Model answer: If you may mutate pushed array as stack storage, yes O(1) extra; still O(n) if you cannot.
✅ Solution Validate Stack Sequences
Problem Statement
Given two integer arrays, pushed and popped, each with unique values, return true if this could have been the result of a sequence of push and pop operations on an initially empty stack. Otherwise, return false.
Examples
Example 1
- Input:
pushed = [1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7],popped = [4, 6, 3, 2, 7, 1] - Expected Output:
true - Explanation:
- We can perform the following operations:
- Push 1, push 2, push 3, push 4, pop 4, push 6, pop 6, pop 3, pop 2, push 7, pop 7, pop 1.
- We can perform the following operations:
Example 2
- Input:
pushed = [1, 2, 3, 4],popped = [4, 3, 2, 1] - Expected Output:
true - Explanation:
- We can perform the following operations:
- Push 1, push 2, push 3, push 4, pop 4, pop 3, pop 2, pop 1.
- We can perform the following operations:
Example 3
- Input:
pushed = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5],popped = [4, 5, 3, 1, 2] - Expected Output:
false - Explanation:
- There's no way to pop 4, 5, 3, 1, 2 in that order with the given
pushedsequence. However, 4, 5, 3, 2, 1 can be a valid sequence.
- There's no way to pop 4, 5, 3, 1, 2 in that order with the given
Constraints:
1 <= pushed.length <= 10000 <= pushed[i] <= 1000- All the elements of
pushedare unique. popped.length == pushed.lengthpoppedis a permutation of pushed.
Solution
To solve this problem, we use a simulation approach where we emulate the stack operations based on the pushed and popped sequences. We use a stack to track the elements as they are pushed and popped. As we iterate through the pushed array, we push elements onto the stack and check if the top of the stack matches the current element in the popped array. If it does, we pop from the stack and move to the next element in the popped array. This approach ensures that we only perform valid stack operations and helps us verify if the given popped sequence can be achieved from the pushed sequence.
The simulation approach is effective because it directly mimics the stack operations and allows us to easily track the sequence of operations. It ensures that we only perform valid stack operations, and by maintaining a stack, we can quickly verify if the top of the stack matches the current element in the popped sequence.
Step-by-Step Algorithm
-
Initialize the Stack and Index:
- Create a
Stack<Integer> stackto simulate the push and pop operations. - Initialize an index
i = 0to keep track of the current position in thepoppedarray.
- Create a
-
Iterate Through the
pushedArray:- For each
numinpushed:- Push the current element to the stack to simulate the push operation.
- For each
-
Check and Perform Pop Operations:
- While the stack is not empty and the top of the stack matches
popped[i]:- This ensures we only pop elements when they match the expected sequence.
- Pop from the stack:
- Remove the top element from the stack to simulate the pop operation.
- Increment
i:- Move to the next element in the
poppedarray to continue the validation process.
- Move to the next element in the
- While the stack is not empty and the top of the stack matches
-
Return the Result:
- Return
stack.isEmpty():- If the stack is empty, it means all elements were matched and popped correctly according to the
poppedsequence, hence the sequences are valid. If not, the sequences are invalid.
- If the stack is empty, it means all elements were matched and popped correctly according to the
- Return
Algorithm Walkthrough
Let's go through the algorithm step by step with pushed = [1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7] and popped = [4, 6, 3, 2, 7, 1].
-
Initialization:
stack = []i = 0
-
First iteration (num = 1):
- Push Operation: Push 1 onto the stack.
stack = [1]
- Pop Operation: The top of the stack (1) does not match
popped[0](4), so we do not pop. stack = [1],i = 0
- Push Operation: Push 1 onto the stack.
-
Second iteration (num = 2):
- Push Operation: Push 2 onto the stack.
stack = [1, 2]
- Pop Operation: The top of the stack (2) does not match
popped[0](4), so we do not pop. stack = [1, 2],i = 0
- Push Operation: Push 2 onto the stack.
-
Third iteration (num = 3):
- Push Operation: Push 3 onto the stack.
stack = [1, 2, 3]
- Pop Operation: The top of the stack (3) does not match
popped[0](4), so we do not pop. stack = [1, 2, 3],i = 0
- Push Operation: Push 3 onto the stack.
-
Fourth iteration (num = 4):
- Push Operation: Push 4 onto the stack.
stack = [1, 2, 3, 4]
- Pop Operation: The top of the stack (4) matches
popped[0](4), so pop 4 from the stack and incrementiby 1.stack = [1, 2, 3],i = 1
- Push Operation: Push 4 onto the stack.
-
Fifth iteration (num = 6):
- Push Operation: Push 6 onto the stack.
stack = [1, 2, 3, 6]
- Pop Operation: The top of the stack (6) matches
popped[1](6), so pop 6 from the stack and incrementiby 1.stack = [1, 2, 3],i = 2
- The top of the stack (3) matches
popped[2](3), so pop 3 from the stack and incrementiby 1.stack = [1, 2],i = 3
- The top of the stack (2) matches
popped[3](2), so pop 2 from the stack and incrementiby 1.stack = [1],i = 4
- Push Operation: Push 6 onto the stack.
-
Sixth iteration (num = 7):
- Push Operation: Push 7 onto the stack.
stack = [1, 7]
- Pop Operation: The top of the stack (7) matches
popped[4](7), so pop 7 from the stack and incrementiby 1.stack = [1],i = 5
- The top of the stack (1) matches
popped[5](1), so pop 1 from the stack and incrementiby 1.stack = [],i = 6
- Push Operation: Push 7 onto the stack.
-
Final Check:
- The stack is empty, so return
true.
- The stack is empty, so return
Code
import java.util.Stack;
class Solution {
public boolean validateStackSequences(int[] pushed, int[] popped) {
Stack<Integer> stack = new Stack<>();
int i = 0;
for (int num : pushed) {
stack.push(num); // push onto stack
// When stack is empty and top elements matches the popped[i]
while (!stack.isEmpty() && stack.peek() == popped[i]) {
stack.pop(); // pop from stack
i++;
}
}
return stack.isEmpty();
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
Solution sol = new Solution();
int[] pushed1 = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 };
int[] popped1 = { 4, 6, 3, 2, 7, 1 };
System.out.println(sol.validateStackSequences(pushed1, popped1)); // true
int[] pushed2 = { 1, 2, 3, 4 };
int[] popped2 = { 4, 3, 2, 1 };
System.out.println(sol.validateStackSequences(pushed2, popped2)); // true
int[] pushed3 = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
int[] popped3 = { 4, 5, 3, 1, 2 };
System.out.println(sol.validateStackSequences(pushed3, popped3)); // false
}
}
Complexity Analysis
- Time Complexity:
, where n is the number of elements in the pushedarray. Each element is pushed and popped from the stack once. - Space Complexity:
, where n is the number of elements in the pushedarray. This is due to the space used by the stack.
🎯 STRICT STANDOUT — Solution Validate Stack Sequences
0. Why this page exists
Family: Stack simulation
Solution page must lock the amortized O(n) argument and the false example where top mismatches the next required pop — that is the LIFO edge the algorithm detects.
1. Pattern + when-NOT (K12)
Pattern / template: Stack + index j into popped. Iterate x in pushed: push x; while stack and stack[-1]==popped[j]: pop; j+=1. Return j==n.
When-NOT: When-NOT sorting both arrays (ignores order constraints). When-NOT graph topo of arbitrary partial order — stack imposes a specific parenthesization, not general DAG.
2. Complexity derivation (K11)
Time Θ(n): ≤2n stack ops.
Space Θ(n) worst (strictly increasing then reverse pop needs all n).
Amortized: each element enters/leaves stack once.
3. Edge hand-run (K13)
Hand-run false: push 1,2,3,4; pop 4; push 5; pop 5; pop 3; need 1 but top=2 → false.
true reverse: pushed 1..n, popped n..1 → stack fills then drains.
Empty arrays: true (n=0) if allowed.
4. Interviewer follow-ups & drills
Q1. Prove no false negative
Model answer: Any valid schedule never needs to skip a legal pop; simulation mirrors unique forced choices.
Q2. Duplicates?
Model answer: With unique values match is unique; with dups same code still validates a concrete sequence.
Q3. Related problem?
Model answer: Asteroid collision / remove stars — same stack-collapse family.
Recognize it: Scan once tracking what you need (running max/sum), or precompute a prefix-sum / hash → turn O(n²) into O(n).
▶ Visualize this problem (step it, predict each fork)
🤖 Don't fully get this? Learn it with Claude
Stuck on Validate Stack Sequences? Open Claude, copy a block below, and it'll teach you this exact concept — visually and interactively.
Progressively stronger hints — you still solve it.
I'm working on the problem **Validate Stack Sequences** (DSA). Give me a HINT LADDER: start with the tiniest nudge, then wait. Only reveal the next, stronger hint when I ask. Do NOT show the full solution unless I type 'show solution'. Keep me doing the thinking. If you're unsure or a claim isn't standard, say so and reason from first principles instead of guessing.
See the technique, not just code.
Explain the optimal approach to **Validate Stack Sequences** with a VISUAL walkthrough: trace it on a small concrete example using ASCII art / a step-by-step diagram, narrate what changes each step, then give time & space complexity with a one-line derivation. If you're unsure or a claim isn't standard, say so and reason from first principles instead of guessing.
Catch bugs, edge cases, sub-optimality.
I'll paste my solution to **Validate Stack Sequences**. Review it for correctness, missed edge cases, and time/space complexity, then coach me toward the optimal — don't just rewrite it. Ask me to paste my code now. If you're unsure or a claim isn't standard, say so and reason from first principles instead of guessing.
Lock in recognition with look-alikes.
Give me 2 problems that use the SAME underlying pattern as **Validate Stack Sequences**. For each, let me attempt first, then review my answer and name the trigger signal that reveals the pattern. If you're unsure or a claim isn't standard, say so and reason from first principles instead of guessing.