Skip to main content

Find the Sequence of Strings Appeared on the Screen - Video Solutions

MediumStringSimulation

Find the Sequence of Strings Appeared on the Screen || LeetCode Weekly Contest 420

codi
0:451,471 views
6 video solutions available

Find the Sequence of Strings Appeared on the Screen - Video Solution

Watch 6 video solutions for Find the Sequence of Strings Appeared on the Screen, a medium level problem involving String, Simulation. This walkthrough by codi has 1,471 views views. Want to try solving it yourself? Practice on FleetCode or read the detailed text solution.

Problem Statement

You are given a string target.

Alice is going to type target on her computer using a special keyboard that has only two keys:

  • Key 1 appends the character "a" to the string on the screen.
  • Key 2 changes the last character of the string on the screen to its next character in the English alphabet. For example, "c" changes to "d" and "z" changes to "a".

Note that initially there is an empty string "" on the screen, so she can only press key 1.

Return a list of all strings that appear on the screen as Alice types target, in the order they appear, using the minimum key presses.

 

Example 1:

Input: target = "abc"

Output: ["a","aa","ab","aba","abb","abc"]

Explanation:

The sequence of key presses done by Alice are:

  • Press key 1, and the string on the screen becomes "a".
  • Press key 1, and the string on the screen becomes "aa".
  • Press key 2, and the string on the screen becomes "ab".
  • Press key 1, and the string on the screen becomes "aba".
  • Press key 2, and the string on the screen becomes "abb".
  • Press key 2, and the string on the screen becomes "abc".

Example 2:

Input: target = "he"

Output: ["a","b","c","d","e","f","g","h","ha","hb","hc","hd","he"]

 

Constraints:

  • 1 <= target.length <= 400
  • target consists only of lowercase English letters.
Read full problem with examples

Approach Overview

Problem Overview: You are given a target string and must return every intermediate string that appears on the screen while typing it using a restricted keyboard. The keyboard starts with the string "a". Two operations are allowed: append 'a' to the end, or increment the last character to the next letter in the alphabet. The task is to simulate the typing process until the screen matches the target string.

Approach 1: Iterative String Construction (O(26 * n) time, O(n) space)

This approach directly simulates the screen operations using a mutable string. Start with "a" and store it in the result list. For each position i in the target, repeatedly increment the last character until it equals target[i]. After every increment, push the current string into the result. Once the correct character is reached, append 'a' if there are more characters left in the target, and record the new string again. Each character may be incremented at most 25 times, so the overall time complexity is O(26 * n), which simplifies to O(n). This approach is straightforward and mirrors the exact behavior described in the problem statement, making it easy to reason about during interviews.

Approach 2: Optimized Approach with Direct Character Manipulation (O(26 * n) time, O(n) space)

Instead of repeatedly rebuilding immutable strings, maintain a character array representing the current screen state. Modify the last character directly in the array while performing the increment operation. After each update, convert the array to a string and append it to the output list. This avoids repeated string allocations during intermediate steps and keeps operations cache‑friendly. The logic remains the same: iterate through the target characters, increment the last character until it matches, then append 'a' for the next position. Time complexity remains O(26 * n) because each position may require up to 25 increments, while space complexity stays O(n) for storing the result.

The problem mainly tests careful simulation and basic manipulation of a string. The key observation is that every character always starts as 'a' and moves forward alphabetically until it matches the target.

Recommended for interviews: The iterative simulation approach is usually what interviewers expect. It shows you can translate a process description into code and manage intermediate states correctly. The optimized character-array variant demonstrates awareness of string mutability and performance tradeoffs, which can matter in languages where strings are immutable.

Complexity Analysis

ApproachTimeSpaceWhen to Use
Iterative String ConstructionO(26 * n) ≈ O(n)O(n)Best for clarity and interview explanations where direct simulation is expected
Direct Character Manipulation (Array Based)O(26 * n) ≈ O(n)O(n)When optimizing string updates in languages with immutable strings