leetcode/.notes/1365.md

1365. How Many Numbers Are Smaller Than the Current Number

Difficulty: Easy URL: https://leetcode.com/problems/how-many-numbers-are-smaller-than-the-current-number/ Topics: Array, Hash Table, Sorting, Counting Sort

---

The One Insight That Makes This Work

If I know how many times each value appears, and I add those counts up from left to right, then prefix[v] tells me how many elements are ≤ v — instantly, for any v.

That's it. Everything below is just executing this idea.

---

Step 1: Spot the Signal

Read the constraints:

0 <= nums[i] <= 100

Values are bounded to a tiny range (0–100). This is the flashing neon sign that says: don't sort, don't nest loops — build a frequency array indexed by value.

Rule of thumb: value range ≤ ~10⁶ and you need counting/ranking? Frequency array.

---

Step 2: Count Every Value (the "bucket" pass)

Make an array with one slot per possible value. Walk the input once. Each number votes for its own slot.

const freq = new Array(101).fill(0);  // slots for values 0..100
for (const x of nums) freq[x]++;

For nums = [8, 1, 2, 2, 3]:

value:  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ...
freq:   0  1  2  1  0  0  0  0  1  ...

Read it as: "one 1, two 2s, one 3, one 8."

---

Step 3: Prefix Sum (the magic pass)

Now transform freq in place: each slot becomes itself plus everything before it.

for (let i = 1; i < 101; i++) freq[i] += freq[i - 1];

Same example after the pass:

value:  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ...
freq:   0  1  3  4  4  4  4  4  5  ...

New meaning: freq[v] = count of elements ≤ v.

• freq[3] = 4 → four numbers are ≤ 3 (they are 1, 2, 2, 3) ✓
• freq[7] = 4 → still four numbers ≤ 7 ✓

---

Step 4: Answer Queries in O(1)

"How many numbers are strictly smaller than x?" is the same question as "how many numbers are ≤ x − 1?"

return nums.map((x) => (x === 0 ? 0 : freq[x - 1]));

The x === 0 guard exists because nothing can be smaller than the minimum possible value — and freq[-1] would be undefined.

Trace on [8, 1, 2, 2, 3]:

x	lookup	answer
8	freq[7]	4
1	freq[0]	0
2	freq[1]	1
2	freq[1]	1
3	freq[2]	3

→ [4, 0, 1, 1, 3] ✓

---

Full Solution

var smallerNumbersThanCurrent = function (nums) {
  // 1. Bucket counts
  const freq = new Array(101).fill(0);
  for (const x of nums) freq[x]++;

  // 2. Prefix sum: freq[v] = count of elements <= v
  for (let i = 1; i < 101; i++) freq[i] += freq[i - 1];

  // 3. Strictly smaller than x == count of elements <= x-1
  return nums.map((x) => (x === 0 ? 0 : freq[x - 1]));
};

Complexity: O(n + k) time, O(k) space, where k = value range (101 here). No sort, no log factor.

---

The Reusable Pattern (memorize this shape)

1. BUCKET   — freq[value]++ for every element
2. PREFIX   — freq[i] += freq[i-1] left to right
3. QUERY    — freq[v] answers "how many ≤ v" in O(1)
              freq[v-1] answers "how many < v"
              n - freq[v] answers "how many > v"

Where else this exact shape shows up

Problem	Same pattern, different query
Counting Sort	Prefix sums become final sorted positions
LC 315 / rank queries	"How many smaller" is literally a rank
LC 1122 Relative Sort Array	Bucket + walk buckets in order
Radix sort digit pass	Bucket by digit, prefix for placement
Histogram percentiles	freq[v] / n = percentile of v
"How many in range [a, b]?"	freq[b] − freq[a−1] — the prefix subtraction trick

The generalization ladder

• Values bounded and small → frequency array (this pattern)
• Values huge but few distinct → coordinate compression first, then this pattern
• Need updates between queries → upgrade prefix array to a Fenwick tree (BIT) — same idea, log-time updates

---

Common Mistakes

1. Returning freq[x] instead of freq[x-1] — that counts elements ≤ x (including x itself and its duplicates). Off-by-one between "≤" and "<" is where this pattern bites.
2. Forgetting the x === 0 edge — smallest possible value has nothing below it.
3. Sizing the array to nums.length instead of the value range — the buckets are indexed by value, not position.