LeetCode #1296 — MEDIUM

Divide Array in Sets of K Consecutive Numbers

Move from brute-force thinking to an efficient approach using array strategy.

The Problem

Problem Statement

Given an array of integers nums and a positive integer k, check whether it is possible to divide this array into sets of k consecutive numbers.

Return true if it is possible. Otherwise, return false.

Example 1:

Input: nums = [1,2,3,3,4,4,5,6], k = 4
Output: true
Explanation: Array can be divided into [1,2,3,4] and [3,4,5,6].

Example 2:

Input: nums = [3,2,1,2,3,4,3,4,5,9,10,11], k = 3
Output: true
Explanation: Array can be divided into [1,2,3] , [2,3,4] , [3,4,5] and [9,10,11].

Example 3:

Input: nums = [1,2,3,4], k = 3
Output: false
Explanation: Each array should be divided in subarrays of size 3.

Constraints:

1 <= k <= nums.length <= 10⁵
1 <= nums[i] <= 10⁹

Note: This question is the same as 846: https://leetcode.com/problems/hand-of-straights/

Step 01

Brute Force Baseline

Problem summary: Given an array of integers nums and a positive integer k, check whether it is possible to divide this array into sets of k consecutive numbers. Return true if it is possible. Otherwise, return false.

Baseline thinking

Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.

Pattern signal: Array · Hash Map · Greedy

Example 1

[1,2,3,3,4,4,5,6]
4

Example 2

[3,2,1,2,3,4,3,4,5,9,10,11]
3

Example 3

[1,2,3,4]
3

Core Insight

What unlocks the optimal approach

If the smallest number in the possible-to-split array is V, then numbers V+1, V+2, ... V+k-1 must contain there as well.
You can iteratively find k sets and remove them from array until it becomes empty.
Failure to do so would mean that array is unsplittable.

Interview move: turn each hint into an invariant you can check after every iteration/recursion step.

Step 03

Algorithm Walkthrough

Iteration Checklist

Define state (indices, window, stack, map, DP cell, or recursion frame).
Apply one transition step and update the invariant.
Record answer candidate when condition is met.
Continue until all input is consumed.

Use the first example testcase as your mental trace to verify each transition.

Step 04

Edge Cases

Minimum Input

Single element / shortest valid input

Validate boundary behavior before entering the main loop or recursion.

Duplicates & Repeats

Repeated values / repeated states

Decide whether duplicates should be merged, skipped, or counted explicitly.

Extreme Constraints

Upper-end input sizes

Re-check complexity target against constraints to avoid time-limit issues.

Invalid / Corner Shape

Empty collections, zeros, or disconnected structures

Handle special-case structure before the core algorithm path.

Step 05

Full Annotated Code

Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.

// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1296: Divide Array in Sets of K Consecutive Numbers
class Solution {
    public boolean isPossibleDivide(int[] nums, int k) {
        if (nums.length % k != 0) {
            return false;
        }
        Arrays.sort(nums);
        Map<Integer, Integer> cnt = new HashMap<>();
        for (int x : nums) {
            cnt.merge(x, 1, Integer::sum);
        }
        for (int x : nums) {
            if (cnt.getOrDefault(x, 0) > 0) {
                for (int y = x; y < x + k; ++y) {
                    if (cnt.merge(y, -1, Integer::sum) < 0) {
                        return false;
                    }
                }
            }
        }
        return true;
    }
}

// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1296: Divide Array in Sets of K Consecutive Numbers
func isPossibleDivide(nums []int, k int) bool {
	if len(nums)%k != 0 {
		return false
	}
	sort.Ints(nums)
	cnt := map[int]int{}
	for _, x := range nums {
		cnt[x]++
	}
	for _, x := range nums {
		if cnt[x] > 0 {
			for y := x; y < x+k; y++ {
				if cnt[y] == 0 {
					return false
				}
				cnt[y]--
			}
		}
	}
	return true
}

# Accepted solution for LeetCode #1296: Divide Array in Sets of K Consecutive Numbers
class Solution:
    def isPossibleDivide(self, nums: List[int], k: int) -> bool:
        if len(nums) % k:
            return False
        cnt = Counter(nums)
        for x in sorted(nums):
            if cnt[x]:
                for y in range(x, x + k):
                    if cnt[y] == 0:
                        return False
                    cnt[y] -= 1
        return True

// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1296: Divide Array in Sets of K Consecutive Numbers
struct Solution;
use std::collections::BTreeMap;
use std::collections::VecDeque;

impl Solution {
    fn is_possible_divide(nums: Vec<i32>, k: i32) -> bool {
        let n = nums.len();
        let k = k as usize;
        if n % k != 0 {
            return false;
        }
        let mut btm: BTreeMap<i32, usize> = BTreeMap::new();
        for x in nums {
            *btm.entry(x).or_default() += 1;
        }
        let mut queue: VecDeque<(i32, usize)> = VecDeque::new();
        for (val, size) in btm {
            queue.push_back((val, size));
            if queue.len() == k {
                let (first_val, first_size) = queue.pop_front().unwrap();
                for i in 1..k {
                    let (next_val, next_size) = queue.pop_front().unwrap();
                    if next_val != first_val + i as i32 {
                        return false;
                    }
                    if next_size < first_size {
                        return false;
                    }
                    if next_size > first_size {
                        queue.push_back((next_val, next_size - first_size));
                    }
                }
            }
        }
        queue.is_empty()
    }
}

#[test]
fn test() {
    let nums = vec![1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6];
    let k = 4;
    let res = true;
    assert_eq!(Solution::is_possible_divide(nums, k), res);
    let nums = vec![3, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11];
    let k = 3;
    let res = true;
    assert_eq!(Solution::is_possible_divide(nums, k), res);
    let nums = vec![3, 3, 2, 2, 1, 1];
    let k = 3;
    let res = true;
    assert_eq!(Solution::is_possible_divide(nums, k), res);
    let nums = vec![1, 2, 3, 4];
    let k = 3;
    let res = false;
    assert_eq!(Solution::is_possible_divide(nums, k), res);
}

// Accepted solution for LeetCode #1296: Divide Array in Sets of K Consecutive Numbers
function isPossibleDivide(nums: number[], k: number): boolean {
    if (nums.length % k !== 0) {
        return false;
    }
    const cnt = new Map<number, number>();
    for (const x of nums) {
        cnt.set(x, (cnt.get(x) || 0) + 1);
    }
    nums.sort((a, b) => a - b);
    for (const x of nums) {
        if (cnt.get(x)! > 0) {
            for (let y = x; y < x + k; y++) {
                if ((cnt.get(y) || 0) === 0) {
                    return false;
                }
                cnt.set(y, cnt.get(y)! - 1);
            }
        }
    }
    return true;
}

Step 06

Interactive Study Demo

Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.

Custom checkpoints (one per line)

Press Step or Run All to begin.

Step 07

Complexity Analysis

Time

O(n × log n)

Space

O(n)

Approach Breakdown

EXHAUSTIVE

O(2ⁿ) time

O(n) space

Try every possible combination of choices. With n items each having two states (include/exclude), the search space is 2ⁿ. Evaluating each combination takes O(n), giving O(n × 2ⁿ). The recursion stack or subset storage uses O(n) space.

GREEDY

O(n log n) time

O(1) space

Greedy algorithms typically sort the input (O(n log n)) then make a single pass (O(n)). The sort dominates. If the input is already sorted or the greedy choice can be computed without sorting, time drops to O(n). Proving greedy correctness (exchange argument) is harder than the implementation.

Shortcut: Sort + single pass → O(n log n). If no sort needed → O(n). The hard part is proving it works.

Coach Notes

Common Mistakes

Review these before coding to avoid predictable interview regressions.

Off-by-one on range boundaries

Wrong move: Loop endpoints miss first/last candidate.

Usually fails on: Fails on minimal arrays and exact-boundary answers.

Fix: Re-derive loops from inclusive/exclusive ranges before coding.

Mutating counts without cleanup

Wrong move: Zero-count keys stay in map and break distinct/count constraints.

Usually fails on: Window/map size checks are consistently off by one.

Fix: Delete keys when count reaches zero.

Using greedy without proof

Wrong move: Locally optimal choices may fail globally.

Usually fails on: Counterexamples appear on crafted input orderings.

Fix: Verify with exchange argument or monotonic objective before committing.