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.
Move from brute-force thinking to an efficient approach using array strategy.
You are given two images, img1 and img2, represented as binary, square matrices of size n x n. A binary matrix has only 0s and 1s as values.
We translate one image however we choose by sliding all the 1 bits left, right, up, and/or down any number of units. We then place it on top of the other image. We can then calculate the overlap by counting the number of positions that have a 1 in both images.
Note also that a translation does not include any kind of rotation. Any 1 bits that are translated outside of the matrix borders are erased.
Return the largest possible overlap.
Example 1:
Input: img1 = [[1,1,0],[0,1,0],[0,1,0]], img2 = [[0,0,0],[0,1,1],[0,0,1]] Output: 3 Explanation: We translate img1 to right by 1 unit and down by 1 unit. The number of positions that have a 1 in both images is 3 (shown in red).
Example 2:
Input: img1 = [[1]], img2 = [[1]] Output: 1
Example 3:
Input: img1 = [[0]], img2 = [[0]] Output: 0
Constraints:
n == img1.length == img1[i].lengthn == img2.length == img2[i].length1 <= n <= 30img1[i][j] is either 0 or 1.img2[i][j] is either 0 or 1.Problem summary: You are given two images, img1 and img2, represented as binary, square matrices of size n x n. A binary matrix has only 0s and 1s as values. We translate one image however we choose by sliding all the 1 bits left, right, up, and/or down any number of units. We then place it on top of the other image. We can then calculate the overlap by counting the number of positions that have a 1 in both images. Note also that a translation does not include any kind of rotation. Any 1 bits that are translated outside of the matrix borders are erased. Return the largest possible overlap.
Start with the most direct exhaustive search. That gives a correctness anchor before optimizing.
Pattern signal: Array
[[1,1,0],[0,1,0],[0,1,0]] [[0,0,0],[0,1,1],[0,0,1]]
[[1]] [[1]]
[[0]] [[0]]
Source-backed implementations are provided below for direct study and interview prep.
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #835: Image Overlap
class Solution {
public int largestOverlap(int[][] img1, int[][] img2) {
int n = img1.length;
Map<List<Integer>, Integer> cnt = new HashMap<>();
int ans = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j) {
if (img1[i][j] == 1) {
for (int h = 0; h < n; ++h) {
for (int k = 0; k < n; ++k) {
if (img2[h][k] == 1) {
List<Integer> t = List.of(i - h, j - k);
ans = Math.max(ans, cnt.merge(t, 1, Integer::sum));
}
}
}
}
}
}
return ans;
}
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #835: Image Overlap
func largestOverlap(img1 [][]int, img2 [][]int) (ans int) {
type pair struct{ x, y int }
cnt := map[pair]int{}
for i, row1 := range img1 {
for j, x1 := range row1 {
if x1 == 1 {
for h, row2 := range img2 {
for k, x2 := range row2 {
if x2 == 1 {
t := pair{i - h, j - k}
cnt[t]++
ans = max(ans, cnt[t])
}
}
}
}
}
}
return
}
# Accepted solution for LeetCode #835: Image Overlap
class Solution:
def largestOverlap(self, img1: List[List[int]], img2: List[List[int]]) -> int:
n = len(img1)
cnt = Counter()
for i in range(n):
for j in range(n):
if img1[i][j]:
for h in range(n):
for k in range(n):
if img2[h][k]:
cnt[(i - h, j - k)] += 1
return max(cnt.values()) if cnt else 0
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #835: Image Overlap
struct Solution;
impl Solution {
fn largest_overlap(a: Vec<Vec<i32>>, b: Vec<Vec<i32>>) -> i32 {
let n = a.len();
let mut res = 0;
for i in 0..n {
for j in 0..n {
res = res.max(Self::translate(i, j, &a, &b, n));
res = res.max(Self::translate(i, j, &b, &a, n));
}
}
res
}
fn translate(x: usize, y: usize, a: &[Vec<i32>], b: &[Vec<i32>], n: usize) -> i32 {
let mut res = 0;
for i in 0..n {
for j in 0..n {
if i + x < n && j + y < n {
res += a[i + x][j + y] * b[i][j];
}
}
}
res
}
}
#[test]
fn test() {
let a = vec_vec_i32![[1, 1, 0], [0, 1, 0], [0, 1, 0]];
let b = vec_vec_i32![[0, 0, 0], [0, 1, 1], [0, 0, 1]];
let res = 3;
assert_eq!(Solution::largest_overlap(a, b), res);
}
// Accepted solution for LeetCode #835: Image Overlap
function largestOverlap(img1: number[][], img2: number[][]): number {
const n = img1.length;
const cnt: Map<number, number> = new Map();
let ans = 0;
for (let i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
for (let j = 0; j < n; ++j) {
if (img1[i][j] === 1) {
for (let h = 0; h < n; ++h) {
for (let k = 0; k < n; ++k) {
if (img2[h][k] === 1) {
const t = (i - h) * 200 + (j - k);
cnt.set(t, (cnt.get(t) ?? 0) + 1);
ans = Math.max(ans, cnt.get(t)!);
}
}
}
}
}
}
return ans;
}
Use this to step through a reusable interview workflow for this problem.
Two nested loops check every pair or subarray. The outer loop fixes a starting point, the inner loop extends or searches. For n elements this gives up to n²/2 operations. No extra space, but the quadratic time is prohibitive for large inputs.
Most array problems have an O(n²) brute force (nested loops) and an O(n) optimal (single pass with clever state tracking). The key is identifying what information to maintain as you scan: a running max, a prefix sum, a hash map of seen values, or two pointers.
Review these before coding to avoid predictable interview regressions.
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.