House Robber DP Intuition
i am learning dp and can u explain and teach the intuition of house robber
Yes! The House Robber problem is a great dynamic programming (DP) problem that helps build
intuition for state transition and optimal substructure. Let’s break it down step by step.
Problem Statement
You are given an array `nums` where `nums[i]` represents the amount of money in the `i`-th house. You
cannot rob two adjacent houses. Find the maximum amount of money you can rob without alerting
the police.
Example
python
nums = [2, 7, 9, 3, 1]
If you rob house `0` (money = 2), you cannot rob house `1`, but you can rob house `2` (money = 9).
If you rob house `1` (money = 7), you can rob house `3` (money = 3).
The best strategy is to rob houses `0`, `2`, and `4`, which gives `2 + 9 + 1 = 12`.
Step 1: Identify the Recurrence Relation
At any house `i`, we have two choices:
1. Skip house `i` → Take whatever money was stolen up to house `i-1`.
2. Rob house `i` → Take money from house `i` plus the money stolen up to house `i-2` (since we
cannot rob adjacent houses).
Let dp[i] be the maximum money we can rob from houses `0` to `i`. Then:
dp[i] = max(dp[i − 1], nums[i] + dp[i − 2])
Breakdown of the Formula
`dp[i - 1]` → Maximum money if we skip house `i`
`nums[i] + dp[i - 2]` → Maximum money if we rob house `i`
Base Cases
`dp[0] = nums[0]` → If only one house, rob it.
`dp[1] = max(nums[0], nums[1])` → Choose the richer house.
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 1/12
Step 2: Implementing DP (Bottom-Up)
python
def rob(nums):
if not nums: # Edge case: No houses
return 0
if len(nums) == 1: # Edge case: Only one house
return nums[0]
dp = [0] * len(nums)
dp[0] = nums[0]
dp[1] = max(nums[0], nums[1])
for i in range(2, len(nums)):
dp[i] = max(dp[i - 1], nums[i] + dp[i - 2])
return dp[-1]
✅ Time Complexity: O(n)
✅ Space Complexity: O(n)
Step 3: Optimizing Space Complexity
Since `dp[i]` only depends on `dp[i-1]` and `dp[i-2]`, we can reduce space to O(1) by keeping only
two variables:
python
def rob(nums):
if not nums:
return 0
if len(nums) == 1:
return nums[0]
prev2, prev1 = nums[0], max(nums[0], nums[1])
for i in range(2, len(nums)):
curr = max(prev1, nums[i] + prev2)
prev2, prev1 = prev1, curr
return prev1
✅ Time Complexity: O(n)
✅ Space Complexity: O(1)
Step 4: Building the Thought Process
1. Think about choices at each step:
Rob this house? → Then skip the previous one.
Skip this house? → Then take whatever was robbed before.
2. Break the problem into subproblems (`dp[i]` depends on `dp[i-1]` and `dp[i-2]`).
3. Translate to recurrence relation.
4. Optimize space by using just two variables.
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 2/12
Practice Problem
Try modifying the solution for House Robber II, where houses are arranged in a circle (first and last
houses are adjacent).
Would you like help with that version too? 🚀
how to solve it using top ddown and backtracking approach
Solving House Robber using Top-Down (Memoization) and Backtracking Approach
We will first solve it using backtracking (brute force), then optimize it with top-down DP
(memoization).
1️⃣ Backtracking Approach (Brute Force)
Since we can either rob a house or skip it, we explore both choices recursively.
Recursive Function
Let `robFrom(i)` be the maximum amount we can rob starting from house `i`. The choices are:
1. Skip house `i` → Move to `robFrom(i + 1)`
2. Rob house `i` → Take `nums[i]` and move to `robFrom(i + 2)`
The recurrence relation:
robF rom(i) = max(robF rom(i + 1), nums[i] + robF rom(i + 2))
Code (Backtracking)
python
def rob_recursive(nums, i=0):
if i >= len(nums): # Base case: No houses left to rob
return 0
return max(rob_recursive(nums, i + 1), nums[i] + rob_recursive(nums, i + 2))
# Example Usage
nums = [2, 7, 9, 3, 1]
print(rob_recursive(nums)) # Output: 12
🔴 Time Complexity: O(2 ) (Exponential) → Each house has 2 choices.
n
🔴 Space Complexity: O(n) (Recursive call stack depth)
Why is it slow?
It recalculates results for the same `i` multiple times. For example:
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 3/12
scss
robFrom(0) → calls robFrom(1) and robFrom(2)
robFrom(1) → calls robFrom(2) and robFrom(3)
robFrom(2) → calls robFrom(3) and robFrom(4)
`robFrom(2)` is computed twice! We need memoization.
2️⃣ Optimized Top-Down Approach (Memoization)
We use a dictionary (`@lru_cache`) or an array to store computed results.
Code (Top-Down DP)
python
from functools import lru_cache
def rob_memo(nums):
@lru_cache(None)
def robFrom(i):
if i >= len(nums):
return 0
return max(robFrom(i + 1), nums[i] + robFrom(i + 2))
return robFrom(0)
# Example Usage
nums = [2, 7, 9, 3, 1]
print(rob_memo(nums)) # Output: 12
✅ Time Complexity: O(n) (Each house is computed once)
✅ Space Complexity: O(n) (Recursive stack + memoization)
Code (Top-Down DP using Dictionary)
python
def rob_memo_dict(nums):
memo = {}
def robFrom(i):
if i >= len(nums):
return 0
if i in memo:
return memo[i]
memo[i] = max(robFrom(i + 1), nums[i] + robFrom(i + 2))
return memo[i]
return robFrom(0)
# Example Usage
nums = [2, 7, 9, 3, 1]
print(rob_memo_dict(nums)) # Output: 12
🔹 and both avoid recomputation.
🔹 Space Complexity: O(n) due to recursion depth and memo storage.
`lru_cache` `memo = {}`
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 4/12
Comparison of Approaches
Approach Time Complexity Space Complexity Notes
Backtracking O(2n ) O(n) Exponential, very slow
Top-Down DP O(n) O(n) Uses recursion & memoization
Bottom-Up DP O(n) O(n) or O(1) Iterative, better for large inputs
Would you like help with House Robber II (circular houses)? 🚀
which category this code will belong
def rob(self, nums: List[int]) -> int:
count = [-1]
sum = 0
self.ro(nums, len(nums), count, sum, True)
return count[0]
def ro(self,nums, n, count, sum, flag):
if n == 0:
if count[0] < sum:
count[0] = sum
return
# print(sum)
if flag:
self.ro(nums, n - 1, count, sum + nums[n - 1], False)
self.ro(nums, n - 1, count, sum, True)
else:
self.ro(nums, n - 1, count, sum, True)
and why it taking three choice while u took only two choices
Analysis of Your Code
Your approach is backtracking (brute force) but has an unnecessary extra choice. Let's analyze why.
Understanding the Choices
In the House Robber problem, at each house, you have only two valid choices:
1. Rob the current house (`nums[i]`) → Skip the next house (`i+1`).
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 5/12
2. Skip the current house → Move to the next house (`i+1`).
These two choices are enough to cover all possible scenarios.
Your Code's Approach
Your function `ro` makes three choices:
1. Rob the house (add `nums[n-1]` to sum and mark `flag` as `False`).
2. Skip the house (keep sum unchanged and mark `flag` as `True`).
3. A third unnecessary recursive call when `flag == False` (skip again).
Your Code's Execution Flow
python
def rob(self, nums: List[int]) -> int:
count = [-1] # To store the max amount
sum = 0 # To track current sum
self.ro(nums, len(nums), count, sum, True)
return count[0]
def ro(self, nums, n, count, sum, flag):
if n == 0:
if count[0] < sum:
count[0] = sum
return
if flag:
# Choice 1: Rob the current house
self.ro(nums, n - 1, count, sum + nums[n - 1], False)
# Choice 2: Skip the current house
self.ro(nums, n - 1, count, sum, True)
else:
# Choice 3 (Redundant): Skip again
self.ro(nums, n - 1, count, sum, True)
Why Does Your Code Have Three Choices?
Your code introduces an extra recursive call when `flag == False`.
However, if we already skipped a house, there is no need to make another "skip" call.
Correct Two-Choice Recursive Approach
python
def rob_recursive(nums, i=0):
if i >= len(nums): # Base case: No houses left to rob
return 0
return max(rob_recursive(nums, i + 1), nums[i] + rob_recursive(nums, i + 2))
This only has two choices:
1. Rob the house → `nums[i] + rob_recursive(i + 2)`
2. Skip the house → `rob_recursive(i + 1)`
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 6/12
Category of Your Code
✅ Your code falls under:
Backtracking (Brute Force) → It explores all possible subsets of houses to rob.
Inefficient due to redundant choices → Introduces unnecessary recursive calls.
🚀 Fix: Remove the third call by sticking to only two choices!
i dont know but i read some where
i guess the topic was knapsack where i have some space s
i have three chocice
if curr_el < s:
choose s
unchoose s
else
unchoose s
why it is wrong , incomplete or complete
You're absolutely right to bring up the Knapsack problem! Let's break this down properly and connect it
to your House Robber intuition.
Understanding the Three-Choice Logic in Knapsack
The 0/1 Knapsack problem is slightly different from House Robber, but the reasoning behind three
choices comes from capacity constraints.
Knapsack Problem Statement
You have `N` items, each with a weight and value.
You have a bag with limited capacity (`S`).
You need to maximize value while ensuring the total weight does not exceed `S`.
Choices in Knapsack
At each step, you consider an item with weight `w[i]` and value `v[i]`. You have three cases:
1. If you can take it (`w[i] ≤ S`):
Take the item → Reduce capacity `S - w[i]`, gain `v[i]`.
Skip the item → Keep `S` the same.
2. If you can't take it (`w[i] > S`):
You can only skip the item.
This leads to:
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 7/12
python
def knapsack(i, S):
if i == n: # No more items left
return 0
if w[i] <= S: # Three choices
return max(knapsack(i + 1, S - w[i]) + v[i], # Choose item
knapsack(i + 1, S)) # Unchoose item
else:
return knapsack(i + 1, S) # Skip item
This is where three choices seem to appear, but the reality is:
You only take or skip an item.
The third case (forced skip) is just part of the logic.
Thus, Knapsack has two valid choices; the third one is just enforcing a condition.
Does House Robber Need Three Choices?
No. House Robber is different because:
1. There is no explicit "capacity" constraint like in Knapsack.
2. The only restriction is adjacency (cannot rob consecutive houses).
3. You don't need a "forced skip" condition because robbery is always possible unless adjacent.
So, the valid choices are just:
Rob house `i` → Skip the next house (`i+2`).
Skip house `i` → Move to the next house (`i+1`).
This is why two choices are enough for House Robber.
Conclusion
Knapsack seems like it has three choices, but it's just enforcing constraints.
House Robber only needs two choices because adjacency is the only restriction.
If you add a third choice in House Robber, you are redundantly skipping a house that is already
skipped.
So, in House Robber, the extra choice in your code is redundant, while in Knapsack, it's just a condition
to handle weight constraints. 🚀
This is where **three choices** seem to appear, but the reality is: * You only **take or skip** an
item. * The third case **(forced skip)** is just part of the logic. Thus, **Knapsack has two valid
choices; the third one is just enforcing a condition**.
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 8/12
explain more in deatil about force condition , if we are lleaving the item than why i should take it
separetlyand should also take it with my if consition
Understanding "Forced Condition" in Knapsack vs. House Robber
You're asking why, in the Knapsack problem, we seem to have three choices but in reality, we only
have two choices, and how the "forced condition" works. Let's go step by step.
1️⃣ What Are the Choices in Knapsack?
In the 0/1 Knapsack problem, at each step, we are given an item with:
Weight `w[i]`
Value `v[i]`
Remaining Capacity `S`
We can only choose or skip the item, but this decision depends on whether the item fits in the
remaining capacity `S`. This is where we get the three cases:
Case 1: Item Fits (`w[i] ≤ S`)
You have two valid choices:
1. Take the item → Add its value, reduce capacity → `knapsack(i + 1, S - w[i]) + v[i]`
2. Skip the item → Move to the next item → `knapsack(i + 1, S)`
Case 2: Item Doesn't Fit (`w[i] > S`)
You are forced to skip the item → `knapsack(i + 1, S)`
This is the forced condition:
Even if you wanted to pick the item, you cannot because the bag doesn’t have enough capacity.
2️⃣ Why Does This Look Like Three Choices?
You might think there are three separate choices:
1. Pick the item → `knapsack(i + 1, S - w[i]) + v[i]`
2. Skip the item → `knapsack(i + 1, S)`
3. Forcefully skip (if item doesn’t fit) → `knapsack(i + 1, S)`
But the third case (forced skip) is not an extra choice—it's just a situation where one of the two
choices (picking) is unavailable.
This is why Knapsack always has two choices, not three.
The third case just happens naturally when the item’s weight is too high.
Final Correct Code for Knapsack
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 9/12
python
def knapsack(i, S):
if i == n: # No more items left
return 0
if w[i] <= S: # Two valid choices
return max(knapsack(i + 1, S - w[i]) + v[i], # Pick the item
knapsack(i + 1, S)) # Skip the item
else:
return knapsack(i + 1, S) # Forced skip (not an extra choice)
3️⃣ How Does This Compare to House Robber?
In House Robber, you only have two choices:
1. Rob the house → Move `i+2` steps forward.
2. Skip the house → Move `i+1` step forward.
There is no "forced skip" condition because:
You are always able to rob a house unless you chose to rob the previous one.
There is no "capacity" constraint like Knapsack.
Correct House Robber Code
python
def rob_recursive(i):
if i >= len(nums): # No houses left to rob
return 0
return max(nums[i] + rob_recursive(i + 2), # Rob house i
rob_recursive(i + 1)) # Skip house i
4️⃣ Key Differences Between House Robber and Knapsack
Feature Knapsack House Robber
Constraints Capacity limit (`S`) Cannot rob adjacent houses
Choices Take item OR skip item Rob house OR skip house
Forced
Yes (if `w[i] > S`, must skip) No forced condition
Condition?
`knapsack(i+1, S - w[i])` and `knapsack(i+1, `rob(i+2)` and
Recursive Calls
S)` `rob(i+1)`
Why Three Choices Seem to Appear in Knapsack
In Knapsack, the forced skip happens naturally due to weight constraints.
But it does not mean we have three choices.
Instead, we just disable one of the two choices when the item doesn't fit.
Why House Robber Only Has Two Choices
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 10/12
No forced condition exists in House Robber.
You always decide between robbing and skipping.
5️⃣ Answering Your Question
"If we are leaving the item, why should I take it separately and also check it with an `if`
condition?"
You check it separately because you cannot pick an item if it doesn’t fit in `S`.
But once you decide to take or leave an item, you don’t need a third case.
🔹 In Knapsack, the forced condition ( ) removes one choice.
🔹 In House Robber, no such forced condition exists.
`w[i] > S`
🚀 Summary
Knapsack has two choices, but the forced condition sometimes removes one.
House Robber always has exactly two choices.
Your original House Robber code added a redundant third choice that wasn’t necessary.
In Knapsack, the "third choice" is just enforcing a condition—not an extra decision.
Would you like a visualization of how recursion plays out in both cases? 🚀
But the **third case (forced skip) is not an extra choice**—it's just a situation where one of the two
choices (picking) is unavailable.
thank you so much u cleared my manny doubts
You're very welcome! 🚀 I'm glad I could clear up your doubts. Keep questioning things like this—that’s
how you build real intuition for problem-solving! If you ever need more explanations, visualizations, or
practice problems, feel free to ask. Happy coding! 🔥
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 11/12
ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 12/12
