Relative Ranks

Relative ranks assigns placement labels to athletes by score: the top three receive medal names and the rest receive their numeric position. The complication is that the output must be in the original athlete order, while ranks are determined by sorted order. Sorting the scores directly loses the association between a score and its athlete. So the indices must travel with the values: - Sort the indices by their scores descending, so position k in the sorted result tells you which original athlete finished k + 1. Walking that sorted list, the first three indices get "Gold Medal", "Silver Medal", and "Bronze Medal", and index k beyond that receives the string of k + 1. Writing to result[originalIndex] is what restores the original ordering — the answer array is filled out of order and read in order. The medal strings must be exact, including the space and capitalisation. "Gold" alone is a wrong answer, and it is a frustrating one to debug since the logic is otherwise correct. Ranks are 1-based while indices are 0-based, so the numeric label is k + 1. Off-by-one here shifts every non-medal athlete. Sorting descending matters — the highest score is rank 1. Ascending order silently produces reversed rankings. A max-heap is an alternative: push all index-score pairs and pop n times, assigning ranks in pop order. Same O(n log n), no advantage here. Scores are guaranteed unique, so no tie-breaking rule is needed.

Sort index-score pairs by score descending, then write each rank back to its original index. Carrying the index through the sort is what lets the answer be assembled in the input's order rather than the sorted one.