Google PhD New Grad VO Rejection: BFS Path Follow-Ups and a Contested Optimization

Role: Software Engineer, PhD New Grad
Result: Rejected after the virtual onsite
Report time: April 2025

The candidate completed three coding rounds. Two felt smooth: each contained either two questions or one question plus a follow-up, and the candidate believed the interviewer was satisfied.

Contested round

The third interviewer began with a simple BFS problem, then added requirements such as returning the path. The candidate implemented each change quickly.

A later follow-up asked for optimization. The candidate first gave a non-optimal solution, then proposed what they believed was close to optimal. The interviewer repeatedly interrupted, said the approach did not make sense, and left only a few minutes for code.

At the end, the interviewer said the approach was unfamiliar and asked the candidate to send the solution afterward for review. The candidate emailed recruiting with code and a written correctness explanation to forward to the interviewer.

Outcome

After roughly two weeks, recruiting said the application would not move forward. The candidate believed this round produced a negative signal and asked whether it was possible to appeal or receive an additional interview.

The source does not preserve the BFS input, objective, final follow-up, or disputed solution. Those omissions prevent an exact practice link. Comments speculated about which round caused the rejection, but no reviewer score or official explanation was available.