Skip to main content

Solving the Maximum Agreement SubTree and the Maximum Compatible Tree Problems on Many Bounded Degree Trees

  • Conference paper
Combinatorial Pattern Matching (CPM 2006)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 4009))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Given a set of leaf-labeled trees with identical leaf sets, the well-known Maximum Agreement SubTree problem (MAST) consists of finding a subtree homeomorphically included in all input trees and with the largest number of leaves. Its variant called Maximum Compatible Tree (MCT) is less stringent, as it allows the input trees to be refined. Both problems are of particular interest in computational biology, where trees encountered have often small degrees.

In this paper, this paper, we study the parameterized complexity of MAST and MCT with respect to the maximum degree, denoted D, of the input trees. While MAST is polynomial for bounded D [1,6,3], we show that MAST is W[1]-hard with respect to parameter D. Moreover, relying on recent advances in parameterized complexity we obtain a tight lower bound: while MAST can be solved in O(N \(^{O({\it D})}\)) time where N denotes the input length, we show that an O(N \(^{o({\it D})}\)) bound is not achievable, unless SNP ⊆ SE. We also show that MCT is W[1]-hard with respect to D, and that MCT cannot be solved in \(O\big(N^{o(2^{D/2})}\big)\) time, unless SNP ⊆ SE.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amir, A., Keselman, D.: Maximum agreement subtree in a set of evolutionary trees: metrics and efficient algorithm. SIAM Journal on Computing 26(6), 1656–1669 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Berry, V., Nicolas, F.: Maximum agreement and compatible supertrees. In: Sahinalp, S.C., Muthukrishnan, S., Dogrusoz, U. (eds.) CPM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3109, pp. 205–219. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Bryant, D.: Building trees, hunting for trees and comparing trees: theory and method in phylogenetic analysis. PhD thesis, University of Canterbury, Department of Mathemathics (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chen, J., Huang, X., Kanj, I.A., Xia, G.: Linear FPT reductions and computational lower bounds. In: Babai, L. (ed.) Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2004), pp. 212–221. ACM Press, New York (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Downey, R.G., Fellows, M.R.: Parameterized Complexity. Monographs in Computer Science. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Farach, M., Przytycka, T.M., Thorup, M.: On the agreement of many trees. Information Processing Letters 55(6), 297–301 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Finden, C.R., Gordon, A.D.: Obtaining common pruned trees. Journal of Classification 2, 255–276 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ganapathysaravanabavan, G., Warnow, T.J.: Finding a maximum compatible tree for a bounded number of trees with bounded degree is solvable in polynomial time. In: Gascuel, O., Moret, B.M.E. (eds.) WABI 2001. LNCS, vol. 2149, pp. 156–163. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Hamel, A.M., Steel, M.A.: Finding a maximum compatible tree is NP-hard for sequences and trees. Applied Mathematics Letters 9(2), 55–59 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Hein, J., Jiang, T., Wang, L., Zhang, K.: On the complexity of comparing evolutionary trees. Discrete Applied Mathematics 71(1–3), 153–169 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R., Zane, F.: Which problems have strongly exponential complexity? Journal of Computer and System Sciences 63(4), 512–530 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Kao, M.-Y., Lam, T.W., Sung, W.-K., Ting, H.-F.: An even faster and more unifying algorithm for comparing trees via unbalanced bipartite matchings. Journal of Algorithms 40(2), 212–233 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Papadimitriou, C.H., Yannakakis, M.: Optimization, approximation, and complexity classes. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 43(3), 425–440 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Pietrzak, K.: On the parameterized complexity of the fixed alphabet shortest common supersequence and longest common subsequence problems. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 67(4), 757–771 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Guillemot, S., Nicolas, F. (2006). Solving the Maximum Agreement SubTree and the Maximum Compatible Tree Problems on Many Bounded Degree Trees. In: Lewenstein, M., Valiente, G. (eds) Combinatorial Pattern Matching. CPM 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4009. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11780441_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11780441_16

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-35455-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-35461-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics